logo

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2011 3:57 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 6662
Location: Chicago, IL
After the last several tournaments I have been to, it has become clear that there is still a lot of confusion surrounding the 3/2 scoring system.

You get a three point win if:
You reach the point total by the end of the round when time was called.

-or-


(and this is a RARE, case by case circumstance) The judge rules it a 3 point win even though the point total was not reached.

Now, a judge has specific criteria to award a 3 point win in this case. He cannot simply say, "this team would have certainly won". Who would have won were it played out is actually irrelevant. This scoring system was set up to promote more people finishing games. The idea is that both players actively pursue reacting the point total. Typically the only way a judge will award a 3 point victory when the point total has not been reached, is when a player has been warned for slow-play previously in that match. This is why it is imperative that if you feel your opponent is slow-playing, you call a judge over early.

If two players finish a game and have not reached the point total, and there was not a clear judge ruled case of slow-play or stalling, it will be a 2 pt victory. That's it. Even if all you had left was a Yammosk, (or Mas Amedda, or Gha Gnackt, etc) and they still had Cad Bane - it is still a 2 point win.

At the GenCon Championships last year - I had a two point win (correctly ruled) after I finished the game having my lancer, Grievous DAC, and Darth Sidious still alive vs only General Reeiken still alive with 10 hp left. Obviously one more round would have been the game, and there's no conceivable way I would have lost were it played out, but I didn't finish by the end of the round when time was called. 2 pt victory. Would have placed 9th were it a three point win, so it alone didn't keep me out of the finals, but it nearly did.

It is also important to point out that a player cannot conceed after 30 minutes and give the opponent a 3 pt win without a judge's ruling. This means after the 30 minute mark, a judge must be called over to determine victory points if someone concedes. Every time.
If there is only 5 minutes left and a few weak characters left, I have frequently heard a judge say, "just play it out". That way there is no question. It is still a judges call at this point, but it is STILL NOT a question of "Who would have won if it were played all the way out?" It is a question of, "Would the winner have reached the point total under the time limit?" There is a big difference there. Conceding when time is nearly up will have less weight to give the 3 pt victory, where-as conceeding with 20 minutes to go will usually be an easier judges decision. This is why 30 minutes is the mark, because before that anything can happen - so if someone conceeds before 30 minutes it's an auto 3 pt win, no judge ruling necessary.

I have also heard worries about how the 3/2 system can be manipulated. I don't honestly see how it could realistically. If you really feel it gives you some edge to get a 2 pt win instead of a 3 pt win (getting paired down in the next round), good luck. It will hurt you far more often than it might help you. There are too many factors to guess the circumstances in which it might be a very slight advantage to get the 2 vs 3, and even if it helps you in one round, it will hurt you down the line. It's actually a much bigger improvement over the former system of only SOS. The fact that there are specific criteria for judges to follow in awarding a 3 pt win in the rare case when it does happen, means it's even harder to manipulate. If it were (as many people apparently think) a case where it's purely a judges opinion on who would have won, then that could easily be manipulated. But if someone is slow-playing or stalling by failing to engage or otherwise, and a judge is called over and it IS RULED A WARNING, then and only then is there a possibility of a 3 pt victory without the point total.

Feel free to chime in about this or add what you think. I have just heard too many fallacies about the 3/2 scoring system in the past month at tournaments to not bring this topic up.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2011 4:06 pm 
Warmaster
Warmaster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 1:06 pm
Posts: 572
Location: Lexington Park, MD
If a player concedes before the time limit, how is it fair to penalize the winner with a 2-point win when that player has no control over whether the losing player concedes or not? Someone could conceivably concede just to screw up someone else's chance of getting into the Playoffs. While it's true that, if the guidelines were changed, it'd be just as easy for someone to help out a friend by conceding and giving a 3-point win to him, I think that's a lesser evil than the other option.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2011 4:26 pm 
One of the Sith on Malgus' Shuttle
One of the Sith on Malgus' Shuttle
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 11:31 pm
Posts: 3575
Location: Cincinnati, OH
In the Floor Rules it is actually discussed about awarding points for conceding. If your opponent concede within the first 30 minutes, you are given a full 3 points. If your opponent concedes with less than 30 minutes remaining, it is up to the judge's discretion.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2011 4:40 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 6662
Location: Chicago, IL
jedispyder wrote:
In the Floor Rules it is actually discussed about awarding points for conceding. If your opponent concede within the first 30 minutes, you are given a full 3 points. If your opponent concedes with less than 30 minutes remaining, it is up to the judge's discretion.


