Regional and State leaderboards

[one chip]

Hi, this is a question for Garth,
Is it possible to have Regional and State leaderboards worked out in bulk points next season?
As under the currant format (best 15 best 10 results) it is impossible for a player to get near the top if they cannot get to 85+ venues regularly.

If for example if player (A) played 40 games in a season and won all of them at a 25 to 40 venues (A) cannot make it anywhere near the top of the state or regional leaderboards as the best average (A) can have is only 50 points.

Or on the other side if player (B) played 40 games at a 85 to 110 venue and placed 15 times at 10th (B) would have player (A) beat on the State or Regional leaderboard. (Player (B) at worst could have a 52.5 average or at best a 65 average)

What would be harder to win 40 times in a row or place 10th 15 times out of 40? (No need to answer that)

I have put in this above example just to show how unfair the current leaderboards best out of 10 or 15 is.

If it was worked out the same way a venue leaderboard was player (A) would have player (B) easily beat, despite player (B) got bigger points for a large venue.

So I ask again is it possible to sort it in bulk points next season in the interest of fairness?
Thanks for you time.

[David]

The top 50 isn't about fairness, and low gamers being treated equally as high gamers. It's about your best 15 averages, period.

It's not there to show who the best are, or anything like that; it's merely a reward if you are the best person who "plays a hell of a lot"

[BigPete33]

Garth... yet another person suggesting the naming of the "leaderboard" is inaccurate and leads some people to believe things that are not necessarily the case.

Good post one chip, and what you said is exactly the case but what Dave said is also the case - it's just not meant for that type of comparison.

[Bacon]

what other words can you suggest, other than leaderboard?

One chip, top 50 was based on total games in season 1, and the winner stopped playing halfway through the season, in order to maintain their average. By excluding games, it keep people playing, to get better average.

That is the point of the SL. Regional could be total points based, for those non metro areas, that would make some sense.

[Garth Kay]

All easily up for discussion.

I am happy to revisit the leaderboard issue for the 2009. We have already decreased the prize pool for this and as such may see a waning in the amount of multi gamers chasing points.

I am especially happy to revist the regional leaderboard issue as the only reward for finishing top ten on these is to represent your team in the regional teams event.

What do you all recommend? Minimum twenty games played and total average? Total Average of all games or average of best ten games and average of worst ten games divided by 2?

I am contemplating holding an annual or seasonal event for those who play more than 4 games per week on average. We still need to reward our most loyal supporters.

[one chip]

it’s merely a reward if you are the best person who "plays a hell of a lot"

That was my point you can play endlessly and can never get anywhere at all.
I dose not encourage people to play extra games under the current sorting.
Why would you?
Unless you just going out to play at venues to get drunk or practice for somewhere else.
I do not view the Npl in that way, I believe it’s bit better than that.

One chip, top 50 was based on total games in season 1, and the winner stopped playing halfway through the season, in order to maintain their average. By excluding games, it keeps people playing, to get better average.

Season 1 2008 2007 2006?
By if you stoped half way in the season you would be worse off under a bulk point sorting.
Never said anything about sorting by averages.
Not sure what you are talking about?
???????

All easily up for discussion.

I am happy to revisit the leaderboard issue for the 2009. We have already decreased the prize pool for this and as such may see a waning in the amount of multi gamers chasing points.

I am especially happy to revist the regional leaderboard issue as the only reward for finishing top ten on these is to represent your team in the regional teams event.

What do you all recommend? Minimum twenty games played and total average? Total Average of all games or average of best ten games and average of worst ten games divided by 2?

I am contemplating holding an annual or seasonal event for those who play more than 4 games per week on average. We still need to reward our most loyal supporters.

All I ask is that its not sorted by any form of average but all the combined results.
This has been done in the past.

[Bacon]

sorry one chip i didn't fully explain. The first ever season in Sa was calculated on average score for ALL games. So if u dnp'd your average dropped.. So stopping meant the average didn't drop, and if his chasers didn't score more than their average, he got further ahead.

If u went on total points scored, u really aren't changing the current system much. Still those who play 14 games a week will end up highly placed.

We did a comparison here for the 2nd ever season, comparing total average vs best 25 game average.... And i think half the field were in both lists.

I really prefer to see real average, not losing any games from your average. Maybe someone can calculate what the top 50 would look like for both states if it was in place for this season.

[Garth Kay]

How is an average not a total of all combined results?

Total points scored doesn't necessarily dictate a good winner as well.
Take PGCC $1,000 game for example - 300+ runners. Have a lucky night and win 300 points from one game. No offense Porky just using it as an example.

I'm already a third of the way to total points accumulated in a season by our mega gamers.

I like total average from total games played. Minimum of 25 games for State and 15 games for regional.

Or I like a Mega gamers leaderboard and Elite leaderboard as well as a true leaderboard.

Not enough room on the webpage unfortunately.

[Des]

Has to be some sort of average.

Look at the mega-gamers in SA. Can play theoretically 15 games a week I think at the moment.

Do that for 10 weeks... ALL DNP's... Based on "total points" it would put them 17th on the leaderboard.


I'm not sure if it can be coded or not... but how about an average from your best % of games, with a minimum qualification of 10 or 15 games. The mega-gamers are going to get around 60-80 games.

e.g.

Make it your best 30% of games, minimum 10 qualification
i.e.
Player A plays 20 games... best 10 count
Player B plays 40 games... best 12 count
Player C plays 60 games... best 18 count
Player D plays 80 games... best 24 count
and so forth.

Just throwing an idea out there.

[one chip]

sorry one chip i didn't fully explain. The first ever season in Sa was calculated on average score for ALL games. So if u dnp'd your average dropped.. So stopping meant the average didn't drop, and if his chasers didn't score more than their average, he got further ahead.

Sounds crazy one win at a big venue and you never have to play again.
In Vic I think it was season 3 2007 our leaderboard was sorted like that for most of the season until it was finally corrected.
It took a long time to work out how the state leaderboard was truly working.
As stated by others where was a communication problem in the past.
That is why I am glad that we have this forum now.

How is an average not a total of all combined results?

?? It is. Not sure how that is relavent to what I am saying??

Total points scored doesn't necessarily dictate a good winner as well.
Take PGCC $1,000 game for example - 300+ runners. Have a lucky night and win 300 points from one game. No offense Porky just using it as an example.

I'm already a third of the way to total points accumulated in a season by our mega gamers.

I like total average from total games played. Minimum of 25 games for State and 15 games for regional.

Or I like a Mega gamers leaderboard and Elite leaderboard as well as a true leaderboard.

Not enough room on the webpage unfortunately.

_________________
GARTH KAY

I guess I got my answer, is there no way I can change your mind?
I know there is no way to make it 100% fair all round but I am just asking that players that do not have access to huge venues have a chance fair or not.