Pinburgh 2015 Consolation Tournament Results

Just finished the largest Brackelope event ever with 246 players! Thanks for everyone that showed up and dealt with a confused first couple rounds. A huge thanks to Emma, Nate, Coyle and John for helping out. And thanks to everyone that introduced themselves to me today, it’s been nice puting faces to screen names.

Pinburgh Consolation Tournament
2x Knockout
3 Player Matches
Brackelope Live:
Bracket Placement: Random
Arena Draws: Balanced

246 Players
250 Matches
280 Arenas

1 Brian Shepherd
2 Brian Nalley
3 Colin Urban
3 Shawn Haley
5 Noah Davis
5 Chris Booberg
5 Al Thomka
5 Simon Brown
5 Joe Schober
5 Lindsey Rhoades
5 Rodney Minch
12 Markus Stix
12 Mike Korcynski
12 Ian Harrower
12 Sergio Johnson
12 Neo Skywalker
12 Jack Tadman
12 Michael Szilagyi
12 Steve Stakem
12 Jeff Lee
12 Mats Runsten
12 Molly Atkinson
12 Mark Hauser
12 Barry Brdar
12 Timothy Enders
12 Peter Andersen
12 Eric Marz
12 Brian Mendelssohn
29 Jim Seward
29 Matt Quantz
29 Dave Ponce
29 Timothy Tournay
29 Joey Gravis
29 Justin Ausmeier
29 Colin MacAlpine
29 Robert DeStasio
29 Sunshine Bon
29 David Mainwaring
29 Aaron Hanson
29 Jason Werdrick
29 Edward Zeltmann
29 Benjamin Salmon
29 Joonas Haverinen
29 Marcus Hugosson
29 Jane Kaminski
29 Steve Hill
29 Miles Grant
29 Ryan Wanger
29 Aaron Cooke
29 Clark Fraley
29 Jay Sterkel
29 William Wulf
29 Steven Clute
29 Andy Mahoney
29 Daniel Cotter
29 Joe Geneau
29 Dan Thronström
29 Jonathan Williams
29 Mike Triplett
29 James Lawrence
29 Bob Mertz
29 Robert Byers
29 Charlie Bucks
29 Kevin Kuntz
29 Jason Dunn
29 John Fujita
29 James Swain Jr
29 Nate Shivers
29 Matt Minton
29 Anna Hovhannessian
29 Mike Gin
72 Ken LaPointe
72 Chris Geist
72 Bill Walborn
72 Matt Makowski
72 Mike Brogan
72 Dayvv Brooks
72 Mike Lukianoff
72 Arthur Dodd
72 Chris Coyle
72 Chuck Webster
72 Koi Morris
72 Ann Nicholls
72 Greg Poverelli
72 Kenny Weiner
72 Howard Levine
72 Tom Hirsh
72 Ken Rossi
72 Steven Marsh
72 Andreas Pettersson
72 Daniel Jacobowitz
72 Barry Schwartz
72 Phil Cridlebaugh
72 Bradley Stark
72 Chris DeLeon
72 Bruce Ng
72 Austin Smith
72 Theresa Nessel
72 Tom Graf
72 Jeremy Williams
72 Bayless Rutherford
72 Nathan Stellhorn
72 CJ Brown
72 Cory Christian
72 Louis Nemphos
72 Louise Wagensonner
72 Dave Stewart
72 Joseph McGinnis
72 David Plaisted
72 Johan Genberg
72 Christopher Raich
72 Kyle Felling
72 Christopher Smith
72 Mike Pantino
72 Nicole Ingalls
72 Jonathon Grieman
72 Alberto Santana
72 Travis Kearney
72 Thomas Knorst
72 Chris Compton
72 Jeffery Teolis
72 Johnny Modica
72 Robert Wong
72 Seth Clayter
72 Tucker Daniels
72 Mike Clinton
72 Eden Stamm
72 John Alioto
72 Will McKinney
72 Kirby Rients
72 Olle Strandh
72 Steve Grimmel
72 Darren Kamnitzer
134 Tim Sexton
134 Ian Seidler
134 Tom Edwards
134 Nick Lane
134 Nicolas Queiroz
134 Mats Sahlberg
134 Tim Moyers
134 Paul Garner
134 Søren Worre
134 Collin Foust
134 Peter Nicholls
134 Urban Magnusson
134 Timo Valkonen
134 Ernie Most
134 Jacob Heinrichs
134 Jay Ramey
134 David Klionsky
134 Tom Destasio
134 Scott McDowell
134 David Baiano
134 David Kanoy
134 Helena Walter
134 Brett Buzek
134 Debbie Baiano
134 Kevin Shanus
134 Kevin Brown
134 Jeffrey Wirth
134 Joseph Lemire
134 Garrett Hays
134 Les Kowal
134 Todd MacCulloch
134 Erin Kelly
134 Alessandra Gillen
134 Walt Morose
134 Patrick Pietras
134 Chuck Jackson
134 Tony Pierce
134 Connor Most
134 Dave Romanowski
134 Rudy Keiser
134 Chris Warren
134 Thomas Skinner
134 Jay Steinberg
134 Russell Crane
134 Matthew Guay
134 Jessie Carduner
134 Sarah Anne Clarke
134 Brian Dye
134 Jon Triplett
134 Kendall Van Pool
134 Magnus Olsson
134 Scott D’Agostino
134 Robert Forbes
134 Maya Nigrosh
134 Augustus Eustis
134 Carol Walker
134 Brett Emerson
134 Dave Grant
134 Chrissy Corica
134 Jeffrey Street
134 Alex Clark
134 Lisa Kost
134 Jason Powell
134 Alan Seibert
134 Theo Ackerson
134 Dave Mobley
134 Eric Priepke
134 Shawn Hillman
134 Evan Bingham
134 Jasmijn De Jong
134 Mark Seidler
134 Mark Jarzewiak
134 Joseph Mahon
134 Mitch Aires
134 Julie Dorssers
134 Edan Grossman
134 Kevin Brumfield
134 Ellen Frankel
134 Van Newell
134 Jeff Parsons
134 Ashley Grabenstein
134 Heath Ashley
134 Mark Pearson
134 Bob S. Johnson
134 Germain Mariolle
134 Nick Greenup
134 R.M. Weiner
134 Ashley Minton
134 Anne Gibson
134 Anthony Verzelli
134 Nick Campbell
134 Eric Ramey
134 Anna Frenkel
134 Stanley Sowa Jr
134 Bob Twichell
134 Shawn Lee
134 Robert Metzler
134 Michael Richardson
134 Jake Kolojejchick
134 Thomas Urban
134 Matthew Carlson
134 Jason Higgins
134 Kevin Myers
134 David Pacileo
134 Steven Walker
134 Ryan Case
134 Jason Charlton
134 Therese Edwards
134 Hee
134 Penni Epstein
134 Alysa Parks
134 Charles V Hess
134 Mirko Lundén

