Points Awarded in Grand Final Qualifier?

[AceLosesKing]

I knew it was Lindgren too and should be an Aussie this year with Lisandro breaking all sort of records.

Nope. The ME counts towards the POTY race this year. If its not the winner, it'll be whoever goes the deepest + few min cashes in other events.

[trishan]

I knew it was Lindgren too and should be an Aussie this year with Lisandro breaking all sort of records.

Nope. The ME counts towards the POTY race this year. If its not the winner, it'll be whoever goes the deepest + few min cashes in other events.

Ah sucks for Lisandro then.

[krunchie]

[quote="AceLosesKing
Nope. The ME counts towards the POTY race this year. If its not the winner, it'll be whoever goes the deepest + few min cashes in other events.[/quote]


So this is the same as our ladder then

[trishan]

[quote="AceLosesKing
Nope. The ME counts towards the POTY race this year. If its not the winner, it'll be whoever goes the deepest + few min cashes in other events.

So this is the same as our ladder then[/quote]

No WSOP has a different points system where there is a set amount of points for places 1-30 (maybe 1-25) regardless of number of competitors. Then anyone who cashes also gets the minimum points.

[AceLosesKing]

Nope. The ME counts towards the POTY race this year. If its not the winner, it'll be whoever goes the deepest + few min cashes in other events.

So this is the same as our ladder then

Trishan: Are those points based on the number of runners in each event?

[trishan]

From http://www.worldseriesofpoker.com/players/2009pts.asp

Standard Points Model
1st 100 pts
2nd 75 pts
3rd 60 pts
4th 55 pts
5th 50 pts
6th 45 pts
7th 40 pts
8th 35 pts
9th 30 pts
10th 20 pts
11th 20 pts
12th 20 pts
13th 20 pts
14th 20 pts
15th 20 pts
16th 20 pts
17th 20 pts
18th 20 pts
19th 10 pts
20th 10 pts
21st 10 pts
22nd 10 pts
23rd 10 pts
24th 10 pts
25th 10 pts
26th 10 pts
27th 10 pts
CASHING 5pts

[trishan]

Nope. The ME counts towards the POTY race this year. If its not the winner, it'll be whoever goes the deepest + few min cashes in other events.

So this is the same as our ladder then

Trishan: Are those points based on the number of runners in each event?

AK obivously more runners means more places with cash prizes and more people getting the minimum points. There are certainly paralells with my third suggested solution.

[trishan]

Crown Casinos POTY leaderboard works as follows:

Standard Points Per Place X # of players

This could also be a way to calculate points and then either average them or use total points.

To earn POY points, players must cash in an eligible tournament. POY points are calculated by multiplying points earned for the following three criteria:

1. The place finished in the tournament
2. The amount of the tournament buy-in
3. The number of entrants in the tournament

Criteria 1 – Position Finished
1st 120 points
2nd 100 points
3rd 80 points
4th 60 points
5th 50 points
6th 40 points
7th 30 points
8th 20 points
9th 10 points
10th 6 points
11th – �h 3 points
21st – 30� 2 points
30th+ 1 point[/quote]

Criteria 3 – Numb�of Entrants
10-20 0.6 point
21-40 0.7 point
41-60 0.8 point
61-80 0.9 point
81-100 1 point

For every 20 additional entrants (101-120, 121-140 etc.) the number of points increases by 0.1 with the number of entrants rounded to the nearest 20. For example 200 entrants = 1.5 points, 300 entrants = 2 points. The maximum points awarded for the number of entrants is 5.

In the case where there is a tie between two or more players, each will receive an average of the points available. For example, if two players tie for ninth place, each receives half of the ninth and tenth place points.[/qu[te]

[Brett Kay]

How complicated do we want this to get?

Obviously weighting games sounds fair, but then there is no incentive to increase venue numbers. I have heard of 400 being for an end of year regular event freeroll in NSW. So do you weight that because it is a regular event on the calender with one week having extra numbers?

If you use a flat point system, it gives the advantage to the small field venues. 10 runners, winning that gets 100 points vs a 100 runner field where winner gets the same points.

And back to square one.

[BigPete33]

Half the problem is nobody (in charge) has definitively said what the scoreboard is actually supposed to be trying to show.


Garth, wtf do you want it to show?


Consistency? (that's consistently good, not consistently bad)

Best overall results over a period of time regardles of consistency?

Combination of both?

None of the above?

Until that's actually declared, there's no way to have a reasonable discussion on if that's actually being achieved or not.