Sorry, Josh. I can do better, I promise!
Screw WPPR’s! Sign up for my new ranking system, Big Mac Points! Twice the value of WPPR’s, plus we have Special Sauce!
6 Likes
Big Mac Credits have a better ring to it! 
1 Like
I agree with you Bob, but not just for higher players, for average players such as myself. I would be putting up a lot of .58, 1.20, or 2.34 points from my weekly tournaments. I can occasionally hold my own against the top layer, but not enough to risk these weeklies counting against me.
My victories/ successes over the past 3 years makes up my profile. I can reflect back to what made those tournaments a success. I just had a nice victory. 5 weeks of weekly tournaments would completely bump that victory out of my profile.
2 Likes
Or BIMPs, as they should be called.
I do agree with the general sentiment, Pittsburgh players would get cheesed out due to the many small tournaments held, and it would definitely lead to frustration and lower attendance rate.
1 Like
It certainly would in my case. An extreme example would be Neil Shatz. Compare his current ranking to his last 20 events. Which one more accurately reflects his abilities?
It would hurt people that compete regularly, which nobody wants. But there is some merit to what Brian is saying. If you’re a halfway decent player who doesn’t compete regularly, your ranking is often not accurate. The better the player you are and the less you compete, the more inaccurate your ranking is.
1 Like
You’re going at this from the wrong direction. NES hasn’t played in a long time so there’s a high degree of uncertainty around his results. He absolutely should be ranked lower because without him playing in tournaments it’s impossible to know how to rank him accurately.
If we went back to his last 20 appearances we’d have to go back more than 5 years. That would bring around a lot of uncertainty. Players would be outranked by someone who had a bunch of good finishes 5 years ago, but haven’t played in any events for a year and a half! That would be a terrible ranking system.
Unless of course you’re trying to determine the best players over the course of the last 5 years. But that’s not what IFPA is trying to do. IFPA is trying to determine the best player right now. And for that, you need to actually be playing right now.
8 Likes
I wasn’t suggesting it would be a better ranking system. Just agreeing with Brian that it would more accurately rank players who don’t compete very often. Skills don’t drop off over night in pinball. Seniors division at Papa is a murder’s row of players lately. Old results may not be accurate in other sports, but they hold up pretty well in pinball.
This is following off what @phishrace was saying Re:skill degradation.
I’m an ex-juggler. I haven’t juggled in a session for little over two years. That being said, every time I pick up my beanbags to show some tricks to friends, I’m surprised to find I haven’t forgotten them, and it still feels natural to do.
Pinball, for me, is very similar. I love to keep the ball in motion and do what feels the most fun for me at that moment. If you ever see me at a competition, you may notice I’ll stubbornly try to hit a shot I really want. (I can’t get enough of the Skid Ramp on Corvette or the left ramp on Whirlwind)
The reason I haven’t lost that [juggling] ability is because of the sheer amount of time I have already dedicated to learning those skills. Throwing a beanbag behind my back and catching it in the other hand took me months to perfect. I still throw my keys behind my back just for fun now, but that was not easy for me to learn. (Months. I cannot emphasise that enough.)
So, I agree skill doesn’t fade in activities like this. However, for a competitive worldwide system it absolutely makes sense to have a more recent past.
Brunn was one of the most important jugglers of the last century, (look up Brunn finish you will not regret it)((actually here’s a link, https://youtu.be/Jj6JcIy8WOo it’s the very last trick but the whole thing is worth watching)) but jugglers these days are taking the art in whole new directions.
All this being said, there’s a peak for everybody. In juggling, you may not be able to pass a certain hurdle. (5 or 7 at once, for instance) The same is true for pinball. I’ve talked with another player who is similar to me in how he gains hobbies and he and I both acknowledge sometimes you can only go so far.
