This is not an official answer Darkson, but I dont think it is. I recall asking Woody this question months ago when over his place and I think he said that if it was, with 9 games, it could have too much influence on the ranking system. Now that may have changed since. (But I recall the Dutch guys Jelmer, Milo, Benji asking me this at the Dutch Open and I knew the answer from Woody by then, so it could have over Xmas I asked that?)

No member has to play for Coach Rating points. If he or she views a tournament ruleset particularly disadvantageous to his/her chosen race, they can simply opt out of putting Coach Rating points on the line. Note that this has to be for the entire tournament, they can???t pick and choose which games will count for rankings, and it has to be declared prior to the opening game, i.e: pre tournament not during or post tournament.

Since neither of the tourneys is a major, the k-value calculation will probably be the same (for non majors its number of coaches OR 30 - whichever is lower. So if 24h makes 30 coaches it's identical to the WC)

I see only two "fair" ways to solve this:
1) make WC count for rating
2) don't allow 24h count for rating

I would prefer #1. People that are afraid of loosing points can choose to not have this tourney calculated see: NAF Tournament Sanction procedure (http://www.bloodbowl.net/index.php?name=Sections&req=viewarticle&artid=24&page=1 )

The terminology we use Schawn, is "Zero Sum". By that, if you took the time to add every single ranking in our database, the average score would be exactly 150. For every 200 ranking (and there are only 48 at this time with more than 200) there is another ranking at 100 (probably with Halflings and Gobbos).

The size of the tournament does affect things. If you have 12 of you the gains and losses are smaller than if there are 28 of you but the system is "capped" so that if there are 90+ coaches it only allows as if a max of 30 coaches were present. This was done because the Europeans were getting large 70+ tournaments were as Canada, USA and Oz were struggling to get 30 at anything less than a major.

Majors: As in the BB fluff there are 4 key tournaments, Spike, Chaos, the BB and Dungeonbowl. These then carried double points as they are the premier evernts. Dungeonbowl is Germany, Spike Canada, Chaos USA and the BB Europe. It was then agreed that this was a bit unfair on Oz coaches so a 5th Major was introduced for them. (I think that is Cancon).

Bottom line -- Picture an event of 30 coaches and first game your rookie Humans draw my zons say while two guys next door to us are both rookie 150 teams. Whoever wins that 150 v 150 game will get 5.5 points and the other will lose that. If its a draw they both stay at 150. Now take our game -My zons are 198 or something so if win I wont get the same 5.5 points, I will get less because the systems understands that having got to 198, I should know what I am doing with them. If you win you will get MORE than 5.5 because again, the system understands that you have scalped a higher team so you would probably get 7.5 I guess. If we draw, I would have gone down and you would go up, unlike the two 150 coaches.

To give you some examples: .. go to the rankings mid next week, click on one of my teams and that takes you to all my tourneys, go right down the bottom and click on The Bloodbowl 07. First game I played Roller who had a Norse ranking of about 210 to my Dwarves 162. As this was a major....I would think I get 10 pts for that but just clicking around the rankings you can see the sorts of gains and losses coaches get.

And sorry Roller..

Risking that the organizers/coaches of 24h BB hate me, but is this "fair" compared to the upcoming 24h's of BB?