I agree that the leaderboard needs to be simple and easily understood
However, the important part is a binary concept....
In with a shot of winning/ Not in with a shot of winning.
This competition is supposed to incentivise play (ideally across all level and players). It can only achieve that among players who still have a chance of winning.
By day 4...
Under Slipwaters system maybe 1% of sky players have a chance.
I agree that the leaderboard needs to be simple and easily understood However, the important part is a binary concept.... In with a shot of winning/ Not in with a shot of winning. This competition is supposed to incentivise play (ideally across all level and players). It can only achieve that among players who still have a chance of winning. By day 4... Under Slipwaters system maybe 1% of sky players have a chance. Under Aussies system maybe 5% have a chance. Under Jordz system 100% players have a chance. Posted by poppy765
Obviously, writing 'maybe' before the percentages should have made that clear. I am trying to illustrate a point (not instigate an argument) Posted by poppy765
Yup Understand.
but Sky are asking for a Fair Structure to Find 'Player of The Tornament', not keep a 'Separate Comp' open until the last Day...
Bernie Ecclestones Structure would be 100 times Points for the last tourmies, thats not point here
I think the player with the best 5 results would most deserve the title 'player of the tournament'.
Under Slipwaters points system, someone that came 1st in the only 5 tournaments they played would lose to someone that played all 33 and came 3rd seven times (a less impressive achievement IMHO).
I appreciate everybody's input into this it has all been very interesting to read through and has highlighted the impossibility of pleasing everybody.
The main focus for us is simplicity. It will be run by a member of the community who will not have the tournament results readily available to them without looking through lobbies etc..
Therefore the proposal that Slipwater has made makes sense and I know that he is happy to run this so we would be more than willing to use this. That is not to say that this has to be a final decision now but if we could have a final proposal in the next couple of days I will ensure that everything is order and we have some formalised rules and terms of the competition.
slippy's system seems to work pretty well for the 2014 leaderboard. the obvious players are on the board, you don't hear any whining about how it is calculated. it is simple and linear so easy to calc in real time by observers as well as players.
i would have thought taking this and tweaking it for ukops would be by far the best thing to do.
slippy's system seems to work pretty well for the 2014 leaderboard. the obvious players are on the board, you don't hear any whinning about how it is calculated. it is simple and linear so easy to calc in real time by observers as well as players. point structure is already quite flat compared to cash won so a lot more inclusive. i would have thought taking this and tweaking it for ukops would be far the best thing to do. Main Board = evening events Mini Board = warmup events BragBoard = all Posted by GELDY
Yeah, I guess you could have a separate list for the warm ups.
In Response to Re: UKOPS Player of the festival : So how would that work from a visual point of view? After Day One you will have a list of hundreds of players to present on the forum - effectively everyone who has played. Posted by Slipwater
Given that the winner would definitely have cashed in five tournaments,
it seems reasonable to use that as entry criteria for the competition.
Publishing the top ten totals which meet that stipulation should be enough to show people what they need to beat-(there's only one prize after all)
In Response to Re: UKOPS Player of the festival : Given that the winner would definitely have cashed in five tournaments, it seems reasonable to use that as entry criteria for the competition. Publishing the top ten totals which meet that stipulation should be enough to show people what they need to beat-(there's only one prize after all) Not that it matters anymore... Posted by poppy765
Every day you would still need to post and include everyone for completeness.
Why not? I pointed out some major flaws in your idea. Someody that plays 5 events and wins 4 of them gets 20 points, yet somebody that plays 33 events and min cashes in 21 events. Or somebody final tables 5 events they play and only gets 10 points yet somebody again plays 33 events and min cashes in just 11 events will beat them. If you only play 5 events and FT all 5 of them then under my initial points system that would give you 15 points and a very real chance of winning it (which should be the case as this is a great achievment)
To answer slipwater's point about coming 19th in a lower field tournament and 70th in a higher field - yes, both are similar achievments!! You have to get through the same % of the field in each because that's how cashing is worked out. Finishing 568th in the WSOP main event is enough to cash. Are you saying that min-cashing in 19th on sky in a low field is far better because 19th is a much lower place? Cmon.. it's all relative.
Looking at your point system it does seem to work out all right - I don't think it's a necessity to get a point for cashing and in all honesty I'm fine with your system but I think it should be based on best X events.
to give a worked example i have looked at the main, mini, the 9pm BH and the 10:30 BH for each night in december. 4 games over 7 nights = 28 games.
this is the leaderboard. there were 3,103 entrants.
cash
FT
3rd
2nd
won
pld
score
PhilAny2_Q
2
2
20
12
Tsaaaar
2
2
14
12
MattBates
1
1
26
9
slurpit1
1
2
13
9
Bawfizzle
1
1
9
8
snoxx11
1
1
20
8
jordz16
3
1
14
8
LmfaoAllin
2
1
1
18
8
Nutter5932
2
1
1
10
8
rancid
4
1
11
8
HotTramp
1
1
8
7
StayOrGo
2
1
15
7
NooGooood
3
1
10
7
nozz3r
1
1
1
5
7
this is what it would look like after 28 events.
with UKOPS there would be 5 events still to play. if you want to win the UKPC seat you will have a clear picture of what you need to do over the final 5 games.
