| User | Post |
|
12:44 pm
May 26, 2009
|
cprpoker
| | BOSTON | |
| TPT Admin | posts 811 |  
|
|
|
Post edited 9:03 am – May 27, 2009 by cprpoker
For Season4, we are contemplating a change in the way we award points for placement in TPT points events. Here is a link to the current scoring system. Without a way to automate the scoring, the current system doesn't scale well. (See this post for what I mean by "scale well")
So we are considering only awarding points to the top X players in an event. Such as only pay Top 9, Top 10, Top 20%, etc.
Here are a few questions for discussion:
1) What should X be?
2) How would you distribute points based on (1) above. What would you use for a total points to distribute?
3) McDonals, Burger King or Taco Bell?
Thanks!
|
"You’re better than him …maybe not by a lot, but, a little. You’re the patron saint of the totally
f*cked, you’re completely toxic, there’s nothing you can’t kill. You’re the violator. You can be the hero."
|
|
|
3:41 pm
May 26, 2009
|
Street3
| | Tulsa, Oklahoma | |
| wife..k | posts 210 |
|
|
|
I would say, no matter the field size, only award points to those that make the final table….1st gets 9 points, 2nd gets 8 points……9th gets 1 point. Also, i should get bonus points for playing. And WTF is McDonals? Is that like McDowels?
|
$50 > BANKWIRE > DECLINED > DOJ > LOL
|
|
|
3:48 pm
May 26, 2009
|
klymacks
| | Kellogg, Idaho | |
| noob | posts 2 | |
|
|
I can't believe I am saying this, but I totally agree with Street3. Everything except McDonals; Burger King cause he's the king, baby. That, and Dairy Queen likes it most when his Whopper is unwrapped.
|
|
|
|
|
4:00 pm
May 26, 2009
|
CoolWhipFlea
| | Los Angeles, CA | |
| TPT Admin | posts 172 |
|
|
|
I'd cast my vote for X=18. I like the idea of placing 2 points on the final two tables. Our games are consistently 5 tables, and this would give more players opportunities for points than just the FT. And then bonus points for making the cash (similar to the structure that we have now based on field size). But I like the 18th place – 1 point, 17th - 2pts, etc. etc. And then at the money, increase the point totals with cash point bonuses.
Something to consider, we likely won't be having dead money contributed to the pot without points for everyone. I mean, I'm much less likely to throw $5.50 into a pot if I'm not going to at least get a return in points.
And to answer the last question, In-N-Out man. That's what a hamburger's all about.
|
|
|
|
|
4:10 pm
May 26, 2009
|
IBGPN
| | Hot Springs, AR | |
| noob | posts 9 | |
|
|
I think if you just point Final Table you are making a mistake. What if some game only 25 are in and some game 50 are in? I say keep it just like it is. What is wrong with the way it is? Where is the fine dining places like Waffle House, IHOP and White Castle?
|
|
|
4:23 pm
May 26, 2009
|
cprpoker
| | BOSTON | |
| TPT Admin | posts 811 |
|
|
|
@IBGPN the issue with the current system is that it doesn't scale well. We have to enter the results manually.
We would try to make it fair to reward the top x with more points in bigger fields.
|
"You’re better than him …maybe not by a lot, but, a little. You’re the patron saint of the totally
f*cked, you’re completely toxic, there’s nothing you can’t kill. You’re the violator. You can be the hero."
|
|
|
4:36 pm
May 26, 2009
|
BrianGoodBeat
| | Boston, MA | |
| noob | posts 9 | |
|
|
(I'm new here, but I just thought I'd share my opinion, since I have one…)
I definitely think there is a scaling problem with the current system. I came in 25th out of 52 in my first tourney, and I was awarded about half as many points as 3rd place was (i.e. too much for me)
I like that everyone gets at least some "participation" points, but I think it should be more of a logarithmic scale. If 50th place out of fifty gets 2 points, then 25th should get 4, and 13th should get 8, etc., with smaller increases in between of course. I'm not sure how the math for the formula would work, though.
Or maybe a similar effect could happen just by increasing the bonus points for the top spots, or paying bonuses to more spots.