Most Wins (Over All)
Brian Shepherd (7)

Tournament created with Brackelope: Tournament Builder


So what was the prize?

Hand made coupons for a free tshirt at the merch booth.


I heard it was $15,001. :grinning:

Circling back to this topic.

@pinwizj, or anyone else who knows for sure, is the reason this event wasn’t eligible for WPPRs that it’s not open to everyone?

The NEPL guys are kicking around ideas for a side event to run along with our season finals, and I was suggesting thinking about something like the Pinburgh Consolation event. I thought it would have WPPRs as an added benefit over a high-score contest or pingolf event, but I guess not.

Besides the fact it wasn’t on the IFPA calendar with 30 days in advance of the event, you can’t have an event where the Pinburgh finalists [or insert finalists of the ‘main event’] wouldn’t be allowed to participate.

If you wanted to get technical, you COULD make the tournament open to anyone to compete, and then those finalists would be welcome to compete in both at the same time and manage those potential times where they are up in both tournaments as appropriately as they can.

OK. This makes sense.

I’m only confused because I thought I remember reading or having a conversation on this topic in which the argument was made that everyone is eligible for the consolation tournament, but you’d just be foolish to play in it if you were still playing in the main event.

Could have easily been a fever dream, though.

Let me know if I have this right:

For 2016 side events for our finals, if we want them to be WPPR-eligible, they will have to open to all (so, not strictly a consolation), and also have a direct match play component for at least 10% of participants. Because our finals already have the potential for ending at 8 pm or later (and many players have 3 or 4 hour drives to get home), it won’t make sense to have the side event start after the main event is done. This leaves indirect formats only for qualifying, then we’d have to run some kind of playoff once the main finals were done.

I’m pretty sure that’s not going to happen, and we’ll just end up with a non-WPPR side of some kind. It will be good to have confirmation before we get started planning, though.

Yep (it’s telling me this post must be at least 10 characters - thx Dunlap!) :slight_smile:


Would a “not also playing in X tournament” restriction fly for an IFPA approved tournament?

so, open to all, but you have to choose which one to play in. (Isn’t this the rule for the SCS provincial/state finals?)

The SCS rule is more of an implied rule of actually not being able to participate in two completely different states at the same time. Similar to something like, Pinburgh and the Texas Pinball Festival are happening the same weekend, there’s an implied choice to be made that a player has to choose one as it’s pretty impossible to participate in both.

With the logistics of managing all the various state registration pages and determining all those qualifiers across the country, we have to get that choice from the player ahead of time.

When you get into a situation where you are running two tournaments in the same facility, this becomes a much more “real” restriction. You would technically have to allow a player to compete in both if they wanted do, but could do your best with the format and schedule to make that extremely challenging for the player to deal with (thus ‘forcing’ them to choose one or the other without explicitly making that a rule).

Wow, that seems wrong. Although, it would have been amusing to watch @phendricks try to play in both WV and PA finals last year.