Exactly. It's actually the best of both worlds. You can't prevent someone from conceding, so if it's under 30 minutes, it's automatically 3 pts. If it's over 30 minutes, it's a judges call. Frequently a judge will award 3 points in this case, but it depends on many factors. The best way to avoid all of this is to just finish it out, but like I said you can't prevent people from conceding. So this system actually covers both of your concerns. It prevents the 3pt win being awarded by a last second concession, but it grants it in cases where it should be (ie - judges decision on if the match would have reached the point total before time is up).


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2011 4:47 pm 
Warmaster
Warmaster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 1:06 pm
Posts: 572
Location: Lexington Park, MD
Ok, I was just making sure I was understanding it right. I interpreted your statement of concession after 30 minutes to mean that all concessions after 30 minutes were worth 2-points, so I was wrong. Thanks for clearing that up! I had a mini freak-out when I thought I judged the MD Regionals wrong, but turns out I didn't. Good to know. :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2011 5:17 pm 
Mandalore
Mandalore
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 7:43 pm
Posts: 1009
Location: Southern Illinois
If after the 30 minutes pass, someone tries to concede and tghe judge is called over, and the judge tells them to play it out, should the judge give them an extra minute (or however long it takes to get him over there) to make up for the time they spent waiting?

Obviously that wouldnt be abusive, but if I was denied the extra time, I was awarded the 2pt win, and it kept me out of the finals or somesuch, Id be PISSED. Just sayin. ;)

_________________
WotC: 890/890
V-Set: 142/142

Wotc GTL: 52ish
Gamers GTL: 2 (dalsiandon, urbanjedi)

fingersandteeth wrote:
Also t4 for override and a cheeky flame.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2011 5:25 pm 
Hall of Fame Member
Hall of Fame Member

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:43 am
Posts: 1163
Location: Fremont, CA
Generally concessions are going to be 3 points.

It's designed the way it is to prevent people from manipulating the system by agreeing (explicitly or implicitly) to play slow and then with a minute remaining whoever is behind will just concede so their opponent gets the 3 point win.

By defaulting to 2 in virtually every case, and requiring a judge to bump it to 3 uncertainty is introduced into any attempt to casually manipulate the scoring.

Of course, abuse and manipulation is still possible, but it's mostly the kind of thing that will be outright ignorance (like the incorrect understanding that caused Tim to start the thread) or blatant cheating.

_________________


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2011 2:33 pm 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:29 am
Posts: 731
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
I, like some people at our regional, were not entirely sure how the system is to be applied. I totally get how the system is to be scored now, but there is a great deal of confusion about it in the community rest assured. I guarantee I will be vigilant about how myself and others are scoring games from now on...several of us are going to Michigan's regional and I will ask that the system be explained before the event begins so the entire room will know how we are scoring.

It is important to get the community to understand the 3-2 system, and I feel equally important to be sure some do not cheat the system by agreeing to a conclusion and point total that is not consistent with the rules that are in place. I think it would be great if the map, minis and damage markers were left in place just as the game ended and the judge called over to examine it...primarily for those reporting 3 point wins before or after the 30 minute mark. Simply having both players report it is not sufficient in my opinion and no exceptions should be made for any player known or unknown in the community.

One note of clarification, I was not concerned that some would take a 2 point win over a 3 to pair themselves down, but that someone would take a 3 point win instead of a 2 pointer thereby enhancing their chances of advancing when said advancement was still uncertain (early rounds).


