@Shep As you know I’m a heavy user of the IFPA API. Please tell me the ranking numbers in API responses won’t change.
1 Like
so from the tax analogy what determines whether you are or are not top 1000 is GROSS points, and then what determines where you rank in top 1000 is NET points? and below top 1000 you only have gross as they are WPPR tax exempt?
2 Likes
You got it.
Would these changes affect only the “Overall” would pinball player rankings? In other words, would they have any effect on the Country, Women, or Youth world pinball player rankings?
Would these changes affect the NACS state/province rankings in any way?
1 Like
Country, Youth and Women (Main) rankings are all just filters of the Overall ranking list … So “yes”.
NACS is not a ranking system, it’s a point accumulation list … So “no”. (With the understanding that the TVA calculated for each event will be based on the adjusted Rank list - so it has an impact on the value of events but not the resorting of players on the State lists)
1 Like
No adjustment to the Women’s rankings based on women’s only events are planned at this time, but plans can change at anytime.
1 Like
From reading this I think I’m correct in assuming this will have no affect on SCS points for the year?
Correct. Nothing we’re talking about would impact anything related to 2023 qualifying for ‘IFPA stuff’.
Wait? Will it impact 2024 qualifying for state stuff?
2023 qualifying is happening now. Qualifying ends on 12/31/23. Finals are in 2024.
2024 qualifying this change will impact the values of events (WPPR-PRO rank will be used for event value calculations). The finals of that season are in 2025.
If efficiency rating can bring down someone’s value, is there concern that this change may encourage people to enter events and drop out before playing 50% (or whatever number) of games so that it doesn’t show on their record, if they are performing poorly at the start of the event? It may be that I don’t fully understand the impact but it seems that having poor showings actively hurt scores could encourage avoiding finishing events
This is something we’ll be watching. We currently don’t allow this for the top 250 and we may just extend this to anyone in top 1000 and “call it a day”.
3 Likes
Not even sure at this point, outside the rebuild process I’ve not even thought of what other changes will be required. Of course, the less change the better
1 Like
Appreciate the preview and supporting Google Sheets with formulas. Makes it clearer to see the math.
Apologies for the wall of questions.
Any other changes being considered for 6.0?
Supported formats or changes to supported formats? The grand return of 100% Flip Frenzies?
Will NACS be limited to best 15 to match Main if that’s the direction?
Not sure if it’s a 6.0 thing, but will there be a Women’s NACS Nationals in 2024?
Any other events being considered for Major designation given the unfortunate absence of PAPA/Pinburgh the past few years?
Any changes expected in the Stern Pro Circuit?
Any changes to Certified or Certified Plus expected?
Any other rule or regulation changes expected?
How’s everyone doing?
1 Like
Nothing worth sharing at the moment.
Nope.
Likely.
That’s the intention based on the Women’s Advisory Board announcement back in February - “We plan to have a Women’s North American Championship event that the championships funnel into, and will announce additional details as we have them.”
Nope.
Nope.
Nope.
Nope.
I can only speak for myself, but Excellent!
1 Like
as for rules will there be any system to add stuff with out having to wait up to an year.
To cover stuff shows up in new games / code updates.
as the rules do have some Examples but they should maybe have more Examples and / or have the rules be written in an cleaner way so that TD don’t need to know the game code for each game out there and can be more geared to play on / keep things moving…
I don’t disagree with the idea, but I do take some exception to the naming convention used here. Not everyone under the top 1000 would accurately be described as an “amateur” nor would everyone in the top 1000 necessarily be accurately described as a “pro”.
3 Likes
What would be a better way to name it? “Competitive” and “Casual”? It’s a similar fashion to Darts where after you much reach a dart point average, you can be considered a “Pro” darter. They do break it up into “Pro” and “Elite Pro”. Elite pros carry a higher dart average than pros.
Pro and Am are just common terms in any sport and IFPA is just following suit with those terms. I’m sure in the future they could add an “Elite Pro” to the top X amount, similar to the power 100 we already have. I wouldn’t think too much into this term.
3 Likes
I really like the idea of Elite Pro, the top 25 players in the new 6.0 deserve that distinction and gives a scrub like me something to aspire too.