Heh, for the SCS, seems like it could be pulled off with just a little co-operation with two state organizers (or a huge co-incidence with start times) - Take the Pinburgh 2nd-4th - play in Pennsylvania SCS with an early morning start, hop a plane back to Seattle/Callifornia for a late afternoon start :wink:

Do you get two entries for Nationals if you win two states? :smiling_imp:

I guess it’s easy enough to add a mandatory “competitor briefing” (and DQ for missing it) to the schedules of both tournaments, held simultaneously on opposite sides of the facility, if I want to accomplish the effect.

Or just allow it, let them register for the increased TGP and TVA, and be harsh on plunging players balls if they are missing for one of their games :smile:

I’m confused. @pinwizj, can you clarify?

If I want to run a consolation tournament that happens concurrently with the playoffs of another tournament at the same venue for players who didn’t make the cut (and anyone else who wants to show up), that tournament can be eligible for WPPRs as long as we don’t explicitly tell the players from the first tournament they can’t participate?

I was planning on doing an event like this in December and honestly until I saw this thread it never even occurred to me that it wouldn’t be eligible for points. IFPA endorses concurrent events that happen in the same region when they’re at different venues, and players have to choose which one they’re going to participate in. I don’t see why it should be different just because they’re using the same facility.

1 Like

We endorse concurrent events, but I can’t run my event and include the language “Players participating in the tournament down the street are not allowed to play.”

If a player wants to attempt to play in both, the tournament organizer can’t not allow them to do so.

Concurrent events that are open to ‘anyone’ to play in is fine. Concurrent events with a stipulation saying a certain group of players is restricted from playing is not fine.

But presumably the inherent rules of the competitions (e.g. “delay of game” types of rules) would more or less exclude someone from one of the tournaments. (“Sure, if you want to be DQ’ed from the Pinburgh finals because you were elsewhere playing in the consolation tournament, you go right ahead!”)

1 Like

I don’t see why forbidding participation in two events simultaneously should be forbidden, rather than making people write rules to game the system… i.e. “Players cannot simultaneously enter tournament A and B” seems fairly functionally equivalent to many delay-of-game rules, and prevents idiots that can’t figure that out from entering both at cost to themselves and others.

If entry to the Consolation Tournament is restricted to those that haven’t made finals, fine, you’re excluding a group. If I’m happy to let people drop from the main to play the Consolation Bracket, that seems like it should fit the requirements.

For better or for worse, one of IFPA’s requirements for an event to be WPPR-eligible is that it can’t exclude any groups… which is why women’s tournaments aren’t eligible (excludes men), juniors/seniors tournaments aren’t eligible (excludes by age) and even things like PAPA B-division aren’t eligible (excludes people who are forced into PAPA A-division). I don’t particularly agree with this myself, but that’s the way WPPR works, and so at least it’s being consistent to say that a tournament that excludes players in another tournament isn’t WPPR-eligible.

(That said, I don’t think there was actually such a restriction on the Pinburgh consolation tournament… it sounds like the only reason that the Pinburgh consolation tournament wasn’t eligible was because no one put it on the WPPR calendar ahead of time. Too bad, because the consolation tournament was probably the second largest tournament of the year, after Pinburgh itself!)

1 Like

This is in the Pinburgh rules under Consolation Two-Strikes Tournament:

“All players who competed in all ten sessions but did not qualify for finals may enter Day 3’s consolation
tournament. Since some players may decide not to compete in this tournament, all who wish to play must sign up at the tournament registration desk before play begins at 9:30 am. There is no additional fee for participating.”

This is explicit enough that qualified Pinburgh players were restricted from participating in the Consolation tournament. With the potential for Pinburgh finalists to have 2 byes, that gave a good 4+ hours of being able to participate in the Consolation Final without running into any overlapping issues with the regular finals. I could easily see myself signing up for the Consolation Final as a way to ‘warm up’ for Finals (especially if that Consolation Final is free to enter). If I have to leave to go play with the big boys, I can make that decision later on when that time comes.

On the other side with it being a 2 strike Consolation Final, it would be possible to jump back into the Consolation Final after being mathematically eliminated from the Pinburgh final . . . forfeiting a strike if you had to :smile:

The point being, if a player wants to try and play in ‘two open events at the same time’ they are welcome to drive themselves insane attempting to do so. For a tournament organizer to not allow that player to even attempt it, that’s when it becomes an explicit restriction.

The Pinburgh consolation tournament has never been awarded WPPRs, even though it is clearly announced far ahead of time.

It’s super obvious that no player in a Pinburgh final round would ever choose to play in the consolation tournament instead. But whatever. The rules for the consolation tournament won’t be changing; it would be total BS for a player to make a final round and try to knock people out in a “consolation” event besides.


As “super obvious” as it would be, you never know the motivation of some players who would dare to try and attempt the double WPPR pay day from Pinburgh by giving the Consolation final a shot.

I fully support the rules not changing, and continuing to have the rules of the Consolation tournament explicitly restrict those players that qualified for Pinburgh finals from competing in it.