This will be like the 2v2 Ladder History, except with the 1v1 Ladder. Here it is:

1. 4/30/11-5/22/11 The Impaller
2. 5/23/11-5/25/11 Doushibag
3. 5/26/11-7/11/11 The Impaller
4. 7/12/11-7/15/11 Heyheuhei
5. 7/16/11-7/16/11 Doushibag
6. 7/17/11-7/17/11 Heyheuhei
7. 7/18/11-7/18/11 Zaeban
8. 7/19/11-7/19/11 Doushibag
9. 7/20/11-8/02/11 Heyheuhei
10. 8/03/11-10/03/11 The Impaller
11. 10/04/11-10/22/11 Troll
12. 10/23/11-10/23/11 retrospecka jeza
13. 10/24/11-11/01/11 The Impaller
14. 11/02/11-11/07/11 bytjie
15. 11/08/11-11/08/11 Fizzer
16. 11/09/11-11/11/11 bytjie
17. 11/12/11-11/13/11 Mian
18. 11/14/11-12/28/11 Zaeban
19. 12/29/11-12/30/11 unknownsoldier
20. 12/31/11-1/12/12 Zaeban
21. 1/13/12-1/19/12 Ace Windu
22. 1/20/12-2/08/12 Gui
23. 2/09/12-2/12/12 Ace Windu
24. 2/13/12-3/12/12 Gui
25. 3/13/12-3/14/12 lobstrosity
26. 3/15/12-3/21/12 Gui
27. 3/22/12-3/23/12 Teddy FSB
28. 3/24/12-3/26/12 Chaos
29. 3/27/12-3/29/12 The Window Cleaner
30. 3/30/12-4/02/12 Chaos
31. 4/03/12-4/03/12 unknownsoldier
32. 4/04/12-4/08/12 Chaos
33. 4/09/12-6/27/12 unknownsoldier
34. 6/28/12-6/30/12 Veelvraat
35. 7/01/12-7/02/12 unknownsoldier
36. 7/03/12-7/06/12 Heyheuhei
37. 7/07/12-7/07/12 unknownsoldier
38. 7/08/12-7/12/12 Heyheuhei
39. 7/13/12-7/13/12 unknownsoldier
40. 7/14/12-7/21/12 Veelvraat
41. 7/22/12-7/22/12 Heyheuhei
42. 7/23/12-7/23/12 Veelvraat
43. 7/24/12-7/30/12 Heyheuhei
44. 7/31/12-8/02/12 Veelvraat
45. 8/03/12-8/16/12 Heyheuhei
46. 8/17/12-8/22/12 Niko
47. 8/23/12-8/29/12 Gui
48. 8/30/12-9/17/12 Niko
49. 9/18/12-9/19/12 13CHRIS37
50. 9/20/12-9/20/12 Niko
51. 9/21/12-9/24/12 13CHRIS37
52. 9/25/12-Present [WM]dead piggy

How many days has each player been ranked #1?
1. The Impaller -141
2. unknownsoldier -87
3. Gui -63
4. Zaeban -58
5. Heyheuhei -50
6. Niko -26
7. Troll -19
8. Veelvraat -15
9. Chaos -12
10. Ace Windu -11
11. bytjie -9
12. 13CHRIS37 -6
13. Doushibag -5
14. The Window Cleaner -3
15. [WM] dead piggy -3
16. Teddy FSB -2
17. Mian -2
18. lobstrosity -2
19. Fizzer -1
20. retrospecka jeza -1

I think it is hard to argue that The Impaller has been the best 1v1 Ladder play on Warlight. These 20 guys are are all very good though and definitely deserve to be known by the community. Good job guys :)

I don't think it's hard to argue... Look at this:
Based on studying hisory of games, I'd say at least numbers 2,3,4,5 and 12 are better, but that's only a personal opinion :P

Anyway in response to topic, I think there'd be one more nice statistic to see:
how many players over 2000 were there during the reign of specific player on average or sth along those lines measuring the competition somehow.

I think The Impaller is the best for his time...I agree that the guys you mentioned would win a game against him if they played him now but for his time, he dominated.

I don't think that would show the competition very well...The only way to see how good everyone actually was is to watch games...The skill of the ladder has slowly increased over time meaning that a 2000 rating now means more than it did back then.

Without (1) a universal rating for all WL games OR (2) a 3v3 Europe ladder and a 5-player FFA ladder (in which players are incognito until the game ends and without private messaging), the BEST MEDIUM EARTH SPECIALIST ARGUMENT (BMESA) is subjective and unrelated to what the BMESA apparently is attempting to ask: Who is the best OVERALL player?

These lists are good as a means to fill the void left by the lack of both better ladders and a universal rating system. But, based on the number of map reviews, the vast majority of WL games are played on maps other than Medium Earth.

For the Impaller argument: Impaller is like the first few iPhones when there were few if any other smartphones. Now, older generations of the iPhone have been supplanted by newer iPhones and other companies' phones. The Imapaller's software can be updated; but his hardware is the same. lol

The numbers of map reviews don't make a big difference in my opinion...I've rated over 50 maps but I still play on Medium Earth over 1/3 of the time.

And yes, I know The Impaller would not dominate now...He rejoined about a month ago and ended up being around 6 or 7...That is a pretty good analogy though. But this is more of a system like professional sports...For instance, Wilt Chamberlain dominated basketball in his time but if he played now, he would not be a standout player. But he is still considered a legend...This is for who was the best for their time, as well as a way to see who led the ladder at any period in time you wanted to see. But if I had to pick the player I am most scared to face on medium earth with strategic settings, I would pick Gui, unknownsoldier, or Heyheuhei.

