View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Joshuaaaaaa
Joined: 15 Oct 08 Posts: 85
Location: Lovely Las Vegas, NV
|
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey, for my 1st tourney, I'll take a 10th place finish. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Zaui

Joined: 29 Mar 06 Posts: 120
Location: Sandy, Utah, USA
|
Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
GamesOnTheBrain wrote: | Also, half-points in the totals column are given to players who tie a winning score but lose on the money tie-breaker. |
Just noticed IBX won two games on $ tie-breaks. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kanga
Joined: 27 Oct 05 Posts: 1503
Location: Moe, Victoria, Australia
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
40/42 done. The last two games dont affect the final placements.
tphon, almondralf, Kanga and Games play in the final.
tphon creates a v0 game, ralf the V1, I get the V2 and Games the V1,2 game.
Game name:
4player T15 Final A/B/C/D
password: final
Map: your choice, or, if you dont want to choose... here are some suggestions:
514
117
497
493
271
Standings:
Code: | Player Played Wins Total
tphon 6 5 30
almondralf 6 4 21
Kanga 6 4 28
GamesOnTheBrain 6 4 36
Dobinator 6 4 53
marcx 6 3 20.5
IBX 6 3 44
gische 5 2 34
cterrell 6 2 55
Joshuaaaaaa 6 2 81
borisumi 5 1 107
NoMoreCheese 6 1 62.5
skk7878 6 1 76
Payton3434 6 1 85
Adriaan Pieters 6 1 108
Zaui 6 1 111.5
mooka 6 1 115
danbar1963 4 0 86
brianlcarr 5 0 35.5
lindalait 5 0 91
yahkeh 5 0 115
Alashar 5 0 130
kxw 6 0 72.5
Early_10 6 0 76
swok 6 0 85
BryJones 6 0 142
kekeweb 6 0 156
ats2630 6 0 315
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dobinator
Joined: 18 Jul 07 Posts: 383
Location: North Carolina, USA
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 3:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Can't believe I don't make the final with four wins.
If I'm griping, using the margin of loss for tiebreaks is only one indicator of skill, and not always a telling one - I had one game here where I was blocked by several opponents, so I couldn't score anything, and ended up with a big deficit. Conversely, in another game, I won by like 15. It might be fairer to also give tiebreak points for margin of victory over the nearest opponent in wins.
Under the current system, you get lots of credit for coming in a close second, but no credit for a runaway victory, and both of those seem identical indicators of skill to me. The runaway victory even more, maybe, because often you achieve a narrow margin of loss if the other guy buys out animals to finish, even though you weren't really that close to winning.
Overall positions, like Gad uses in Amun Re, is maybe even better, if harder to keep track of.
OK, sour grapes mode off. Good luck to the finalists. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kanga
Joined: 27 Oct 05 Posts: 1503
Location: Moe, Victoria, Australia
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 5:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dobinator wrote: | Can't believe I don't make the final with four wins.
If I'm griping, using the margin of loss for tiebreaks is only one indicator of skill, and not always a telling one - I had one game here where I was blocked by several opponents, so I couldn't score anything, and ended up with a big deficit. Conversely, in another game, I won by like 15. It might be fairer to also give tiebreak points for margin of victory over the nearest opponent in wins.
Under the current system, you get lots of credit for coming in a close second, but no credit for a runaway victory, and both of those seem identical indicators of skill to me. The runaway victory even more, maybe, because often you achieve a narrow margin of loss if the other guy buys out animals to finish, even though you weren't really that close to winning.
Overall positions, like Gad uses in Amun Re, is maybe even better, if harder to keep track of.
OK, sour grapes mode off. Good luck to the finalists. |
no matter what system I use there's plusses / minuses. Using placings theoretically encourages people to play for second rather than try to catch the leader if there's a runaway leader.
Also placings dont distinguish a narrow loss from a big loss.
In practice I doubt it matters much which system I use. Adding in winning margins is an interesting idea, not sure how practical it is. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
tphon

Joined: 02 Nov 07 Posts: 219
Location: Wirral, England
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 6:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dobinator wrote: | Can't believe I don't make the final with four wins.
|
Should have gone for the five, to be sure
It just doesn't seem right that topping the chart has no bonus for the final. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kanga
Joined: 27 Oct 05 Posts: 1503
Location: Moe, Victoria, Australia
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
tphon wrote: | Dobinator wrote: | Can't believe I don't make the final with four wins.
|
Should have gone for the five, to be sure
It just doesn't seem right that topping the chart has no bonus for the final. |
Any suggestions? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dobinator
Joined: 18 Jul 07 Posts: 383
Location: North Carolina, USA
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Margin of loss is also not fair if the maps and variants aren't the same for all players - some maps tend to be much higher scoring, and variant 2 cuts down on overall scoring by a lot. Variant 1 is often lower-scoring, too, I think, depending on the map layout.
I wasn't suggesting giving partial tournament points for 2nd or 3rd - just using those placings as the tiebreakers after number of wins, since ordinal placing seems to me to be a less-random measure of prowess than margin of loss. I don't see how that would get folks to play for second.
I agree that no system is perfect, and if the margin is easier to record than something else, then that's a significant plus. Thanks for running the tournaments. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Knave

