Two comments on this:

1. I agree that the Top 100 is very flawed (if you look at it as something that it isn't, which many people do). At the moment Wonka is #3 all time. That's crazy if you think of it as an objective ranking of all the games. But that isn't what this list is. If you just take it for what it actually is, a list in order of the average rating of a game, then it's fine. But you simply can't look any deeper than that at all. It would be cool to have a more objective list based on strict criteria, but the logistics of that could become insane if you really think about it. Who's rankings count? How many do there have to be? How do you get a real consensus? So the lesson is, don't think of it is a Top 100 best games. It is a list of what games have high reviews from the users of this site. That's it.

2. To the point of buying a game without playing it based on the Top 100, I can say I sort of have. Not necessarily where it is on the list, but more for how good the reviews generally are. Over half the games I have owned I have bought either without ever having played one at all (usually because they weren't working and it seemed like I game I'd like once it was working) or that I had only played when I got to the seller's house to buy it. Unless you've been in the hobby for many years or been dedicated at pinball shows to play as many games as possible, there are just going to be times where you have a chance to buy a game that you haven't played. That's where the ratings and reviews have a tremendous value. I don't care that a game is ranked 34 instead of 21 for example, but I do care if a game is ranked 146 vs 46. It won't be the only factor in my decision, but if a game is ranked fairly low, I will temper my enthusiasm and offer price.