Weren’t tiebreakers only automated for seeding and byes, but not for qualifying for finals? Am I remembering that wrong?
They were most definitely automatically broken for the qualifying bubble last year. No actual tiebreaker games were played.
Interesting! I think going back to this is the fairest way to break bubbles for getting into finals. But I also completely appreciate the TD/organizers’ desires to be able to close up shop on Saturday and get more rest.
Hmm, this year’s official rules are the same as last year’s where it comes to breaking ties. No matches played - ties broken based on results from previous rounds - https://replayfx.org/competitions/pinburgh/pinburgh-rules/
Yeah I checked there first but sometimes the official rules aren’t updated until closer to the event.
There are no tiebreakers, the tiebreakers will be handled like last year. This must be a remnant from a previous schedule. I’ll talk to the correct people to get this cleaned up.
The Unified IFPAPA ruleset has been updated with some clarified language around coaching and some minor tweaks to wording. https://papa.org/wp-content/uploads/Professional-Amateur-Pinball-Association-Complete-Competition-Rules-5.pdf
Also, a slight change regarding division restricions was made to the Pinburgh rules. https://papa.org/wp-content/uploads/Professional-Amateur-Pinball-Association-Pinburgh-Rules-3.pdf
“Any player who qualifies for playoffs in any division will be restricted to that division or higher in the next Pinburgh they attend.”
was changed to
“Any player who qualifies for playoffs in any division will be restricted to that division or higher the following year.”
Could someone smarter than me clarify something related to the Coaching section?
In the majority of tournaments there are now people streaming the game play and making commentary on the play in progress, along with stating what they would do if they were in the given situation. Also in the majority of these tournaments that broadcast booth is within earshot of the player playing the game. While not necessarily targeted at the player playing the game, the advice being given could be construed as coaching the player on what to shoot next…at least in my head. Am I way off base here?
No you’re not off base. But I don’t think anything an announcer says or the booth says within earshot is considered coaching at this time. At least, that’s my understanding.
Maybe it should be? I know there have been instances in past tournaments that I’ve watched the stream where it’s apparent one of the announcers has a vested interest in a particular player…
I’m in the camp that as long as it isn’t holding the game up, and you’re not giving unwelcomed advice (IE trying to mess with them while they play), coach away. So doesn’t really matter to me one way or the other.
Live commentary from the event staff themselves would fall outside of the typical player-to-player to friend-to-player coaching that is found up at the machine in play.
You’re always welcome to ask the TD of the event in question for that clarification. As a TD myself my response would be “Anything the player happens to hear from the commentary booth is fine.”
An example that’s not fine happened at IFPA16 . . .
Player from Austria mutters to themselves that they wish they knew how to collect the Proton Pack value on Ghostbusters.
Another player from Austria who is near the machine and watching the action responds to their friend in their native language where to collect this value.
Said player from Austria then collects the value by shooting what they were told to shoot.
That is NOT ALLOWED
(Big hint, if you ever feel like coaching your friend at the machine, simply have a loud conversation with someone else around the game about what you think your friend should be doing. Just never talk directly to your friend and you’ll be fine.)
Could I get you to follow my friend around at Pinburgh and talk loudly about how I should be playing?
Put a recording of Steve Ritchie saying, “Play better!” on your phone. Set to repeat. For the entire weekend.
Why bother creating a rule, just to turn around and explain how to circumvent that rule?
This is a pretty common joke that’s been in circulation for many years. I can’t take credit for this one.
I would joke about “intentionally tilting” on Addams Family for a Greed letter but it seems like a tough crowd tonight