logo

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read


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

Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 4:17 pm 
Big Bad Brad
Big Bad Brad
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:14 am
Posts: 5343
TimmerB123 wrote:
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.



That is correct, I won't be judging that way again, just going to go back to my old way. Probably even more so.

If you don't finish when I call time, it's 2 points. If you try to come up to the socrer's table and say 3, then you better have shown me the board. Those will be the only tables I will be looking at.

_________________
"200 or 2"
"Consistency is the key, not crying"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:29 pm 
Name Calling Internet Bully
Name Calling Internet Bully
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:10 pm
Posts: 6172
Location: Gurnee, IL
Let's clear this up with accurate information, so people like Waco don't go on making a fuss about inaccurate information.

As I understand it, the 4-6th placers after five rounds were all at 3-2.

Ben 9
Lou 9
Tony 8

But Lou had been granted a full win against Tony on a game that was 187-102 with a 40hp Jaina being the only thing remaining at time. Judge can call that one a full win, with Yodabuck and Panaka still alive. Brad initially called it 2, then changed his mind later and made this a full win.

But the lunacy of it is, that neither Tony nor Lou made the top 4 initially. Ben was 4th. Ben decided not to play and allowed the next finisher into his spot, which was Lou. Now Tony or someone on his behalf is upset because he thinks it was unfair, and Wacoblaze is crying foul about it.

Guess what guys, Lou beat Tony head to head, which is the next tie breaker. So even if Lou had not been awarded 3 pts, which I agree the judge was fully within his right to award it, Lou finishes ahead of Tony. Make sure you understand all the issues before you go around telling people the system is broken, run for the hills, OMG.

Further, making a claim about the 3-2 scoring system supposedly failing because the "wrong person" made it to the top 5 of a tournament looking for top 4, is both innaccurate and unfair. The facts of the matter were that the system worked perfectly. The judge made a decision that in the end, actually did not affect the outcome anyway. I can see the concern, but since its still not an example of someone screwing the system by cheating, that makes what, 100 tournament reports between regionals last year, gencon, multiple events through out the year, and regionals so far without a single example of that occurring? If someone has a real example, I'd like to hear about it, since it's never been reported as of yet.

_________________
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 5:46 pm 
Big Bad Brad
Big Bad Brad
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:14 am
Posts: 5343
It was a crazy day anyway and pairings were completely screwed up. Dan had been awarded a 3 point win in the 2nd round, but it was mistakenly marked as a 2. This jacked with parings from then on, leading Lou to face Jason in the final round which was an autoloss for him. Paired appropriately, it likely would have all been irrelevant...

Take the dice as they roll and keep on playing.

"200 or 2"

_________________
"200 or 2"
"Consistency is the key, not crying"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:24 pm 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:29 am
Posts: 1281
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
Right on Brad, a very hectic day and you did a fine job. My 3-2 talk is opinion about isolated previous incident(s). Really, my opinions are more about helping the players and - especially the judges - to have a more hassle-free day for the graciousness they show by working instead of playing.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 11:24 pm 
One of The Ones
One of The Ones
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 8402
Location: Chicago, IL
billiv15 wrote:
As I understand it, the 4-6th placers after five rounds were all at 3-2.

Ben 9
Lou 9
Tony 8


I was 3-2 with 9 points as well. i think there were at least 2 other 9 pointers in addition to Lou and Ben and I. (Not counting Eric who was 9 points but 4-1.)

Brad - you did the best you could in a rough situation.

I am still a bit confused by the veiled collusion accusations. The only thing I can think of that you might be referring to, but is actually not cheating or collusion, is this: One player is winning heavily, and it has passed the half hour mark. The opponent wildly flings the last of his characters into harms way to get slaughtered. Easy and quick finish to earn the full three points. This example cannot be prevented in any way. If an opponent has time to apply this tactic (for whatever reasons they might have), then it's a 3 point win. It's not collusion or cheating. The winner cannot be punished for the loser essentially quitting. I heard one quote this weekend in a similar situation to this. The game was more or less decided, but it was past the 30 min mark. So the player who was going to lose said, "Let's hurry up and finish this game, I have to poop." Threw his pieces to the slaughter, and went to poop in peace. His prerogative. Not the winners fault. SO - this is not cheating. Or collusion.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:57 am 
Big Bad Brad
Big Bad Brad
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:14 am
Posts: 5343
TimmerB123 wrote:
billiv15 wrote:
As I understand it, the 4-6th placers after five rounds were all at 3-2.

Ben 9
Lou 9
Tony 8


I was 3-2 with 9 points as well. i think there were at least 2 other 9 pointers in addition to Lou and Ben and I. (Not counting Eric who was 9 points but 4-1.)

Brad - you did the best you could in a rough situation.


So that means Tony had 9 points as well then.

_________________
"200 or 2"
"Consistency is the key, not crying"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:06 am 
Name Calling Internet Bully
Name Calling Internet Bully
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:10 pm
Posts: 6172
Location: Gurnee, IL
Ok, so 4th-7th was

Ben 9
Lou 9
Tony 9
Tim 9

Not sure whether Tim or Tony was 6th and who was 7th.

But apparently Waco is alluding to previous unnamed and unknown examples which supposedly prove his point, to which no one else has access to. Well, that's about 0 percent helpful isn't it.

Sounds like the issues were also related to an incorrect scoring earlier as well. Sounds like this is a learning experience, but it in no way invalidates the system, which was the point of bringing it up. So with that, we move on.

_________________
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: Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:29 am 
One of The Ones
One of The Ones
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 8402
Location: Chicago, IL
billiv15 wrote:
Ok, so 4th-7th was

Ben 9
Lou 9
Tony 9
Tim 9

Not sure whether Tim or Tony was 6th and who was 7th.

