Some chatter on pinside from a player in the UK offering some suggestions for a better system. I’m away for the weekend for a wedding and figured it was worth discussing some of his points to see what people think … Comments are welcome if you have any opinions on his comments
if I could come up with a solution which would please and fit everyone I’d put my skills to better use, like solving the Middle East problems - just different ways of trying to achieve the same goal.
###IFPA come up with a standard set of tournament formats and rank these accordingly, based PURELY on format.
There could be any number of different formats, but to qualify for WPPR points your tournament MUST be taken from one of the approved formats. if you want to run a tournament with a different format it can be submitted to IFPA for consideration to be added to the ‘approved format’ for the following year.
- Everyone would know what a tournament would be worth before entering and choose whether to enter or not.
- It would stop tournaments being made overly long, just to gain max points in current system.
Tournaments across the world would be easier to understand the format.
- Tournament Organisers would simply be able to go on to the IFPA website (or other source) and get the pre-approved format that suits them best, along with scoring sheets to download, software to display tournament details etc.
- Tournament formats can be set for different skill levels / time constraints / machine availability etc. (obviously these will earn different WPPR points)
- It could stop different formats being trialled
- Decisions will have to be made as to the rankings of various formats against each other (but that already happens).
###Rather than basing the number of games a tournament consists of by the number of games the winner plays, make it the average number of games played by everyone entering.
- Deters weighting the back end of tournaments with superfluous games
- Allows the lesser plays to play more games and thus feel more encouraged/involved.
- I really can’t think of any
###Don’t count the players best 20 (or whatever number) games, just the last 20 games. Still include depreciation so a recent win, will be worth more than a win 3 years ago.
- Will benefit/reward those skilful players who can’t attend as many comps. Whatever the reason.
- The potential to deter people entering new comps if they’ve had a good result in the past for fear of losing that good win. (this doesn’t really stack up, as the majority of the higher level players enter comps, not just for the points, or the prizes, but because they actually enjoy it)
- Currently it’s an equivalent of playing a game of darts where one player has 3 darts the other has 6 but only counts his best 3. Yes, the player with 6 still has to perform well, but they have a safety net for half their darts. (PS I actually played a number of games of darts against a World Champion - John Lowe - a number of years ago and did manage to beat him. Although only once out of 4 attempts)
###Do away with tournaments gaining points based on who enters. It is the opposite of a vicious circle.