 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject:
 Posted: May 05, 2006 - 03:31 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
Posts: 1146
|
|
Uthrac wrote: At last weekend's tournament, the last place finisher (1-1-3) finished below teams with no wins (0-5-0, 0-3-2, etc.) This scoring system, as previously pointed out, seems "broken" when ties count as much (or more) than wins.
The difference lies in just how badly the last place finisher was actually beaten in his games. He did not garner a single bonus point throughout the entire tournament including the game he won. He also did comparatively badly in sportsmanship. Actually he tied for the worst overall sportsmanship score now that I'm looking at it. That stretched a tight 10 point difference in standing results to a final score difference of 24 points.
Now I'm fully open to the fact that sportsmanship points are questionable and in 4 years I've yet to see a way to handle it that I'm completely satisfied with. That being the case he was still beaten in standard tourney points. What would be broken would be to allow someone who consistently has a less than stellar performance and one tight win finish better than someone who has several bonus point performances but no wins.
Uthrac wrote: Certainly a team with a win and a tie should finish ahead of a team with 5 losses, but that wasn't the case.
All things being equal yes I agree. In a dice game where coach skill and tactical ability to make the best of a bad situation are part of the game, I have to disagree.
Uthrac wrote: And yes, it's important to have fun, but if that's really the goal, then why keep score at all?  For some people, the competition is the fun part of the game.
Which is why we keep score It's simply a matter of ensuring that the fun of competition isn't at the expense of creating a fun & pleasant social atmosphere.
Uthrac wrote: I, for one, will not be playing in tournaments where a lost match can score more points than a tie. It just doesn't work for me.
I don't know of any events in North America off hand where a loss couldn't possibly be worth more than a tie. I'm not sure what the Ottawa tourney is using as a scoring system though as Garth runs a more league type event. Even in the 50-20-10 system a loss can still be worth more than a tie. Personally I believe it's one of those little Blood Bowl quirks that makes the game interesting. All wins and losses are not created equally  |
_________________
Brian St.James
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 05, 2006 - 07:00 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
skummy wrote: Taking casualties out of the tiebreaker eliminates players going nuts for cas on the last couple of meaningless game turns.
Sort of like finesse teams that run up the score for most TD's. Same difference I'd say...if not...why not stop scoring once your up by 2 or 3 TDs vs slow bashy teams?
-RobO
skummy wrote:
Metagame-wise, I know that a bashy team can lose or tie and still be in the final game in many tournaments, but an agility team has no such chance.
BTW...at last year's Phrakus...three of the top four in CAS were Skaven teams. I don't think we made any special accomodation to create that possibility...set up the blocks and the CAS should come.
Also...and I know I'm setting myself up here...but at the DC Cup my Lizards with 7 players of 4+ STR were out CASd by Halflings. Again...I know I am opening myself up here, but it is very improbable matehmatically for me to have been out CASd 4 to 0 with all that strength, while the opponent has AV 6 on 90% of the team...and a built-in +1 to the injury roll.
My point? Anything is possible if you throw the blocks. Finesse teams do not deserve to get bonus points just for playing their game, when the fruits of playing a Bashy team should be seen as "Their own reward" |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
 
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Clan_Skaven |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 05, 2006 - 08:46 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 19, 2003
Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Posts: 2604
Location: Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Ok I'm a little offended here..............
I earlier posted an idea of a possible soloution to tie breaking rules (a fair way to equal the playing field between bashy & non bashy teams) but its been ignored! (Except Paul) But Paul's 0-0-5 record & not winning the Spoon started this whole debate (so what real credit to my idea is his opinion?  )
There is another idea I had for a tourney & I gotta go find the rulez for it but once I do I'll post em.
Till then gimme more BEER!
Rod |
_________________
"2006 SPIKE Champion!"
"Death-Bowl IV & V, Most Casualties!, Death-Bowl VI Best Team!"