In my old home league we awarded points based on payouts received. Basically, every $1 won = 1 point. It's a system that automatically accounts for number of players and size of buy-in, since points and payouts both change based on the same variables. I would be down with that, too, as long as some kind of participation points were awarded, too.
|
|
|
4:36 pm
May 26, 2009
|
Street3
| | Tulsa, Oklahoma | |
| wife..k | posts 210 |
|
|
|
How about we award the top 9 like i mentioned above, but add a +(number of tables) So if we have 6 tables, 1st place gets, 9+6…..that way more points for more tables…..or again, we can just let me decided each who gets points.
|
$50 > BANKWIRE > DECLINED > DOJ > LOL
|
|
|
5:40 pm
May 26, 2009
|
Twitchy67
| | |
| booba | posts 54 | |
|
|
I like the final two tables idea, and I also like the pts plus per table, except only for the top 3 or 5; this rewards people who win in a bigger field with bigger pts, but doesn't reward everyone who cashes pts by just being there. Just my .02
What about Wendy's…
|
|
|
5:50 pm
May 26, 2009
|
IBGPN
| | Hot Springs, AR | |
| noob | posts 9 | |
|
|
http://www.pokersite.org/poker…../wsop/poy/
How about this plus however man play however many you beat added to your score.
So first out of 48 = 147
second same tourney = 121
third same tourney = 105
and so on? Pay maybe top 10 points everyone else gets however many people they beat. So 13th in that tourney would be 35 points. Make sense?
|
|
|
7:01 am
May 27, 2009
|
cprpoker
| | BOSTON | |
| TPT Admin | posts 811 |
|
|
|
There may be some confusion as to what I meant by "scale well" I should have phrased it differently. What I mean is that it is a tedious task to manually enter the points for each player into the spreadsheet to calculate points, then into the leader board program.
This only gets more tedious as we grow. With no way to automate the recording of points when we hit 75 or 100 entrants it will be very time consuming and prone to human error. Also, we have been asked about making the alternate events (mini tpt, heads up, etc) count in the leader board, this would add significantly to that problem.
So we are looking to limit the # of places that are awarded points and thus reducing the overhead in running the TPT.
|
"You’re better than him …maybe not by a lot, but, a little. You’re the patron saint of the totally
f*cked, you’re completely toxic, there’s nothing you can’t kill. You’re the violator. You can be the hero."
|
|
|
9:40 am
May 27, 2009
|
Twitchy67
| | |
| booba | posts 54 | |
|
|
10 pts for a win, 9 second, 8 third etc down to tenth…any event, any time…auto entered. Not as cool from a risk/reward standpoint, but real easy. Also, @street3 should donate any points he miraculously earns via lucksacking suckouts to real players. Which would really be virtually everyone else except that french donkey from last week.
|
|
|
10:34 am
May 27, 2009
|
72suited
| | Grand Rapids, MI | |
| booba | posts 12 | |
|
|
Post edited 12:39 pm – May 27, 2009 by 72suited
Well I think the first thing that needs to be decided is if ALL events (mini tpt, etc) will count towards the leader board? Because if the answer is yes, then I think it should be a top % of players get points, since the fields will vary greatly. Wouldn't be fair if only the top 10 get points (10 for 1st, 9 for 2nd…) if one field is 60 and one field is 10.
For what it's worth, I can't say I like the idea of ALL events counting. If you want simple scoring, the normal Thursday 9pm events should be all that count. At that point I'm with Flea, top two tables (top 18) get points which increases the chances for everyone to score. Cash places could get bonus points (completely optional, the ultimate goal is limited scoring places and simplifying the process, no bonuses would be the simplest of course).
|
|
|
|
|
10:48 am
May 27, 2009
|
RawrStar
| | Teh Internetz! | |
| noob | posts 5 | |
|
|
I'm just going to throw this idea in here…
In the UK and Ireland league on PokerStars they have a system which scaled to fit TPT fields would go something like;
1 point for participating.
5 points for cashing.
Bonus points for 1st, 2nd and 3rd (3 for 1st, 2 for 2nd and 1 for 3rd).
With that system it could obviously be scaled to fit any size field which could be useful when the TPT hits triple figure entries.
(http://www.pokerstars.com/uk/poker/promotions/ukpl/)
|
|
|
11:34 am
May 27, 2009
|
cprpoker
| | BOSTON | |
| TPT Admin | posts 811 |
|
|
|
@72Suited, good points. I think we can put the discussion of scoring alternate events on the back burner for now. But if we the participation grows close to the current levels (30 – 40 players per) then we could do the flat 18 get points.