The point of the 1v1 ladder is not to answer the question "who is the best player?". Do you think when Fizzer sat down to write the code he was thinking "I must find out who the best player is."?

I think the ladder was created to encourages people to buy membership, and to give us all something to talk about and compete for, thereby strengthening the community.

I just put this on the wiki to.

5 player FFA with no PMs is also a flawed way to measure skill, because it doesn't measure all useful skills either. Using PMs is a skill, for instance, and one that I happen to like and excel at. Large FFA also uses a very different skillset to small FFA or team games.

The reality is that we will never be able to put together a single number or ranking for Warlight. I'm okay with that, and it's important to recognize that The Impaller or unknown or HHH are really good at a subset of game types, but may not be good at others.

That is not accurate Duke. TrueSkill can actually handle global ELO rating (including team games). It also has its flaws (a few months back I was looking into the possibility to write a quasi-code and I studied TrueSkill). Also at one point in discussion, Fizzer said he could implement global ELO rating outside of ladders, but it wasn't high on his list of priorities.

How the #1 ranked guys do against other #1's:

The Impaller 18-19
unknownsoldier 8-6
Gui 12-12
Zaeban 19-11
Heyheuhei 42-27
Niko 7-12
Troll 5-4
Veelvraat 3-5
Chaos 3-9
Ace Windu 7-11
bytjie 6-15
13CHRIS37 12-11
Doushibag 3-1
The Window Cleaner 10-9
[WM]Dead piggy 4-1
Teddy FSB 8-14
Mian 6-8
lobstrosity 7-4
Fizzer 10-7
retrospecka jeza 6-9

you included booted games (not boot surrenders, but actual games in which someone was booted before the game was decided or when the winner was unable to get his orders in and was booted)

also, i was denzyman in march. i wanted to help him get more recognition after he gave me his account to use while he took a break to focus on working. he is one of the best 1v1 players. for example, i looked at his common games with hhh and he has won about 60% of their 100 or so games. in fact, he completely dominated hhh in their first 35-40 games, winning 25+ and losing only 7 or so. i was surprised. but when i first started learning to play 1v1s, i played denzyman about 40 times and only won 40% or so. if you talk about great 1v1 players, he should be considered, even if he is too much of a perfectionist to keep playing the 1v1 ladder after losing a game or two.

http://warlight.net/LadderGames.aspx?ID=0&LadderTeamID=282

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?TournamentID=1476

i stopped using this account on the 1v1 ladder after experiencing boredom with medium earth games and after getting booted in a few games. no sense in trying to get to #1 if i lose a game i was going to win (vs teddy) and need another month to make up for that loss.

I will add to this list every time someone else makes it to the number one spot...Today zibik took the top spot! Congrats zibik! You are now in the #1 club with 20 other of the top players in the game.

This is a cool thing you put together JSA. Both the list of #1's and how they've fared against each other. Well done.

As far as calculating records with and without auto-boots, I think the boot factor is mostly irrelevant. Identifying the reason for a win or a loss does not change the fact that it's a win or a loss.

I don't know about that J. I recall when Zaeban disappeared he was in 5 games, plus the replacement games he got put in until Fizzer removed him from the ladder. I can't tell you for sure anymore who he was playing, but surely some of his losses to high ranked players were after he was gone. He got booted from at least 10 ladder games in that time period. The Impaller did that somewhat recently during his return to the ladder, getting booted from several games during a vacation.

The same has happened to other players, both when they disappared, and also during things like vacations. There's also the odd "thought too long and got booted over the weekend," like when lobstrosity lost to unknownsoldier during territory picks.

I guess it's a matter of whether we are recording what happened, in which case a literal won-loss record is fine, or if we are trying to record notable games, in which we only want games in which both sides played well, and one triumphed.

The Duke is right.
If I recall correctly I have both a loss (against HHH) and a win (zaeban) against other #1's due to boots.
Still, correcting for boots (especially turn 0 boots) would change the outcomes only slightly, I'd say the vast majority of games here was played through.

On another note: Great job on the list JSA! It's nice to see all #1's together like this.

Might it be worth a 1v1 ladder listing by highest rating achieved?

In my opinion that's less interesting, because highest rating is much more by chance or intentionally stalling in losing games than anything else.

Someone who wins a lot of games against great players but never stalls (HHH) will not reach a 2200 rating, despite winning against better opponents more often. There's also the question of playing a few games verses playing five at a time. Again, HHH plays 5 games at a time and has a rating that can hardly move, win or lose.

Death Taco managed a 2000+ rating by playing 10 games, winning them all (only one strong opponent, and he managed the win), and then dropping from the ladder as soon as he could. He then lost the next few games and dropped his rating closer to where it should have been. He only played one hard match, and frankly got lucky. HHH maintain(ed)(s) a high rating despite playing tons of matches, which is a much better indicator of skill.

If you really like the math behind the rating system, it could be fun to follow statistical averages and such, but the actual rating number is pretty worthless to me.

Actually Duke, I think it's the other way round.

You get to number 1 by playing tactically. When I played in the ladder, I played 5 games at a time, never stalling. Had I stalled one of my games my delaying a surrender for a few days, I actually would have been number 1. Furthermore, the scores also indicates the standard of the opponents they were playing against.