This is not a slight- that is to say, the distance each person is able to go is unique. Perhaps other distractions get in the way, or maybe you become frustrated trying to accomplish something that feels impossible. You come back to it time and again, but you’re unable to get it down. These limitations exist, but it’s not a weakness of character- just the extent of one’s ability. Maybe NES isn’t playing as often anymore because he’s bored, or isn’t having the fun he once had. That’s ok. I hope he’s found another passion that has smitten him just as much as pinball has if that’s the case. 
Tldr; Skill isn’t completely related to time from last example, but for a competitive structure it is absolutely necessary for an accurate showing of who is performing well right now. (But also in what quantities and context)
2 Likes
No, I didn’t say that exactly - I think that’s what the original poster was thinking, but I don’t agree.
I’ve been ranting for this for a while. I am so much on the side of wanting this. This would be amazing. Seriously.
I’m tired of lame formats designed to exploit wppr points. I’m so tired of playing crap formats, where people just come up with whatever because they think it sounds cute, neat, or they just don’t know better to no fault of their own.
As the description noted, this doesn’t need to deter anyone from a new format, but it would be an amazing suggestive guide for events that want to pick a format and just don’t know what to do.
And, I wouldn’t have much granularity to it - basically make it like these formats get full points, these get 3/4, these get half, these get 1/4. - with the standard modifiers for caliber of players that enter, and # of participants.
I think the other suggestions in the OP are boring or just badly conceived, so I wont comment on them. 
3 Likes
What if you did Top 15 AND last 5 or Top 20 AND last 5? Or some variation of both top point earning tourneys and recent results. I think maybe this would be the best for accuracy purposes. Any overlap could be counted as a recent result.
Instead of doing this, use the first suggestion of standardization and force TDs to submit true head-to-head or match play results which can then be used for an accurate Glicko rating
If only such an amazing suggestive guide existed . . . oh wait
I get tons of emails to the IFPA inbox requesting help on setting up a format, they have no idea what to do, and no idea how these various formats will grade out.
Knowing that we’ve accounted for:
Single Elim
Double Elim
2 Strikes (various group combinations)
3 Strikes (various group combinations)
4 Strikes (various group combinations)
Match Play
Ladder style
We are literally already doing what you’re asking for 95% of the tournaments existing.
If you have a group of 16 players for example, and running something at “full value” is important to you, regardless of time you can scroll up and down the TGP guide to find the standard set of tournament formats that will work for you.
I think the 5% of organizers that run “crazy shit” get more attention on Tilt Forums because we’re sort of the niche of the niche who are more crazy about competitive pinball than most.
3 Likes
My experience is that 90% of the world runs formats that do at least something that is crazy shit.usually its more so rules, but often its formats.
That guide is nice, but its a holy fu@k1n& Critical wall of text for a newcomer.
Bonus points or GTFO!
2 Likes
Somewhere 2005 me is cheering…
I’ve learned that getting Josh to change his mind on these things is like chess. You need to be thinking about 20 moves ahead
2 Likes
I’ll keep pasting this link into threads until Josh starts linking to it from the TGP guide: http://tgp.slapsave.com/
4 Likes
I have over 77,000 head-to-head & group game results in the Match Play database that I’m dying to do analysis on. There’s never enough time 
Some day!
1 Like
Submit them to PARS 
3 Likes
Been wanting this for 10+ years, but understood why it couldn’t be done. One of the things that MANY people don’t realize TODAY is many things couldn’t have been done years ago. Back then, getting results was a PITA. As the overall landscape grows, layers and rules and structure can be added. I think the time has came for “here is the approved list of formats” day has came as well.
No idea how this grades a tournament and seems like it would give a huge advantage to pump n dump tournaments. Just because a bunch of crappy players play a ton of games, doesn’t mean the tournament was more difficult or not.
This would make for a very stale rankings system and doesn’t encourage play which is kinda the point…
Fair point. A tournament with Elwin, Bowen, Cayle and Trent should be valued the same as 4 random people pulled off the street. 