"2008 Dagger Bowl Champion"
Host of the Warpstone Cup, Q'ermitt Bowl & the Hope Bowl
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Clan_Skaven |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 05, 2006 - 09:39 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 19, 2003
Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Posts: 2604
Location: Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Ok I'm not sure exactly where I got this from (I know it was a BB site on the net & it was Brittish, it says MBBL/MBBL2 not sure whom it is, but I love the system. Its sortan like the NAF CR system but easier)
Here is a word for word quote of the system I printed from them...
The league point system is a strength of scheadual system.
The League Point system that I'm using is used by the World Chess Organization & by Wizards of the Coast for the Magic.
It works really well for longer term BB leagues (like 10 games), but I believe it will work for a 5 game league season also.
Every team starts with 100 points, & your Leaugue point total can never go below zero.
At the beginning of every game you compare the league point difference between the two teams on the folowing chart:
Point Difference.....League Points
0-10..........................16/16
11-32.........................15/17
33-54..........................14/18
55-77..........................13/19
78-100........................12/20
101-124.......................11/21
125-149.......................10/22
150-176.......................9/23
177-205.......................8/24
206-237........................7/25
238-273........................6/26
274-314.........................5/27
315-364.........................4/28
365-428.........................3/29
429-523...........................2/30
524+...............................1/31
Okay, the first number in the points column is the points the winner gets and the loser loses if the higher league point team wins. The second number is the points the winner gets & losers lose if the lower league point team wins the match.
Example:
The "Chaos All-Stars" play the "Bluebun Crammers" (haflings). The All Stars have racked up 174 league points after 5 victories, the coach of the Bluebuns called him out & the All Stars accepted the league match.
The Halfling team has lost 5 straight games & now has a league points of 24. The differance is 150.
On the chart this indexes to 9/23.
This means that if the ALL Stars Win:
All Star League Points= 174+9=183
Bluebuns LP's=24-9=15
Should the Crammers pull off the upset win:
All Star League Points =174-23=151
Bluebuns LP's = 24+23=47
(& in case of a tie game both teams add/subtract zero points?)
Theres no rules for tie games.
But if this system were to be used I'd scrap the Swiss match up system each round & have a preset order every team plays before the teams register.....
(lets say theres 8 teams total at tourney)......
1vs8
2vs7
3vs6
4vs5
1vs7
8vs6
2vs5
3vs4
and so on & so on
(I'd have a predetermed scheadual drawn up for 4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20 (& every even number up to 40) so if 12 people show up I will just pull out the 12 team scheadual & then radomly draw the teams numbers (like: Paul#1,Twist#2,Spazzfist#3,Cyberhare#4 ect ect.) So although Paul lets say ends up with 6 easier opponents than Spazzfist, the points gained lost will reflect your matches based on the toughness of your opponents.)
Ok nowe that I took the time to research that system & type it lets see just how many people are going to ignore my efforts this time!
Rod  |
_________________
"2006 SPIKE Champion!"
"Death-Bowl IV & V, Most Casualties!, Death-Bowl VI Best Team!"
"2008 Dagger Bowl Champion"
Host of the Warpstone Cup, Q'ermitt Bowl & the Hope Bowl
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 06, 2006 - 01:03 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
MBBL is Galak's PBEM league (so international, US based). You can get a similar effect by using the total of opponent's scores as your first tie break (strength of schedule) without compromising the games scores.
One thing I think really works well on a psychological point is including TDs/Cas into the primary scores. If you don't, people who are winning tend to concentrate on protecting their lead - rather than extending it - and people who are losing badly don't have anything to play for. Once you start giving token points for TD/Cas then people for remain much more focussed on getting that one TD back, or that extra casualty - making the games more fun for all involved. I don't know why, but even having TD/Cas as the first tie break doesn't have the same effect and most coaches seem to ignore it. |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Clan_Skaven |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 06, 2006 - 10:57 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 19, 2003
Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Posts: 2604
Location: Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
But would the MBBL system work for a 6 game tourney paired with a round robin (stop at 6 games) type tourney?
Rod. |
_________________
"2006 SPIKE Champion!"
"Death-Bowl IV & V, Most Casualties!, Death-Bowl VI Best Team!"
