Match Play Events: The Next Generation

General
143

Can you share the tournament link to your test one? I’d be interested to see the round/player count and how it ended up locking you into that position.

For what it’s worth for people testing out Max Match Play, I ran through a number of scenarios with Andreas, and if you always pick an EVEN number of rounds you avoid a single player being “odd one out”. If you have an odd number of rounds, you need an even number of players and you run the risk of running into an issue if a player drops out (or you add someone new).

Plus, Max Match Play makes an effort to avoid pairing you against the same opponent until you’ve cycled through all available players. It even helps with Arena Balancing, which I know was an issue in Flip Frenzy if you happened to get caught in a weird cycle based on available players and games.

1 Like
144

Also, IFPA posted this up tonight.

Key dates related to NACS/WNACS:

  • TDs need to submit by January 4th
  • Players need to declare NACS and WNACS State/Province by January 7th, 8pm CST
  • NACS - January 21st
  • WNACS - January 22nd
1 Like
145

i did 2 test and i had no problem as soon as you follow the guideline from the software, what @coreyhulse mentioned.

146

There’s an off-by-one for at least one player (Ralf) for the buchholz value. I’m looking at it and one question first. What’s the story about round 11. You have a game with only one player but it’s not a bye game. So how’d that happen?

image
image732×392 22.7 KB

147

Interesting, I picked that tournament at random, and it looks like that weirdness in round 11 might actually be the cause of the issue. I’ve looked up some other tournaments now, and they don’t show the same standings discrepancy between versions.

I’m afraid I can’t tell you what happened in round 11, I wasn’t the organizer. I’ll try to get some info. Not sure how this is even possible, though, and even if it is, I dont’ really understand how a bye that counts as a win would be any different from a win without an opponent, since both would be discarded for Median-Buchholz.

Apart from that, though, is there a reason why the tie breaking scores aren’t shown in the new version? And what’s the new “ADJ.” column, is this where the tie breaking scores are supposed to be shown, or is this something else entirely?

148

I spoke with Andreas about this previously. Here is what he said.

“The new MP is using the same tiebreaking formula as the old version and if you look in the left column you can see that ties are being broken.

It’s just that the new version doesn’t show the raw numbers used to break ties. I haven’t decided whether to show them or not. They always were weird because they’re essentially magic numbers in the sense that any random person can’t see why the number or one thing for one player and another thing for another players.

So I’m been trying to figure out how to not just show the numbers but also explain what the numbers mean. I just haven’t had time to do the thinking on how to present all that…”

149

Is there anyway to fix the font so player names that are long will fit in the vertical orientation?

image
image1920×1440 450 KB

image
image1920×1440 235 KB

150

Thanks for the info. I think if showing tie breaking scores is not even an option, that will make the switch a lot harder for a bunch of communities. There are big parts of Europe that have been playing Swiss since long before matchplay.events was around, and every software that has ever been used for this purpose showed some variation of Buchholz in the standings.

The only reason it might look like a weird magic number that needs a lot of explaining is that legacy matchplay shows two different tie breaking scores at the same time. If it just used Median-Buchholz by default (or maybe made it a setting which calculation to use instead of showing both), it would be very easy to explain:

“Basically the sum of all of your opponents’ points”, that’s good enough for most people. If you really wanted to go into the details, “with top and bottom scores removed to make it fairer, because you can’t control what opponent you get in round 1”, easy as that. I’ve never had anyone not understand that.

1 Like
151

HTH MP is the simplest case. The different tournament formats have different tiebreaker values. I do want to display the tiebreaker values, but I have to do it for all tournament formats at the same time and have to put them all into context. I’ll get there soon!

1 Like
152

The fix is what you see: To truncate longer names using an ellipsis :sweat_smile:

1 Like
153

Missed a spot… the ADJ column shows points that have been manually adjusted.

1 Like
154

If you’re willing to pull in another script, textFit seems to work pretty well.

image
image839×578 19.8 KB

@TomGWI Depending on how comfortable you are using browser developer tools, you could maybe hack things together to make this work even if @haugstrup doesn’t want to build it in to Match Play Events.

1 Like
155

Any chance next.matchplay could have a feature to fully delete players from the player list instead of (or in addition to) flagging them inactive?

After many years of running events with Match Play, I have 500 or more players who are never going to come back to an event and it would be great to be able to clean this list up.

6 Likes
156

Tommy thank you so much. I already hack the old version but didn’t know how to make it work.

Poor Kassidy and Alexander can’t get their names to be seen. lol

157

@haugstrup a few things I’ve missed using the next version of Matchplay: vanity URLs and pulling games from pinball map without Scorbit logo

Vanity URLs are pretty nice to help people quickly find the tournament

The alert when trying to add games “From Location” confuses me regarding Scorbit. None of the games at our location have Scorbit installed. Can we still use this feature by spuriously putting the logo on our Pinball Map listing? Not really interested in false advertising, so the logo isn’t going on the page, but I wanted to understand what has changed here?

158

Match Play Events sorry for the lateness in reply… Been busy with trying to get our website up and running for the show.

159

I just did another test that one work good, had to do the override on it but works very slick, can’t wait to try the format out on Jan 20 just before Provincials.

160

I ran a Pingolf tourney yesterday where I wanted to create a top four player playoff (10% out of 40 players per IFPA requirement) but it wouldn’t let me (I selected “other” and it started to cry that at least 6 were required and 8 was the lowest in the dropdown). We ended up doing pen and paper but I realized now I could just have created a new pingolf tourney with 4 holes on it. I must be misunderstanding something.

I used the new registration function for this tourney and it worked out well. There were some complaints about not being able to remove your own registration, I’m sure there’s a reason for that.

I was also registering people on site who wanted to get on the waitlist and I was expecting the same dialog as you would “Add Players” as you would add registrations when in TD mode.

161

So I’ve gotten “around” this by doing a 4-Player PinGolf Finals as an 8-Player PinGolf Finals.

First round is the 4-players and 4 “dummy players” seeded so that’s split 2/2. Give the real people good scores and the fake people bad scores, and then you’re onto Finals.

I’ve also used a Google Spreadsheet when I’m in a pinch, and then translate to MatchPlay later:

Also @haugstrup - I’m sure oEmbed/OpenGraph is low on your priority list but TiltForums is saying it’s can’t render a preview:

image
image714×122 3.54 KB

162

Oh, clever! I’ll have this in mind for next year unless we’ll get a 4 player playoff fix.