Looks like the website resolved itself. Can now access.
1 Like
For fun: we took 41 people from the waitlist, and started with a full field of 1000. Thanks to everyone for their patience before we started!
14 Likes
How far down the waitlist was it to get the 41?
One of the last people I know was 97, so not far
1 Like
#98 RIPā¦
Ben Clement, #133
2 Likes
Your Pinburgh Team
6 Likes
Announcements!
2 Likes
Nintendo MAY sue them over that artwork
Hello, this is my first Pinburgh, and thanks everyone who puts all the effort into this show!
My question is about the tiebreakers, I was under the impression that software tiebreakers would be used to settle tiebreaks for the cut lines for each division, so for example if 30 people have the same exact number of āwinsā, then their win-loss record would be used to break the ties and distribute a weight between all the people in that score single-point bracket. However, after looking at the divisions published at the end of Thursday night, Iām seeing much stranger behavior. If you take a look at the top qualifier for C, they had a win-loss record of 32-28, but if you look at the bottom qualifier for B, they donāt have 32 points. In fact they have a win-loss record of 25-35, which I believe only 25 wins and much more losses at 35. What kind of math arrives at this division? If you look at the top and bottom of the other sequential divisions you see similar discrepancies.
1 Like
Division restrictions
2 Likes
Some people can not play in C division because their IFPA ranking or if they finished in B or A last year.
I see. If I look a little further at the divisions, it gets even stranger. If you look at the bottom player in A, they have the same win-loss ratio as the top player in D, 29-31. And if you look again at the bottom player in B, they have the same win-loss record as the seed 15 person in E, 25-35. So it looks like, no matter how bad a restricted player does, he/she is guaranteed to make it into their lowest restricted division.
In all the other tournaments I have played in, if you did not make the cut line and were division restricted, you were eliminated. You didnāt play well, so you donāt deserve to get the chance to finish above someone who was not restricted and got more wins/points than you.
Will these restricted players be finishing with higher placement than the ones who did better by the end of Friday? That is, when this is all done with, will they earn more WPPRs than the lower division players who might finish with more wins?
Yes.
I suggest checking out the full rules here.
1 Like
Based on past years, yes they will. It doesnāt seem very fair, but I think theyāve decided itās just not practical to disentangle WPPRs from division restrictions.
I understand how it works and the reasoning for the restrictions but I canāt say I donāt feel a little screwed as ātop qualifier in Cā
2 Likes
The difference in WPPRs between top of B and top of C last year was about 3 WPPRs. Forget about the points and enjoy the experience! Top of C puts you in a good spot to aim for a double bye Saturday.
7 Likes
If thereās going to be streaming later on, where would that be? On what āchannelā ?
/Mats
Papa tv live on YT and twitch. Starting during quarters of A tomorrow.
It seems like the restrictions are in place because this tournament takes what a player has done in the past 3 years into consideration when seeding the 2nd round. They want to attract/reward the best overall players in the world. I get that. It just feels odd to have players with losing records in the A/B division. Itās even weirder that they are guaranteed more WPPRS than someone who outplayed them all weekend.
Not sure there is a better way to do it.
2 Likes