"2008 Dagger Bowl Champion"
Host of the Warpstone Cup, Q'ermitt Bowl & the Hope Bowl
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 06, 2006 - 06:32 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
| Maybe, but I'd not try it myself. TBH I think you'd get a lot of puzzled coaches and it doesn't address the TD/Cas issue I consider more important than strength of schedule scoring (which Swiss largely takes into account anyway). |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Paul |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 06, 2006 - 07:33 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 18, 2005
Canada
Posts: 422
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
ok, heres a problem with it.
You have covered that it doesn't really work for a swiss tournamnet, because the point difference would be the same between each game. But, say this occured..
Player A has 180 points, Player B has 179 points, Player C has 174 points and Player 'Rod' has 102 points.
Now, the pairings come up that player A plays player 'Rod' and Player B plays Player C in the final round of a tournament.
Player A and Player B both win their games.
Player B earns 16 points for the win (since they are between 0-10 of their opponent) and finish the tournament with 195 points.
Player A earns only 12 points for the win (78 difference) and then finishes the tournament with 192 points.
Now player B wins the tournament because he/she has the most points, but he got a luckier draw in the random pairings that you did up. Player A won the game and lost the tournament because of a technicallity.
A swiss system would have ment that player A and player B played off for tournament. This is the best system to use in my opinion but the point system doesn't really work with the Swiss System because you'd most likly see all games being worth 16 points.
Also, what happens in the case of ties? You could play OT in the tourney, but as we all know, time is of an issue, so you can't always expect to finish games.
Just my 0.02 cents. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
MightyQ |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 06, 2006 - 07:52 PM
|
|
Joined: Jul 16, 2004
Posts: 40
Status: Offline
|
|
Thanks Rob for your thought, I know this might have taken away from your drinking time, or maybe not
Thanks Ulthrac for kind of seeing this in a way I do, maybe I just didnt word it well...
I thinking having fun should be high on the list, when you get 20+ Blood Bowlers in a room, how can't you have fun ???
I dont see how fun is taken out if you go by w/t/l records without the bonuses... And the Casualy bonus is a bit unfair because it also depends on the races you got stuck playing against...
Now I have only been in 3 naf tournaments... The first had 12 people, the 2nd had 6 and the World Cup 24...
The Phrakus was my first... In that tournament standings after round 4 of 5
the top 4 were
4-0-0 High Elf
2-2-0 Lizardmen
2-1-1 Skaven
2-1-1 Orc
The Skaven went to the championship due to bonus points and played the 4-0-0, his loss was already against the 4-0-0 High Elf... The Undefeated 2-2-0 didnt get into the championship...
I went back and looked at the teams and their opponents of our curiousity because I am trying to figure out why caualties, which favor certain races, are used and what so called bonus system can be fair...
2-2-0 Lizards (T Skaven, T Orc, W Skaven, W Orc) 8 Casualties
2-1-1 Skaven (T Lizard, W Orcs, W Chaos & L High Elf) 13 Casualties
2-1-1 Orc (L Orc, T Orc, W Chaos & W Ogre) Suprise only 4 Casualties
Unless the tournaments were based on certain races, like an all orc tournament or all elf tournament, using casualties is a bit unfair...
You dont have a choice who your opponent will be and you cant just go get casualties when you want them...
In the original blood Bowl Handbook, if a games was tied, you go into sudden death (not going to happen at tournaments due to time unless it was the championship maybe), if tied after that, each coach rolls a d6...
Just like hockey used to do a while back, maybe still does, a loss = 0 points but an overtime loss = points... So if a game is tied, roll off, then winner gets points for the tournament even though his naf record would be a tie...
Just throwing things out there because with my earlier example with a possibility of someone going 5-0-0 and not making the championship round is just wrong due to bonus point system that doesnt seem balance or fair to certain races and I think that would keep some players from player certain races and having fun... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Hoshi_Komi |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 06, 2006 - 10:44 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 23, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 550
Location: United States of America
Status: Offline
|
|
| Personally I like tournies that let you play OT so there are less ties. As long as there's time they should let'em play I think. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
MightyQ |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 06, 2006 - 11:23 PM
|
|
Joined: Jul 16, 2004
Posts: 40
Status: Offline
|
|
gken1 wrote: Personally I like tournies that let you play OT so there are less ties. As long as there's time they should let'em play I think.