@Rawrstar the issue is with awarding participation points. We want to be able to take the results of the event and give points to the top X players only.
|
"You’re better than him …maybe not by a lot, but, a little. You’re the patron saint of the totally
f*cked, you’re completely toxic, there’s nothing you can’t kill. You’re the violator. You can be the hero."
|
|
|
11:37 am
May 27, 2009
|
pokerguru
| | |
| noob | posts 5 | |
|
|
Don't think that just the final table should be rewarded. I like Rawrstar's idea of everyone getting a point for participating and more points based on finish, but I understand that data entry can be an issue.
In that case, go with coolwhipflea's idea x=18.People who play the most should be rewarded the most (guess I gotta start playing again.)
Hehe
|
|
|
11:47 am
May 27, 2009
|
cprpoker
| | BOSTON | |
| TPT Admin | posts 811 |
|
|
|
@Pokerguru Everybody already gets points for participating so if that is the way to go then we will leave it as is. But the issue is with the scalability of the current system from an overhead standpoint. When we reach 75 or 100 players a week then the data entry is mind numbingly annoying! We are working with the poker rooms to see if there is a way to automate this, but barring that….
|
"You’re better than him …maybe not by a lot, but, a little. You’re the patron saint of the totally
f*cked, you’re completely toxic, there’s nothing you can’t kill. You’re the violator. You can be the hero."
|
|
|
4:48 pm
May 27, 2009
|
CoolWhipFlea
| | Los Angeles, CA | |
| TPT Admin | posts 172 |
|
|
|
The WSOP has their point total for their POY leaderboard based on awarding each player who cashes, points. Because our events don’t draw the same field sizes, I think that this would be unfair. But I like the idea of including X=18, and having a point system akin to that WSOP system (you can see it here: http://www.worldseriesofpoker……008pts.asp)
We look at top two tables making points. We could also have these be bonus points, and have everyone receive points (very small for participation). So if we had 5 tables to start, first people out get 1 point, at 4 tables = 2 pts, 3 tables left = 3 points, and so on. When we get to 2 tables left, the multipliers would take effect based on finishes, with more bonuses being awarded for placing ITM.
Another system is that of Bluff magazine. They assess a POY ranking very similarly, awarding points to players that finish in the cash. Again, I’d propose that the points are awarded based on finishing in the top 2 two tables. (check out bluff’s rating guide here http://www.bluffmagazine.com/p…..ormula.asp).
But I would also like to see something on the TPT site like what the WPT does on their site. Something that show’s historical data, as well as the number of cashes, amounts won, etc. I don’t know how this would all be designed, and/or whether or not it would be possible, but it would be way awesome. Look at the WPT setup here: http://www.worldpokertour.com/…..nding.aspx
I love the idea of a Career Earnings table, Number of cashes, number of titles. These things are WAY cool. Just some more thoughts.
|
|
|
|
|
6:53 am
June 2, 2009
|
cprpoker
| | BOSTON | |
| TPT Admin | posts 811 |
|
|
|
Post edited 8:54 am – June 2, 2009 by cprpoker
OK. Let's play the other side of the argument and discuss a different strategy for scoring if we were to continue awarding points to all participants of an event.
See this spreadsheet for how the last event (Season3 Event 7) would look using the PokerStars TLB scoring method.
Thoughts???
|
"You’re better than him …maybe not by a lot, but, a little. You’re the patron saint of the totally
f*cked, you’re completely toxic, there’s nothing you can’t kill. You’re the violator. You can be the hero."
|
|
|
8:02 am
June 2, 2009
|
CoolWhipFlea
| | Los Angeles, CA | |
| TPT Admin | posts 172 |
|
|
|
I like this better than awarding points to players who cash. I'm ok with this system, and if it's easy, then that'll work. I'm not sure exactly why we'd change it from the current scoring system though, as it appears to be very similar to the one that we already have in place. But it seems fine to me.
There are still points awarded for participating (a bonus, which should encourage players to actually play for the prizes) and the scale isn't so far off that the winners would be unreachable after a victory.
|
|
|
|
This Forum is Currently Locked – Access is Read Only
Poker Forum