1 point if cashing 2 points if FT 3 points if third 4 points second 5 points first
In Response to Re: UKOPS Player of the festival : Every day you would still need to post and include everyone for completeness. And of course it matters - it's a debate. Posted by Slipwater
I'm sure people could remember (or look up) their best five results so I think a top ten would be sufficient to show what they need to shoot for.
If after two days noones on the leaderboard it's simply an added incentive for people to get involved.
Anyway, it's a bunch of thankless work (whatever the scoring system), so thanks in advance!
I guess it rests on what Sky want - they are offering the prize.
Alot of good points have been made on here, so I think it is about time Sky gave a bit more guidance.
Do they want to reward someone who plays high volume with consistent results
Or do they want to reward someone who gets a 2/3 very high finishes in the M/E bigger buy-ins.
Realistically would Sky want a "player of the festival" being someone who never FTed or even entered a M/E?
The OP states they have their own ideas about rewarding based on buy-in and runners which as others have stated tend to be inversely proportional.
Personally I would rather this prize went to someone who put the volume in and played a lot of tournaments AND got some "impressive" results - not just a bunch of min cashes but 1 or 2 wins or a few FTs.
I think you definitely want a system that encourages people to keep trying if they havent got anything in the first 2 days - which to me would mean skewing points to wins/FTs and needs people who have started well to keep playing to try and improve their score/defend their position.
As things stand I think I prefer Slips version for weighting to the better finishes, however Aussies is the simplest, I dont think any as stand though show any bias towards the bigger events, which I suspect Sky want, though they have only hinted at that in the OP.
To do that you would either have to have say double points for a M/E - or maybe if you do go down the capping 5 best scores, specify that one of them has to be a M/E to count? At least with that last suggestion you are guaranteed the winner will have at least one strong M/E finish and recs do have opportunities to enter M/Es cheaply via satellites so it does not exclude them.
Anyway - glad I have dont the problem of chosing the scheme - thankless job sometimes giving stuff away.
EDIT:Sigh took so long to post this I had missed Skys response above - Albeit dont think it changes much. Now that so many schemes have been proposed I hope that the formula is picked soon so everyone has the chance to get used to it and accept it before the start.
Hi Everybody, I appreciate everybody's input into this it has all been very interesting to read through and has highlighted the impossibility of pleasing everybody. The main focus for us is simplicity. It will be run by a member of the community who will not have the tournament results readily available to them without looking through lobbies etc.. Therefore the proposal that Slipwater has made makes sense and I know that he is happy to run this so we would be more than willing to use this. That is not to say that this has to be a final decision now but if we could have a final proposal in the next couple of days I will ensure that everything is order and we have some formalised rules and terms of the competition. Thanks Sam Posted by Sky_SamT
That gives you plenty of time to engrave a 'player of the festival' bracelet!
The inherent problem with doubling the points for a Main Event win is that you widen the (already large) gap between the higher and lower stakes players, because those winners will be more likely to be playing more events anyway. You therefore are reducing the incentive (and the opportunities) for the little guys to progress.
I agree that the 'Player of the Festival' should probably, ceterus paribus, have won a Main Event, but let's not bring a gun to a knife fight.
Personally I am all for the little guy (insert your own Matt Bates joke here)
I would love it if a rec had a string of good results in smaller events and binked a seat to the UKPC
I think player of the festival would have a hollow feel if their results were made up entirely of minor events though. Dont think double points is the answer either.
But whatever the suits decide - let's just back them and get on with it, its their promotion and I can only applaud them for asking for views from the forum.
Personally I am all for the little guy (insert your own Matt Bates joke here) I would love it if a rec had a string of good results in smaller events and binked a seat to the UKPC I think player of the festival would have a hollow feel if their results were made up entirely of minor events though. Dont think double points is the answer either. But whatever the suits decide - let's just back them and get on with it, its their promotion and I can only applaud them for asking for views from the forum. Posted by Phantom66
Comments
but Sky are asking for a Fair Structure to Find 'Player of The Tornament', not keep a 'Separate Comp' open until the last Day...
Bernie Ecclestones Structure would be 100 times Points for the last tourmies, thats not point here
Given that the winner would definitely have cashed in five tournaments,
To answer slipwater's point about coming 19th in a lower field tournament and 70th in a higher field - yes, both are similar achievments!! You have to get through the same % of the field in each because that's how cashing is worked out. Finishing 568th in the WSOP main event is enough to cash. Are you saying that min-cashing in 19th on sky in a low field is far better because 19th is a much lower place? Cmon.. it's all relative.
here's an illustration of what i suggest.
to give a worked example i have looked at the main, mini, the 9pm BH and the 10:30 BH for each night in december. 4 games over 7 nights = 28 games.
this is the leaderboard. there were 3,103 entrants.
this is what it would look like after 28 events.
with UKOPS there would be 5 events still to play. if you want to win the UKPC seat you will have a clear picture of what you need to do over the final 5 games.
1 point if cashing
2 points if FT
3 points if third
4 points second
5 points first
I'm sure people could remember (or look up) their best five results so I think a top ten would be sufficient to show what they need to shoot for.