Another Scoreboard question

[gundog]

My respose to your initial reply which is somewhat reviewed after additional posts by you and others.

The thought of a 10x for SA away events is not the solution, SA was at it peak a few seasons back and the market has now leveled off with a solid core of in venue players, using my local venue as a barometer, where we were having mid 30's to low 40's every week, now the last 2 seasons we have high 20's to mid 30's. Whats changed to effect the venue numbers, not much but we dont have that 4-5 up river players coming anymore.

So how do I see we can make the away games more equitable between big and small venues/states participants, a look at our old NPL partner NSW a win has the same points value 1000 points wether its a 100 runners or 25.

1st 1000 down to 180 for 15th a DNP is worth 100, I went through the excercise using the NPL points system, looking at the top 5 in my local venue to see if it effected the current standings, there was no change to standing at all. The only change would the smaller venue player would have some equality, this way the would be any need to run bonus high point games or higher multiplyer games for smaller states.

As for online games I feel that the freerolls needs to be eliminated from eligibility for Dream Team and the freeroller have a separate leaderboard, only buy-ins count towards points, events like MM and ALK need to have an actual buy-in value attached, Friday night I played MM seriously, 150 runners and I encountered a number of dead stacks along the way to final table, I and 2 other final table players made no rebuys or add on's, so when the prize pool was declared there was only 88 rebuys and 0 add ons, was this game a 1x or 3x game i feel it was a 1xer.

If this forum is a bit of a sounding board for 888pl why not present some form of poll to gauge what participation of forum members have in venues ie games played no venues played etc etc, some vocal forum member may not be the avid supporter 888pl venues as they would lead us to believe.

[Garth Kay]

I will respond to the above post tomorrow when I can formulate some sort of polite and coherent response.

Too tired right now.

[JMACK007]

Garth, no one has mentioned it here, but I did in another topic. I think there is a problem with the current scheduling of the AK & MM games. This season, because of the multiplier, they have become the games you must play to make DT (or at least give you the best chance). The scheduling problem is that to play EITHER of these games, it does not allow you to play in venue that day.....

The AK starts at EST16:00, usually finishes around EST20:30
The MM starts at EST21:00.....

As most venues kick off here in ADL at EST20:00, you can work out for yourself why these games cannot be played if playing in venue....

As this season was supposed to be more encouraging for players to play in venue, I believe this schedualling is counter productive....

Cheers,

Jo

[JMACK007]

David & Gundog, I am not sure your suggestions will help 888pl in general.

David - Having a sliding scale for points is a flawed system, as 888pl want to encourage players to play and participate as much as possible, because that is what their business is all about. In your system, if players have a really good run, get massive points early and hit the lead on a certain scoreboard, they will more than likely stop playing so as to not bring their average down. The days of "fighting for it" over the last few weeks will be gone....

Gundog - you cannot have a "blanket" point structure because you are awarding the same points for a venue with 10 players as you are for a venue with 150 players. How can you sell that to a venue?? The whole idea is to get venues to attract more players, but with your system, the players would actually flock to the venues with less runners!!! This goes totally against what the 888pl are trying to achieve....

Also, a 10x multiplier for a 30 runner game is not equitable to a 5x multiplier in a 60 runner game (IMO) as it is ALOT easier to consistantly make points in the 30 runner game than the 60 runner game, and therefore would be too advantageous. Maybe a 7.5x multiplier for that game would be more equitable...

[maccatak11]

Also, a 10x multiplier for a 30 runner game is not equitable to a 5x multiplier in a 60 runner game (IMO) as it is ALOT easier to consistantly make points in the 30 runner game than the 60 runner game, and therefore would be too advantageous. Maybe a 7.5x multiplier for that game would be more equitable...

Not sure if i am right here, but i think Garth was suggesting have one or a number of isolated games that attract higher points, not a venue that does so every week. i.e. venue's would remian as they are, but extra games may be offered in certain areas (perhaps a game similar to the AFC 10x game) as an extra to regular venue games, for the sole purpose of making DT points more equitable in their availability. Im sure all options will be considered though, and 7.5x is probably one of them.

[bennymacca]

across states, jmack's idea sounds like what might happen - qld averages 60, sa 30 or whatever.

[gundog]

David & Gundog, I am not sure your suggestions will help 888pl in general.