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2011 9:06 pm 
Major Tierce
Major Tierce

Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 11:21 pm
Posts: 3163
Waco

I'm sure that we can get Brad to explain it before we start in MI and I know Brad has lots of judging exp so there shouldn't be any problems at the MI regional.

_________________
When I left you I was but the learner . . . now I am the master.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 9:46 am 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 6662
Location: Chicago, IL
WacoBlaze wrote:
I, like some people at our regional, were not entirely sure how the system is to be applied. I totally get how the system is to be scored now, but there is a great deal of confusion about it in the community rest assured. I guarantee I will be vigilant about how myself and others are scoring games from now on...several of us are going to Michigan's regional and I will ask that the system be explained before the event begins so the entire room will know how we are scoring.

It is important to get the community to understand the 3-2 system, and I feel equally important to be sure some do not cheat the system by agreeing to a conclusion and point total that is not consistent with the rules that are in place. I think it would be great if the map, minis and damage markers were left in place just as the game ended and the judge called over to examine it...primarily for those reporting 3 point wins before or after the 30 minute mark. Simply having both players report it is not sufficient in my opinion and no exceptions should be made for any player known or unknown in the community.

One note of clarification, I was not concerned that some would take a 2 point win over a 3 to pair themselves down, but that someone would take a 3 point win instead of a 2 pointer thereby enhancing their chances of advancing when said advancement was still uncertain (early rounds).


I know there is wide-spread confusion, which is why I made this thread. I do think it's a good idea to have it explained before every tournament, so everyone is on the same page.

I brought up the whole issue at Kokomo when it was clear that people were reporting 3 pt wins when it should be a 2 pt win. I will say I honestly didn't think anyone was purposefully cheating - I just don't think it was clear to many people how it was supposed to be specifically ruled. I think many were under the misconception that a 3 pt win was awarded when there would be an obvious winner if the game were completed, even though the point total was not reached in time.

The reason I brought up someone reporting a 2 pt win when a 3 pt win was earned, is because someone actually said that to me. To be fair I think it was a hypothetical comment as opposed to an actual strategy. It was in round 4 of the Kokomo Regional, and the way it played out was that I was the only 3-0 at that point, and therefore guaranteed into the finals. In fact - it ended up that the 4 finalists were 3-1 or better, while all the 2-2s missed the finals. So I faced someone who was 2-1, and had to beat me to make the finals. Well, our teams did not match up well (to my advantage) and he said, "Man, I should have gotten a 2 pt win last round, and then I would have been paired with someone else". Which is probably true, and had he won that last game vs someone else, he would have made the finals and bumped someone else out. Once again - I think it was a theoretical hindsight comment, and not an actual strategy to employ. Of course as it turned out, points meant nothing at this tournament, since only record ended up mattering. Obviously in other situations it could make a big difference.

I was a bit confused when I heard talk of the system being manipulated. The system actually takes all cases into account quite well in my opinion, and the tricky situations will come down to a judges decision, as it should. So if the system is followed, it has built in counters to manipulation. The case that you brought up is not following the system at all.

Now this is not to be confused with someone being determined to finish games. I have personally focused on making that a goal for myself. I will even say to my opponent at the beginning of a match, "I am determined to finish this game, win or lose. I want us both to play at a speed where that will happen." This will result in a 3 point win either way. That's not manipulation, that's actually the goal of this system.

There was even a situation at Kokomo where 2 players were playing, and I had finished early, so I was watching. There was 10 minutes left in the game, and one player conceded to the other. It was clear that the conceding player would have lost, but it was still gonna take a couple rounds to mop up the rest of the 200 pts. I informed them that it wouldn't automatically be a 3pt win unless they finished, since it was past the 30 minute mark. They both felt it should be a three point victory, so I encouraged them just to finish the game. This way there was no question, no ambiguity. They did finish under time and it was a 3 pt victory nobody could argue with.

