|
BennyLaRue
|
03-12-2009, 10:18 PM
Post subject: Gauntlet VIII Format Discussion: The Scoring System
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 646
|
|
The FTR Gauntlet VIII will be up and running shortly. Huzzah!
If you're unfamiliar with how the Gauntlet has run in the past, read the rules from the previous seasons here: http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...te-t60313.html
There have been a number of comments in the past on needing to revise the scoring system. Previously, the scoring system was as follows:
Quote:
The season's leaderboard standings are determined by a point system based on this formula:
Points = 10 * [sqrt(n)/sqrt(k)] * [1+log(b+0.25)]
n is the number of entrants
k is the place of finish (k=1 for the 1st place finisher, and so on)
b is the buy-in amount in dollars (excluding entry fee).
ALL players of each game receive points for participating. This system rewards excellent performance and frequent play.
|
Proposed changes to the above scoring system include:
1) Deriving an average points/game system (with a required minimum number of games played). Currently, those with no life who can make all of the events have an advantage. This proposal seems to get around that issue. Input on what such a system would look like would be appreciated.
2) Total profit for the season. This idea also rewards excellent play without requiring a participant enter most of the events. However, as payout schedules are generally top heavy, early success by one or two players might be impossible for those further back on the leaderboard to overcome.
3) Bonuses for success in more than one poker variant.
Other ideas? What say you, FTR?
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
meeloche
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,131
|
|
I like a top heavy structure because lets face it you make money when you place high not when you consistently bubble a tournament. Prize money isn't ideal since it'll field size is a big factor in this. A top heavy point system would be my choice.
|
|
|
|
kevster
|
|
Full House
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Fold City
Posts: 758
|
|
Meh. I don't think there's anything hugely wrong with the current system.
|
|
|
|
GatorJH
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: HotLanta
Posts: 3,179
|
|
the problem with a top heavy system is that luck plays a pretty big role in any given tournament, yet a league like this is supposed to reward consistently good play over the course of the entire league.
I took a look at the final standings a while back and the only noticable change that would have occurred over the last 3-4 leagues if we used an avg ppg method is that Nutsinho would have won last year instead of finishing out of the money. However he only played 10 games versus 16 so his average may have dropped (probably not given his ability, but let's assume he gets sucked out on early one game) had he played all 16 games.
Also, the detriment to the ppg method is that it actually may discourage the leader from playing in more than the minimum amount of games as they may not want to reduce their average.
I agree with Kevster that the current scoring isn't that bad and will counter that has made some of the final games the last 2-3 seasons pretty exciting.
|
|
Poker is easy, it's winning at poker that's hard.
|
|
Jack Sawyer
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Old School
Posts: 2,535
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kevster
Meh. I don't think there's anything hugely wrong with the current system.
|
|
My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...
Quote:
|
VHS is like a book and a book is like a stack of kindles.
|
Hey, I'm in a movie!
http://youtu.be/lGdnIrRKDTI
|
|
tuuk2
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Hartford
Posts: 296
|
|
I may be out of place responding to this since I don't plan on participating, but how about a plan that takes your 10 (or whatever number) best results? That way those who play in all the events have a small advantage in that they can throw out some of their worst results, but not have a huge advantage over those who can't play as many?
|
|
|
|
GatorJH
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: HotLanta
Posts: 3,179
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tuuk2
I may be out of place responding to this since I don't plan on participating, but how about a plan that takes your 10 (or whatever number) best results? That way those who play in all the events have a small advantage in that they can throw out some of their worst results, but not have a huge advantage over those who can't play as many?
|
The problem with this is that someone could play every single tournament and therefore have a better chance at 10 good tournaments. IMO, if you play a tourney the results should count.
|
|
Poker is easy, it's winning at poker that's hard.
|
|
Warpe
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Canuckistan
Posts: 3,905
|
|
The only change I'd make is removing the point weighting based on the size of the field. Currently you get more points for taking down a large field event vs a small one, so the incentive for playing in historically low turnout events besides a reduced payout is lessened even further.
|
|
|
|
Ragnar4
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Billings, Montana
Posts: 1,284
|
|
How about there are 20 total tournaments.
Your first 10 count and you're allowed to replace any 3 with any other tournaments?
|
The older I get, the more I start wondering; Just what in the hell is going on here? 
|
|
bode
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: May 2006
Location: slow motion
Posts: 4,270
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tuuk2
I may be out of place responding to this since I don't plan on participating, but how about a plan that takes your 10 (or whatever number) best results? That way those who play in all the events have a small advantage in that they can throw out some of their worst results, but not have a huge advantage over those who can't play as many?
|
this is a good idea if the total number of games you can play is capped at 15 or 16.
other than that i like the average pts/game system, assuming with this you have to play a min of like 8 games. I'm someone who can almost never play in 16 games over the course of the season so something that shortens it or uses an average will give me more incentive to play.
|
Quote:
|
eeevees are not monies yet...they are like baby monies.
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
