[ShannonRyu]

All very good points. Thanks for them.
[ QUOTE ]
I must not understand your formula, because your example 1st place should get 19 points, 2nd 17 points, and so on.

[/ QUOTE ]The winner gets the 25% bonus, the 2nd place finisher does not, less 2 points.[ QUOTE ]
and 0 points and 17 points is a fair assessment of the relative tourney skills of the two players?

[/ QUOTE ]Over ten events I hope to get a fair assesment of skill. I understand your point. I typically either go out VERY early in a tournament or get 3rd or 1st (I don't lose heads up [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]. [ QUOTE ]
I disagree with the message that rating on bankrolls sends.

[/ QUOTE ]A long running debate in our circle, but even those who feel the buyin does not dictate the level of play will, at the end of the night of a larger buy in tourney, comment on how much tougher the play is. The fact is, in our circle, when the stakes are raised the players step up their game, therefore I'd like to weight those events with more points.[ QUOTE ]
And why do you penalize rebuys? It's HARDER to win a tourney from the rebuy spot, depending on stack sizes and blind levels.

[/ QUOTE ]I can't argue with that. I now agree.

Thanks. Any other perspectives on ranking players?

Another dilemma faced is when a player, say after 6 events, is mathatmatically guaranteed to reach whatever level is needed, what incentive is there to play in the remaining events? I like to start out TOC with chip bonuses. Our last TOC had begining stacks that ranged from 10k to 35k (16k average) and the winner started with 13k.