Rankings that survive being questioned.
Rankings are the most public thing a federation produces and the thing it is most often challenged on. A table that is rebuilt every time it runs cannot answer a challenge, and neither can a scheme only one person understands.
| # | Move | Player | Events | Points | Why this rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | +2 | A. MoreauNorthern Region | 8 | 4,820 | |
|
The tournaments behind this rank.
Ranking total4,820 |
|||||
| 2 | — | L. HaddadCentral Region | 6 | 4,655 | |
| 3 | −1 | M. SilvaCoastal Region | 9 | 4,110 | |
| 4 | +3 | S. TanakaEastern Region | 7 | 3,975 | |
Why it holds up
- A number you can stand behindEvery rank opens onto the results that produced it, so a challenge gets answered instead of argued.
- Published stays publishedReleases are dated and kept, so last season is still there when a member, a board or a parent federation asks about it.
- The scheme is your federation'sPoints and periods follow what your body has adopted, not what the software happened to arrive with.
Elsewhere in the platform
Book a demo
Bring us the season that went wrong.
The most useful first conversation is not a feature tour. Tell us about the registration deadline that collapsed, the ranking you could not defend, or the fees nobody can reconcile — and we will show you that part of the platform.
- A reply within two working days From someone who has run a federation season, not a form-handling queue.
- Your data, in the demo Send a spreadsheet of members or a past draw sheet and we will load it before we meet.
- A migration plan, in writing What moves, what cannot, and what it costs — before you commit to anything.