I agree, but because time is an issue other outcomes need to be worked out... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 06, 2006 - 11:33 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
gken1 wrote: Personally I like tournies that let you play OT so there are less ties. As long as there's time they should let'em play I think.
 But then all the tables who finish on time have to wait around for half an hour (or more since close games tend to take longer) twiddling their thumbs. So from an organisers POV I don't see how you'd get that to work and keep everyone happy. |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 06, 2006 - 11:43 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
MightyQ wrote:
The Skaven went to the championship due to bonus points and played the 4-0-0, his loss was already against the 4-0-0 High Elf... The Undefeated 2-2-0 didnt get into the championship...
IMO the scoring system used is badly flawed. One thing you need to have is a degree of certainty that a player who wins all their games will win the tournament. IMO bonuses for TDs/Cas/"keeping it close" etc should be about placing people on similar records and increasing the involvement of the coaches in games once the result has been determined - they should not enable you to bridge a significant gap in your record.
I know some people disagree - and they like scoring systems which emphasise the margin of victory and keep the some overlap between marginal results. The one Babs uses in Australia is a bit like that. There are 7 points up for grabs and a win can be 6-1 or 4-3. Draws can be 4-3. So you can lose, get 3 points and win and get 6 (giving 9 in total) when someone with 2 wins might only have 8. What he likes about it is that he believes this means the competition is more open and its easier to rectify a bad game. |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 07, 2006 - 05:47 AM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
MightyQ wrote: Thanks Rob for your thought, I know this might have taken away from your drinking time, or maybe not
Actually, ROD is the drinker...just to set the record straight...and if he make it to the Phrakus and drinks Guinness on Saturday Night. We're going to sit you next to him on Sunday.
:hint: Bring Nose Plugs.
Quote: The Phrakus was my first... In that tournament standings after round 4 of 5
the top 4 were
4-0-0 High Elf
2-2-0 Lizardmen
2-1-1 Skaven
2-1-1 Orc
The Skaven went to the championship due to bonus points and played the 4-0-0, his loss was already against the 4-0-0 High Elf... The Undefeated 2-2-0 didnt get into the championship...
I went back and looked at the teams and their opponents of our curiousity because I am trying to figure out why caualties, which favor certain races, are used and what so called bonus system can be fair...
2-2-0 Lizards (T Skaven, T Orc, W Skaven, W Orc) 8 Casualties
2-1-1 Skaven (T Lizard, W Orcs, W Chaos & L High Elf) 13 Casualties
2-1-1 Orc (L Orc, T Orc, W Chaos & W Ogre) Suprise only 4 Casualties
Unless the tournaments were based on certain races, like an all orc tournament or all elf tournament, using casualties is a bit unfair...
Knowing who played what at this tourney...I can tell you that Bampf was the Lizardman Coach, gken1 was the Skaven coach, and Skummy was the pro...I mean High Elf coach.
It is still kinda early here so I don't have the focus to fully digest the whole argument but a couple of counterpoints are as follows:
1. Lizards are more bashy than Skaven, so given that the CAS differential through 4 games was so signifigant, maybe that demonstrates that one coach is better than the other. (However slight the difference might be.) A 1 or 2 CAS difference over four games might be irrelevant...but 5?
2. gken1 played the eventual champion and the game resulted in his only loss through 4 rounds. Now the format as it is might not have absolutely bore this fruit...but again knowing Skummy, and his ability, Bampf not having to play him certainly had an impact on his tourney standings. As it was, bampf beat everyone that he faced...but that does not necessarily mean that his tourney ranking should have been higher.
I am still mostly asleep at this point so I am not sure if I am making my points here, so let me just leave off by saying...tourney rankings should not just be left to wins and losses alone. There are too many times where someone can play very well and lose strictly because of a kick off even or just dice in general. A person's play over a stretch of time and considering multiple facets when teams/coaches are being ranked.
Anyway...coffee time! |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 07, 2006 - 06:34 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
| BTW NAF does not have a policy around scoring of tournaments. Just like rule sets we believe diversity is a source of strength |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
