PAPA 20 results online? (PAPA Scoring Software Feedback)

@ASG … Any idea what’s going on with the results for IFPA? We saw this after LAX as well, but it looks like players are being added to the Classics standings that shouldn’t be:

https://www.ifpapinball.com/tournaments/view.php?t=18411

159 players were submitted but the live standings that are still viewable on the app only show 119 for K1.

I’m also assuming that players that didnt play 100% of the games needed for a full qualifying ticket weren’t removed?

Is that something you can generate and send to me?

@pinwizj In the app, it only shows the top 120 players, not everyone who competed.

1 Like

When you make a charge, Stripe will automatically create a customer object. If you’re not storing the customer IDs on your end you likely have a customer object for each charge. I bet you’ll see them all if you login to the Stripe dashboard. I haven’t ever tried, but I would imagine you can also delete customer objects from the dashboard manually.

I was going to say! :wink:

YAY! I’m spending this week writing a “how to jump into the code” document, and automating the 30+ steps required to get everything setup/configured after you checkout the repo. I’ll be posting here on TiltForums once the two tasks are done.

Yes - the division results cutoff at 120 - if there is concern about the results that were submitted, I can change that (for now) on the live version. I’ll let you know when that is done.

If you tell me what the “100%” equals (i.e. how many games were needed), I can get you that info - but the earliest I can get it to you is next weekend ( work is gonna be insane-o balls this week).

I thought the same thing - but if customers are being created when you click the “remember me” option, I don’t have access to them. I tried getting a list of customers via the API and the web dashboard - in both cases, the list was empty.

For A division it means players had to have recorded scores on at least 6 different machines, representing a ‘full card’.

For Classics 4 different machines had to be played with scores recorded.

1 Like

It needs to be cleaned up, but it is not massively off (since you only need 2 games in classics to count). By no intended as correct, but it looks like
Classics 1 Remove: Nick Zendejas, Tom Knorst, Tim Juchcinski, Dan Woodske
Classics 2 Remove: Brian Uplinger, Germain Mariolle, Tom Knorst
Classics 3 remove: Nathan Eppley, Gregory Kennedy, Robert Hooton
A division remove: Aleksander Kaczmarczyk

Methodology: checked player results by searching for player from bottom up. Stopped when i hit someone with 100 total since higher needs 2 games. For A i checked by clicking through the standings until someone has 200. Feel free to check my work, or ignore me and wait for access to the raw data.

At over 100 players participating the percentage goes up to 100% instead of 50%.

Aiton sent me the list so I’ll get it corrected this week.

1 Like

Oh right, i forgot about the progression as player count grows. Needing 100% is way too much to check by hand :slight_smile:

I volunteer FLR :wink:

7 Likes

I’m late to the party (I told you guys to give me a week) but I’ll address this one.

Aiton and I spent some time redesigning and extending the network at PAPA so that it now reaches the farthest corners of the building. YAY! This was a key issue that’s come up in the past, with scorekeepers down where D division was hardly able to get a signal at all.

So, we improved and expanded the physical reach of the network. And then we rate limited the hell out of the public SSID. This was intentionally so that we could dedicate the bandwidth to the private SSID for scorekeepers, and also because it offends me when people watch Netlix on their phones while at PAPA. I’M LOOKING AT YOU, JOSH.

We did realize sometime on Saturday afternoon that we’d only allocated 150 IP addresses to the public side, and that the DHCP wasn’t releasing for 24 hours, so whoops! We fixed that just in time to sell the building.

ErinK brought up international players, and we did think about them. That’s why we built the little queuing stations at the front of each division. The computers in the cafeteria allowed you to look at the results and standings. And, you know, the wifi wasn’t off - which is literally a thing I’ve had to do in the past - it just wasn’t as zippy as anyone would like.

6 Likes

Downloaded in advance so I could watch offline . . . BOOM! :slight_smile:

5 Likes

Hi Everyone,

I’ve been playing with some data analysis of the qualifying scores from PAPA, but when I went to http://results.papa.org over the weekend I get a “Can not perform action requested. The server is unreachable.” I am guessing here, but I think that there’s an invalid SSH certificate causing the problem. I dropped a note to @ASG over the weekend but haven’t heard back yet, so I’m wondering if anyone else has insight as to what may be happening on the site?

Also, a random question about the results. Were there finals for the Juniors on any of the days, and are the bracket results known? All the other divisions had results posted.

Thanks in advance!

@coreyhulse Yep, the SSL certificate expired three days ago. It’s a Lets Encrypt certificate which needs to be renewed every 90 days. The certificate for the main site has been renewed, but it looks like their backend service runs on a different server/service and that certificate has not been renewed.

Thanks for the reply, @haugstrup. I heard back from @ASG (thanks Aiton!) and I’ll continue to pick up with him over PM.

1 Like

One follow-up question for the group. I’m nearly finished up with my data analysis from PAPA, and the only pieces I’m missing are the winners and brackets from the Juniors divisions (I, II, and III). At a minimum, it would be great to at least get the winners so I can share an initial version, and I can always add in the bracket results at a later point. Does anyone know who won each of the days at Juniors?

Juniors top 8 is posted on IFPA
https://www.ifpapinball.com/tournaments/view.php?t=19252

Awesome, thank you! I should have thought to look at IFPA.

I finally published version 1.0 of the scoring analysis for anyone interested: PAPA 20 - Scoring Analysis App

IPC was my first time using this as a Score keeper. Generally, things went well, but a couple pieces of feedback on the webapp as a scorekeeper.

  • Fonts need to be bigger. Especially on the confirmation screen. Many of the players had no hope reading it on my screen even zoomed in.
  • Yellow is a really bad choice for color. There was a really important yellow button I could not really read.
  • the name of next player on machine should have been much more obvious. I got use to it, but first time through I was like, whaa?
  • tournament ran without photos and it made some of the UI a little strange.

Still, it was a good experience and it seemed to work well for IPC. Thanks.