Gundog - you cannot have a "blanket" point structure because you are awarding the same points for a venue with 10 players as you are for a venue with 150 players. How can you sell that to a venue?? The whole idea is to get venues to attract more players, but with your system, the players would actually flock to the venues with less runners!!! This goes totally against what the 888pl are trying to achieve....

...

What I have put up for discussion is not my idea, it is already in use in NSW/Qld with the NPL
League Points



Every event you play with NPL earns you points ranging from 1000 points down to 100 points based upon your placing in the event.

Points are used for multiple reasons with the NPL.

Your points contribute to not only a Combined State leaderboard, but a regional leaderboard and a venue leaderboard.

All three leaderboards are used to determine prizes and season final invites.

The following is the points breakup depending upon positions placed;

Place Points
1st 1000
2nd 800
3rd 600
4th 550
5th 500
6th 450
7th 400
8th 350
9th 300
10th 280
11th 260
12th 240
13th 220
14th 200
15th 180
16th+ 100

For any system to be equitable then there must be equal opportunity for every player to aspire to make the Dream Team or State leaderboard, because of locality some players may not have to opportunity to play the larger venues, to get these big points, so you automatically consign them to acheiving the semi final as their holy grail.

Having points parity may effect some of the larger venues, however this maybe advantageous for 888pl in general as those smaller marginal venues may get additional players and become better positioned in the market place. It would then put some pressure on those bigger venues to do more for the players to entice them to their venue which I see as a win/win for 888pl.

I'll pose this question to you and anyone else who cares to respond, where is the highest placed regional player on the state leaderboard ?, I can tell you that the highest placed Riverland players are at 31 and 32, and both these player have wins at the riverlands highest number venue.

[Bacon]

For any system to be equitable then there must be equal opportunity for every player to aspire to make the Dream Team or State leaderboard, because of locality some players may not have to opportunity to play the larger venues, to get these big points, so you automatically consign them to acheiving the semi final as their holy grail.

Why?? As someone who knows they can only play the odd game, I have no aspirations for the DT. Are you saying that someone who plays 6 in-venue games a season HAS to have the possibility?

Some people just won't have the time to play for the DT scoreboard, and THEY need to accept that, and 888pl shouldn't have to change their rules to suit. The games are there, people play them.

The little guy has to miss out occasionally, I'm sorry.

[bennymacca]

For any system to be equitable then there must be equal opportunity for every player to aspire to make the Dream Team or State leaderboard, because of locality some players may not have to opportunity to play the larger venues, to get these big points, so you automatically consign them to acheiving the semi final as their holy grail.

sorry gundog, but that is detrimental to venues that actually give a damn,and ADVANTAGES people who play small venues - how is that fair?

think of it this way

there are 2 venues that are close to me, venue X and Y (both hypothetical btw)

venue X really loves having poker around, tries its hardest to listen to the players. it has meal and drink specials for players, it is great with the stamping, and it has prizes which are higher than normal. as a result, players flock to this venue, and it averages 80 a night.

venue Y thinks that 888pl in their pub is just a money spinner for them and nothing more. it has the worst stamping in the region, offers no prizes for a winner, and the poker is in a small dingy area. as a result, this venue only gets 15 players a week.


now, under the points system you mentioned, which venue will gain?

you yourself gundog are a big supporter of venues, especially ones that support you back (which is a credit to yourself), but a points system like that goes against all of those principles.


just because it is in use for another league, doesn't mean it is right. (other leagues use this system as well, including EPA and ozpoker, and we all know how well those leagues have done since starting)

[David]

David - Having a sliding scale for points is a flawed system, as 888pl want to encourage players to play and participate as much as possible, because that is what their business is all about. In your system, if players have a really good run, get massive points early and hit the lead on a certain scoreboard, they will more than likely stop playing so as to not bring their average down. The days of "fighting for it" over the last few weeks will be gone....

I disagree.
This isn't like the first season's state leaderboard where it was your average fullstop - where some people (one mainly) stopped playing so they wouldn't affect their average.

By adding one game in for every X games you play *over a certain amount* I don't think it stops people playing at all. People are playing all the time now, online and otherwise. Can you imagine someone on the leaderboard now stopping? I can't. It doesn't affect your average much at all if you think about it

Chances are your score that is just out of your average calculation (so your 11th online or away) isn't that far behind the 10th score. Your average won't go down much.