I have also seen another strategy employed, which you may be referring to, which is actually impossible to stop. And that is where someone wants to concede after the 30 minute mark, and doesn't want it to come down to a judge's decision. So they run all their pieces at the opponent to get slaughtered. If someone wants to do that, they can, there is no way to prevent it. If they do this and finish before time is up, then it's a 3 pt win. Not ideal, I don't like it, but it's how it works. At Chicago Regionals, I had several matches (vs Ben in the semis, and vs Jason in the finals) where they fought to the last man standing. I actually had respect for how they fought to the end. No concession, no running and hiding - just trying to play quickly and as best as you can in a bad situation. They didn't run and hide and try and give me a 2 point win when it was obvious the victory was mine. They kept trying to hurt me any way they could. Jason still came after me when it was only his Jabba and Thrawn vs most of my squad. He didn't stop until I reached 200 pts. That's how the game is meant to be played. I personally hate concessions, but you can't prevent them. I encourage everyone play out the game until time is called or the point total is reached. Every time. You're there to play minis, right?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Sun May 29, 2011 4:17 pm 
Black Sun Thug
Black Sun Thug

Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:15 pm
Posts: 63
My only problem with 3/2 point scoring is the fact that someone can lose to two people, go 3-2 and be ahead of the two people they lost to even if those two people went 4-1. How is that fair? Their army was obviously not good enough to beat these people's armies, but yet he will be ranked higher then the people he lost to. I understand the whole playing to completion and trying to reach the 200 point mark and getting a three point win, but I have seen this type of system get manipulated way to much, with people losing on purpose when they have no chance of moving on to let someone that is 2-2 get another 3 point win so that they can possibly advance or get an award.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 8:49 am 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 6662
Location: Chicago, IL
There was quite a bit more discussion on this topic over the weekend, and perhaps even some changed opinions by prominent community members. I encourage more discussion here.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 9:08 am 
Name Calling Internet Bully
Name Calling Internet Bully
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:10 pm
Posts: 6172
Location: Gurnee, IL
DeathsBaine wrote:
My only problem with 3/2 point scoring is the fact that someone can lose to two people, go 3-2 and be ahead of the two people they lost to even if those two people went 4-1. How is that fair? Their army was obviously not good enough to beat these people's armies, but yet he will be ranked higher then the people he lost to. I understand the whole playing to completion and trying to reach the 200 point mark and getting a three point win, but I have seen this type of system get manipulated way to much, with people losing on purpose when they have no chance of moving on to let someone that is 2-2 get another 3 point win so that they can possibly advance or get an award.


Well, that's next to impossible. 2nd if both the 4-1s did not finish a single win in time, they don't deserve to advance just because they beat another player. Timed games are tie breakers, they are not a full win. If you can't win even 1 game out of 5 in time, then you are slow playing so bad, that you have no one to blame but yourself.

_________________
Image

http://www.bloomilk.com/Squads/Search.aspx?UserID=29


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 9:21 am 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 10:03 pm
Posts: 2525
Location: Anderson, SC
Just from personal experience.

I believe (correct me if im wrong daniel) had had only 5 2 point wins in atlanta. 2 involved Gowk chasing down shooters and running out of time. the other 3 being from a guy who never ever finishes games on time. The rest of us just know that if your not completing a game in an hour your doing it wrong.

Graham played a squad with 3 attackers and every single game was a 3 point win, and only 1 of those went close to time (against the slow player). If you don't learn how to finish a game in an hour your only hurting yourself.

If your opponent is playing slow call a judge over early and often. I did this in my first round game and my opponent understood he needed to hurry up. (he spent 3 minutes, I clocked it, to decide where to move an ughnaught that wasnt even close to the fight). Once I called Daniel over that game sped up.

It's on you to do something if you think something thats happening isnt fair.

_________________
Bald is beautiful.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 9:36 am 
Sith Apprentice
Sith Apprentice
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:15 am
Posts: 242
Location: charlotte, nc
I have no issue with the 3/2 scoring system. It weeds out the players that can only manage 2 point wins and rewards those that go all out and get the full 3 points. If, for some reason, I can't pull out a full win and only get 2 points then I don't have anyone to blame except myself (unless i'm playing said slow player weeks was talking about). By now most players know that to make top four in any Regional or top 8 in the Championship they are going to need the full win. It's really not that difficult.

