One day soon, there will be a ton of movement. In the “completed-but-yet-to-be-reported” (soon, we hope!) box are two majors - Pinburgh and EPC - plus their huge side events, Intergalactic and EPC Classics, plus two Circuit events with Vancouver and Cleveland and their respective Classics events. I think this is the biggest batch of pending points we’ve ever had. When the dust settles, I expect theguyoverthere will still be #1, but after that, all bets are off. Anyone on the “will I qualify for IFPA 2019?” or the “will I make the Epstein Cup team?” bubbles better recheck their situation. Can’t wait to see how it all shakes out.
Looks like EPC ifpa results are already out, clearly the EU guys are efficient!
Wait shouldn’t the TGP be 150%?
It should. (Actually I think it should be 100 but there should be a Major Bonus in addition which is not yet there)
Actually there should be an extra “Major Tour Bonus” at 150% and TGP is still 100%… At least it looks like that for the last EPC according to the IFPA website.
Looks like I got up to pee in the middle of the night at just the right time.
I forgot to flag EPC as a Major before the rebuild, so I just reloaded it with it marked correctly. Updated rankings should be up in the next hour or so for those still awake . . . I won’t be
Too bad I was not even in the tournament so it will not affect my ranking other than more people passing me I guess… I’m still impressed that it’s fixed and that you got this site as a go-to site when you wake up in the middle of the night.
Wow, what was the qualifying format and game bank for EPC Classics? The results look… volatile.
Classics qualifying: 4 machines assigned by random, 2 attempts, both count. The bank:
Capt. Fantastic and the Brown Dirt Cowboy
The Incredible Hulk
Okay, that makes sense then. Brutal format!
Someone said he’d been having a little 30 year break from pinball…
Re the brutality of the qualifying, 96 players went on to playoffs so that compensated a bit I guess.
All qualifying scores can be found here: https://scores.epc2018.net/
I hope 200+ players pass me with these events occurring. Not likely but I’d be thrilled to see it so I wont be A restricted anymore. I got lucky at TPF which put me below 500 and, if you look at my history, I don’t really belong there
Finals format also volatile: 96-player H2H single elimination, best 2 of 3 on randomly selected pins.
I like that format, no machine camping.
I mentioned the European events’ “greater variance” in another thread a while back (maybe on the old G forum), it being due largely to formats. This may be the most extreme example yet of both end result low correlation with player ranking and event format that would lead to it. I may want to tweak the inputs a bit before crunching it [remove unrated or super-low rated perhaps), but from what I remember of the ones I reviewed before, this is even more random. No value judgment at this stage.
Crunched it, removing players with too few results, and compared with other events doing the same. Correlations between finishing position and entering rank relative to other participants were as follows:
EPC Classics 2018 - .548
EPC Open 2018 - .699
EPC Classics 2017 - .480
EPC Open 2017 - .545
NW Classics 2018 - .754
NW Open 2018 - .725
INDISC Open 2018 - 753
IFPA 2018 - .651
Draw your own conclusions.
Kari is a very skilled Classics player. His ranking was definitely not indicative of his skill.
He had one loss in the 11 games of playoffs before the final which is pretty amazing. Best of three single elimination on classics can lead to upsets but 2-0 against Jörgen Holm, Albert Nomden and Colin MacAlpine is a great achievement no matter how you look at it.
@BMU is there something in particular about the formats you want to point to? I suspect that head to head playoffs tend to cause more variance when you can have two top players face each other early on.
There’s also the unanswerable question of how well does rank in fact correlate with skill level… I think more variance is to be expected if you have more participants who don’t compete as much.