do we an cap (take best X) on # of events per Country / per state that can count per player?
Have more min of X per zone gets auto bids into?
Never say never . . . we’re saving our next big round of WPPR changes to focus more on this inequality of access.
Based on our current simulation under one of these proposed rule changes here’s how the Women’s top 10 shake up (Position, Name, WPPR total):
CURRENT
|1| Keri Wing|576.11|
|2| Kassidy Milanowski|545.43|
|3| Leslie Ruckman|386.54|
|4| Danielle Peck|369.9|
|5| Kaylee Campbell|344.63|
|6| Karyn Kiser|324.77|
|7| Jane Verwys|287.47|
|8| Elizabeth Gieske|266.63|
|9| Louise Wagensonner|263.48|
|10| Sunshine Bon|247.94|
PROPOSED WPPRv6.0 SIMULATION
|1| Danielle Peck|369.89|
|2| Keri Wing|322.83|
|3| Kassidy Milanowski|302.17|
|4| Elizabeth Gieske|266.64|
|5| Kaylee Campbell|252.43|
|6| Leslie Ruckman|224.63|
|7| Karyn Kiser|188.57|
|8| Louise Wagensonner|186.38|
|9| Sunshine Bon|139.71|
|10| Jane Verwys|138.94|
Is that a more accurate representation of those 10 women with respect to how good they are at pinball . . . not sure any hypothetical version of any ranking system that has ever been or ever will be created can nail this down with absolute certainty . . . but that doesn’t mean we won’t continue to try.
1 Like
I wouldn’t mind seeing a slight change to the State/Provincial standings, particularly in the places that don’t run a lot of tourneys. There are currently 14 places with less than 20 tournaments, so the “top 20” WPPR -finishes, heavily favours the people who play the most tournaments, obviously you still have to finish high to earn the available WPPRs. I get that an issue like this isn’t a top priority, but with all of the changes to make the overall standings better reflect the top players in the world, I feel like the State/Provincial standings are a great place for most players to focus and feel like their skill is better reflected.
Maybe something more like top 5 tournaments as the base level, but then 50% of total available tourneys (rounded up) up to a max of top 20 tournaments counted. Again, in the current situation this would only affect 14 States/Provinces but I do think it would help make things more competitive and fair for the players involved.
and that any Championship type events that you need to play in lot’s of OUT zone events to make need to not count to that local ZONE or have an points cap of how much they can add based on an average points of other events in that ZONE.
Now maybe you can count the local zone Championship as part of the local points.
But things like events that take the top 100 only / no auto bids / no going down the list should count 0 to local and maybe even 0 to national.
and State/Provincial level really should not have events that count as part of it’s points that you need play out of State/Provincial to be able to get into.
Thanks for replying Josh.
I honestly don’t know what the answers are but maybe a formula change is the answer.
I just wanna state a couple of things …
1/ I’m not anti D82 (or anywhere!) If I had the facility in a big city/area I would do exactly the same thing. More pinball is awesome. (That’s why flip frenzies are great! More pinball!!). 
2/ This isn’t about my daughter - in retrospect I shouldn’t have even mentioned her, because I know some people will jump to that conclusion. Because - people. But she is certainly a good example, which is why I used her in the post. If there aren’t some tweaks to the proposed 5.8 as it was, then she goes from #1 Woman in the world in 2020(?) to like 100th in a couple of years.
Like I said the other day - I think it’s easy to be in the bubble of going to all these events and forget about everyone else around the country/globe.
I think Fred Richardson sorta hits it on the head with his comment to this post:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/funwithbonus/permalink/5511893328865019/
(Sorry for the link - but I can’t post a screenshot)
Dave.
Yes Fred’s post is very not anti D82 :-\
Without fictional burger points competitive pinball isn’t worthy of being something that even exists lulz
1 Like
We all want our fictional burger points.
Another great t-shirt idea!
rd
Thanks for the link! I had to add my 2 cents about the poor lighting at D82.
This will happen this year?
With 5.8?
Dave.
This is not part of the v5.8 rules. This would be a far more significant change that would be worthy of a v6.0 change.
While I can appreciate all the worry about hypothetical problems that we are bound to run into whenever “X” changes are made, I’ve always been someone that likes to see these problems actually occur before we implement solutions to solve them.
2 Likes
It’s interesting Dave. I guess it’s a question of what yours (or Dani’s) motivation is. If it’s to earn the most WPPR points in a calendar year to be classed as the highest ranked player in the world, then yeah it’s going to be tricky in your location. But realistically, I think everyone knows that most points doesn’t necessarily equal best player*. In the same way as in Golf or Tennis, no one knows or cares who the number 1 ranked player in the world is (or at least it’s most definitely secondary). Where as everyone knows who the major champions are.
World Champion/Major Champion/Women’s world champion = Best player. All of those things are still on the table for you guys for sure. Dani just needs to get to as many of those as possible each year and beat up on all those players going to 40 D82/Fulda tourneys each year. She maybe ranked the 100th best, but she will be the best and everyone will know.
*Sometimes it does of course (Escher = Best)
1 Like
So how are all you tournament directors adjusting leagues and tournaments for 2023?
Changes that we’re doing:
- For our monthlies, we’re currently running Flip Frenzies. We’ll either switch over to X rounds of MatchPlay or pivot to the “Round Robin vs Available Opponents” concept if there’s software to support it.
- For monthly finals, we used to do Multi-Play Match Play rotating players in between balls. We switched to doing Multi-Play Match Play where a player plays a full single-player game, writes down their score, and the players rotate clockwise to the next game. Less chaotic but achieves the same goal. We’ll likely keep doing this because it feels fairer as as a quick Finals even though we won’t get the 2X benefit
- For longer full-day tournaments, we’ll just add more rounds to qualifying (bump up from 7 to 10 or so).
- For our leagues, we’ll keep the same format (Best Game 5 of 8 Weeks, 8-Person 3-Game Finals). We’ll let the points fall where they lie but that should get us a healthy margin over the 25 game mark.
Soon… want to test it before release?
3 Likes
Just adding more rounds to matchplay qualifying to get as close to 200% as possible. Might try 4 game finals rounds too.
Yes please! I always want more of a sample size in one-game-per-round matchplay qualifying.
4 game final rounds feel like a slog to me. More than 2 rounds of 4 game matches definitely requires some kind of break built into the schedule.
Absolutely! Our next monthly is Dec 21. I can also run some test not-real events.
Understood. As always I’ll use the NKY open for the test run and adapt Pincinnati accordingly. But adding a game or two to qualifying will definitely stick I think.
1 Like
IFPA Pin-Masters we’re expanding finals to 4 game rounds instead of 3. Fucking Whoppers . . .
4 Likes
Yeah, but those are 4 games where Escher is done in 1 ball. 
1.33 MGP > 1 MGP … Every little bit helps