_________________
Quite possibly star wars miniatures biggest...and only Yuuzhan Vong supporter


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:54 pm 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:29 am
Posts: 731
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
I think a poll of the Regional judges to see how the 3-2 scoring system worked is a great idea. I would guess that there might be occurrences where the system was not ideal.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:15 pm 
Name Calling Internet Bully
Name Calling Internet Bully
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:10 pm
Posts: 6172
Location: Gurnee, IL
WacoBlaze wrote:
I think a poll of the Regional judges to see how the 3-2 scoring system worked is a great idea. I would guess that there might be occurrences where the system was not ideal.


I'd bet you there wasn't a single case where it made even a small difference. A poll is a waste of time. We are in communication with the judges of all the events, and no one has ever reported an issue with the 3-2 scoring at Regionals. Its worked exactly as intended in all cases. It takes a 5 round minimum event for it to even make a difference in something like a top 4, and even that requires a 4-1 no complete wins and a 3-2 that wouldn't make it otherwise with 3 full wins. In reality, as long as you get at least 1-2 full wins, you aren't going to be knocked out of a playoff by a person with less wins. And if it comes to a tie, I think nearly everyone would agree that a person who went 4-1 with 4 full wins played better than a person who went 4-1 with 1.

So seriously, what on earth are you suggesting by saying you think there would be "occurrences of it being less than ideal". That's just a random out of left field accusation with nothing to even support suggesting it.

_________________
Image

http://www.bloomilk.com/Squads/Search.aspx?UserID=29


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:26 pm 
Hall of Fame Member
Hall of Fame Member

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:43 am
Posts: 1163
Location: Fremont, CA
DeathsBaine wrote:
My only problem with 3/2 point scoring is the fact that someone can lose to two people, go 3-2 and be ahead of the two people they lost to even if those two people went 4-1. How is that fair?


Because three wins is superior to 4 ties in pretty much anyone's definition.

Even the head-to-heads weren't losses, they were ties. So you can't even make that argument based on the info provided. Granted, one player still advances for being ahead at the point where the game had to be called, but being ahead at some point before the game finishes is not the same as winning. There is no guarantee they would have won and they are "punished" in the scoring because of that.

(Not that this situation would virtually ever occur for the reasons Bill mentioned.)

_________________


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 2:28 pm 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:29 am
Posts: 731
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
I am merely curious. 3 of my Swiss round wins were 3 pointers and the other win a 2 pointer. Worked fine for me. I am more concerned as before with people reporting 3 point wins without the judge being sure it is a 3 point win. Say the round has about 10 minutes left and there are a flurry of games ending at or around the same time. 3 or 4 people can easily be reporting results and one could easily report a 3 point win when a 2 point win was the result under the stringent - 200 points no exceptions - rule. The judge could be answering questions and/or fielding reports of ended games and easily not know or have the time to be sure that all the games were reported correctly.

If you had several 3-2 (in a 5 round tournament) records with 9 points each vying for 4th place I think it would seem possible for a player that reported a 3 point win early when a 2 pointer was the result to sneak in on a better strength of schedule. If nothing else, I think all tournaments should return to the sheet listing spots for: (1) each opponent's name, (2) a 3 or 2 point win designation, (3) and a spot for each opponent to initial after the game ended. Finally, the loser could return the paper to the judge for entry.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 3:15 pm 
Hall of Fame Member
Hall of Fame Member

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:43 am
Posts: 1163
Location: Fremont, CA
That situation requires not only cheating but also collusion to occur.

No system can account for that.

Dennis can regale you with stories of collusion based manipulation of the DCI system that actually impacted Magic play. We never saw it occur in any significant way in SWM. I don't believe we'll see this new method occur either because, as always with SWM, there's too little reward on the line to create the motivation and a community that's too close-knit to leave an opening for it.

_________________


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Darth Ruthven and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Jedi Knights style by Scott Stubblefield