the problem with that is that there are not many people who actually placed in MKX yet, so it's not fair to judge based on previous NRS games.
They do change if its consistent placing in MKX.
You're right, there is not enough data and the game is too recent to make an objective criteria.
On the other hand, those are the same reasons a subjective criteria could be a better alternative as none. Treating several known players from the FGC (either being MK9, SF, japaneses...) the same as unknowns seem also not fair. I'm sure you, or Eita, have much more chance of being good, and have matches that attracts viewers than xxxrandommk. Is a matter of fighting games experience, and tournament experience, giving a better probability of you being better than a random.
So, regardless of having point/placings on MKX tournaments (which should be the #1 criteria), having placed on other fighting games in tournament should be a secondary criteria.
I, for myself, am very interested on watching the japanese and see what can they do.Perfect Legend x Eita in a first round in pools seem very unbalanced compared to randomguy x firsttournamentever
I agree with you, objective MKX results should be weighed in first. But I think there is room for a secondary criteria based on history on fighting games. Specially in this first EVO. Next year, with a whole 15 months of results, they'll have enough data