Joined: 28 Jun 08 Posts: 258
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have an idea is almost certainly unfeasible, but I like it nonetheless...
Find the mean of the margin that each placing lost by. Then, every loss is increased by an amount equal to the mean of the loss by somebody in that placing.
Hypothetical example:
At the end of the round, the mean margins of victory over each placing are as follows
1st: 0
2nd: 13
3rd: 19
4th: 27
Now, Kanga, Tphon, Dobby and Knave play a game. The final score for that game is as follows:
Kanga: 180
Tphon: 175
Dobby: 149
Knave: 148
The margins of loss are as follows
Kanga: 0
Tphon: 5
Dobby: 31
Knave: 32
Now we add the placing penalty to these margins
Kanga: 0
Tphon: 18
Dobby: 50
Knave: 59
So, Dobby only beat knave by a point, but gets a 9 point spread in the standings because he squeezed into 3rd place. More importantly though, both Knave and Dobby got smacked around appropriately for their 30+ point loss.
The above would only be a tiebreak of course. I just invented it now, so I haven't fully thought through any flaws. Some easy adjustment is possible, you can multiply either the means or the game margins by some arbitrary constant to weight one or the other higher. You can square one of the measures if you really want to punish big losses and/or poor placings.
The main drawback I see is that it would be a nightmare for the tourney organizer, but a spreadsheet could probably handle the calculations... if that is what the tourney people use for these standings. I could make the spreadsheet , but I'm not entering scores or looking them up. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
GamesOnTheBrain

Joined: 14 Jun 07 Posts: 191
Location: Cleveland, OH
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kanga wrote: | tphon wrote: | Dobinator wrote: | Can't believe I don't make the final with four wins.
|
Should have gone for the five, to be sure
It just doesn't seem right that topping the chart has no bonus for the final. |
Any suggestions? |
One option might be... if there is a tie in the finals, the victor, rather than point differential as the tie-breaker, is the one who came in a higher rank in the qualifying round. That would give a nice advantage to the higher ranked qualifiers.
I'm not saying I'd prefer this -- I don't know what I think -- I'm just offering an option. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
GamesOnTheBrain

Joined: 14 Jun 07 Posts: 191
Location: Cleveland, OH
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dobinator wrote: | Margin of loss is also not fair if the maps and variants aren't the same for all players - some maps tend to be much higher scoring, and variant 2 cuts down on overall scoring by a lot. Variant 1 is often lower-scoring, too, I think, depending on the map layout.
I wasn't suggesting giving partial tournament points for 2nd or 3rd - just using those placings as the tiebreakers after number of wins, since ordinal placing seems to me to be a less-random measure of prowess than margin of loss. I don't see how that would get folks to play for second.
I agree that no system is perfect, and if the margin is easier to record than something else, then that's a significant plus. Thanks for running the tournaments. |
In other words, if multiple people are tied for the final (which will likely be the case in every tournament), the tie-breaker is first, the number of second places, then thirds. If there is still a tie, then you could use point differential.
If that is what you mean, then that might be worth trying. I wonder whether it that would be easier or harder to track than point differential. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dobinator
Joined: 18 Jul 07 Posts: 383
Location: North Carolina, USA
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That is what I mean. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kanga
Joined: 27 Oct 05 Posts: 1503
Location: Moe, Victoria, Australia
|
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have actually paid attention to the above discussion and am toying with changing things for future tournaments.
This tournament has now concluded. Final standings:
Code: | Player Played Wins Total
tphon 6 5 30
almondralf 6 4 21
Kanga 6 4 28
GamesOnTheBrain 6 4 36
Dobinator 6 4 53
marcx 6 3 20.5
gische 6 3 34
IBX 6 3 44
cterrell 6 2 55
Joshuaaaaaa 6 2 81
NoMoreCheese 6 1 62.5
skk7878 6 1 76
Payton3434 6 1 85
lindalait 6 1 91
borisumi 6 1 108
Adriaan Pieters 6 1 108
Zaui 6 1 111.5
mooka 6 1 115
brianlcarr 6 0 39.5
kxw 6 0 72.5
Early_10 6 0 76
swok 6 0 85
yahkeh 6 0 122
danbar1963 6 0 130
Alashar 6 0 137
BryJones 6 0 142
kekeweb 6 0 156
ats2630 6 0 315
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kanga
Joined: 27 Oct 05 Posts: 1503
Location: Moe, Victoria, Australia
|
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
The final saw my luck finally return and allowed me to win 3 out of 4.
Winner: Kanga (3 wins)
Runner up: almondralf (1 win)
Finalists: GamesOnTheBrain, tphon |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|