Improved Ranking System ???


Higher than I thought, tbh. I was enjoying some beautiful 150th place finishes in PAPA classics in 2014


Ctrl-F “Lewis”

Yep, I’m not worthy of the power just yet. :slight_smile:

Interesting graph; there’s some interesting people there and missing both in the same.



Can those of us in “the rest” see for fun where we would fall against THE POWER 100 (seems like it should be followed by duhn duhn duhnnn) I am below 250 to begin with, so I am not even eligible to be compared :slight_smile:

Thanks :slight_smile:


“THE REST” of the top 250 can see their details based on their IFPA player ID. For example @timballs is here:

Anyone outside of the top 250 we don’t run the calculation as part of the build script.


Ok thanks. I was just curious. Easiest thing for me to do would be to get out and play more :slight_smile:


One more FPF should do it for you. See you in November! :slight_smile:


geez… all these “best 2nd player” joke were gonna get back to me at some point :smiley: I would agree with the analysis and the result. I would definitely see Tim as a more efficient and consistent player.

It would definitely be interesting to have a couple parallel ranking systems that represent different skills though the WPPR does seem more balance (even if not addressing everyone) overall.


Note the win percentages don’t average to 50% as computed since ties are treated the same as losses. For average to be 50 percent, ties need to count as half wins.


it doesn’t have to cost that much. You can do pinburgh, and I therefore assume papa on not a huge amount of money if you plan ahead. Pittsburgh is probably one of the cheapest US cities to stay in, although irritatingly no direct flight from the UK.

This sort of thing happens in sports all the time. Look at Formula 1 - Alonso, one of the best drivers but stuck in a car with a rust bucket engine. Or in Soccer, someone like Ryan Giggs who was an outstanding player in his time at club football but was from Wales (who suck) so in International football never made it to any significant tournament despite being better than many players who did).
There is no perfect system.

One thing that a few folks in the UK have raised is that something changed in the WPPR points that have put players off competing. Not sure what that was (Wayne?) and personally I don’t care as I suck at pinball but a ranking table like this shows how you are progressing which is valuable. I look at pinburgh though where many folks jumped lots of places, including myself. :smiley: but I did better than 200 people and I think the move reflects that.



Its easier for US players to goto US tournaments. Its easier for EU players to goto EU tournaments is what I assume you mean? Which means its about the same for players who originate in their continental location :slight_smile:


I suspect that’s at least roughly correct. Now consider that the US has about ten times as many active players as Australia. That roughly means ten times as many tournaments (somewhat less than ten times, because some tournaments are huge). There are not ten times as many points per tournament, of course. But there are many more same-value and high-value tournaments than Down Under, so lots more opportunities to improve in rankings.


rating can improve without you beating a single player ranked higher than you, therefore if you play enough you can be top of the ratings without ever playing anyone better than you.




Now remove league stats :wink:


This is absolutely right. Frankly, my only interest in WPPR’s now is qualifying for the WC. I went through a period of wanting to stroke my ego, as I’m guessing many do, seeing how high I could go (38, I think?) but quickly lost interest in that. Now, i just want to play the best players in the world as frequently as possible and win a major, which understandably means a lot of travelling.

What the IFPA does with the rankings/data is absolutely the key point. The WC is meant to be the ‘best’ 64 players in the world competing for the title. How those 64 ‘best’ qualifiers are determined, in my opinion could be improved using the data that is already produced.

FWIW I like the POWER100 rankings :blush:


So the players that “don’t travel but are really good” can now earn the right to play in the IFPA WC . . . but to play in the IFPA WC they have to travel :slight_smile:


Also known as the Tidmore paradox.


Check. Now can you re-sort it and see if Andy Jr is still #100 or if as I suspect someone else slips in?


It depends what you want the WC to be. I agree that travelling is essential. How about a balance of the two? Ranking/POWER100. I think that this is good data that could/should carry some weight.


How about allocate positions in the finals based on percentage of player per country.

i.e. if 50% of ALL players registered with the IFPA are from the US 50% of the finalists should be from the US, 5% from AUS then 5% of finalists should be from AUS etc.

You could also set a minimum no. of players from each country who are guaranteed a place (as you currently do).

This should give the best 2 from each designated country plus the next best range from each country, rather than just the next best players (as based on a potentially biased ranking system).