But apparently Waco is alluding to previous unnamed and unknown examples which supposedly prove his point, to which no one else has access to. Well, that's about 0 percent helpful isn't it.

Sounds like the issues were also related to an incorrect scoring earlier as well. Sounds like this is a learning experience, but it in no way invalidates the system, which was the point of bringing it up. So with that, we move on.


Not that it matters at all at this point, but I believe I was 8th place - so there was at least one more 9 pointer at 3-2. I think Troy was.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:29 am 
Big Bad Brad
Big Bad Brad
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:14 am
Posts: 5343
billiv15 wrote:

But apparently Waco is alluding to previous unnamed and unknown examples which supposedly prove his point, to which no one else has access to. Well, that's about 0 percent helpful isn't it.


Per my phone conversation with him, I believe the issue is a hypothetical one that could present itself in a larger environment such as Gencon:

With the flurry of games being reported in the end of a round, how does a judge verify the score if someone were to come up and say "I got a 3 point win". He misses the old DCI slips where both players signed the score off.

Honestly, my new motto of "200 or 2" should prevent most of this. If you try to report a 3 point win after I have called time or 1 minute left etc, then you had better be prepared to show this (in other words, your opponent's pieces have been eliminated or you have 30 points of gambit for his 27 point Lobot). As opposed to trying to show a 2pt win is a 3, as this isn't going to be an issue anymore.

_________________
"200 or 2"
"Consistency is the key, not crying"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:38 am 
Hand of the Sith
Hand of the Sith

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 4:41 pm
Posts: 933
Location: Olivet Mi
I agree with brad, If the tourny would of been 200 or 2 the top 4 would of been Jason Mike Ben and I think Tony Eric would of been left out because all of his swiss games did not end. This is just a small problem we need to fix before it becomes to large.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:47 am 
One of The Ones
One of The Ones
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 8402
Location: Chicago, IL
Lou wrote:
I agree with brad, If the tourny would of been 200 or 2 the top 4 would of been Jason Mike Ben and I think Tony Eric would of been left out because all of his swiss games did not end. This is just a small problem we need to fix before it becomes to large.

Oh yeah, I forgot Eric was awarded the one three point win by judges decision, or else he would have been 8 pts at 4-1, and missing the finals. That single 3 pointer was the exact theoretical situation Bill talked about earlier (OK - I had to look up the quote now - here it is)

billiv15 wrote:

I'd bet you there wasn't a single case where it made even a small difference (. . .) 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.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:56 am 
Big Bad Brad
Big Bad Brad
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:14 am
Posts: 5343
Eric's one 3 point win was a direct result of what I call "The [true] Atris Factor", which is a high cost tech piece that the average skilled player leaves in the back. He had defeated all of his opponents characters save Jaster Mereel, whom had stayed away from the action until all the the death shot characters were defeated, and some minor filler pieces which were accounted for in gambit.

In the case of Jaster that essentially 80 hidden points Eric had to counter (30 free reinforcements) and then Jasters actual 50 cost.

I know I'm going to hear arguments of how others use Atris or Jaster to actually attack, note I said "average" and honestly from walking around that day I saw several Atris/Thrawn/Mas combos (or something to that effect; Jaster/Qm/Cpt etc) sitting in the starting area. That's nearly 100 points and one of the reasons I decided to be more lenient than I was last year. Clearly, the community has told me they prefer otherise. "200 or 2"

_________________
"200 or 2"
"Consistency is the key, not crying"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:02 am 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:29 am
Posts: 1281
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
Lou is exactly right. Eric in 200 or 2 would not have made the final 4. 200 or 2 will indeed be easier on the judges and players knowing exactly what they need to achieve to win. Slower, larger squads simply will have to be tweaked or their style of play altered which is good for the game in my opinion. Brad, 200 or 2 will or should save you and other judges lots of grief and I think you are wise to employ it. I know some will be unhappy when they feel they have a marked advantage at the end of time (like I did in Kokomo, up 109-24) with a zillion shots left, but it will be on me and others to press that action or face a 2 point win.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:54 am 
One of The Ones
One of The Ones
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 8402
Location: Chicago, IL
WacoBlaze wrote:
200 or 2 will indeed be easier on the judges and players knowing exactly what they need to achieve to win. Slower, larger squads simply will have to be tweaked or their style of play altered which is good for the game in my opinion. Brad, 200 or 2 will or should save you and other judges lots of grief and I think you are wise to employ it. I know some will be unhappy when they feel they have a marked advantage at the end of time (like I did in Kokomo, up 109-24) with a zillion shots left, but it will be on me and others to press that action or face a 2 point win.



I agree here, and it was what I was expressing in Kokomo. And this is exactly why. 200 or 2 allows virtually no wiggle room, which makes it actually easier on the judges. I am one of the people who has been consciously running squads that allow you to finish in time. There are very tough squads out there that I refuse to play in tournaments (Eric's IG swarm, Jake K's Nom Bombs with Cad Bane) because they are too hard to finish games with regularity. This system was created to encourage people to play faster. 200 or 2 only emphasizes that point. It has become get on board or get left behind.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 9:06 am 
One of The Ones
One of The Ones
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 8402
Location: Chicago, IL
NickName wrote:
I've never felt like the 60 minute time limit was enough for the typical SWM player to complete a 200 point game which was one of two reasons I opposed moving the championship to 200 points.

So the typical player is going to have to play a bit less cautiously than they prefer. Playing quickly well is a skill as much as anything else in the game. Now it's one that's being rewarded fairly heavily. Players not interested in developing that skill are unfortunately going to suffer a lot of 2 point wins.



I pulled this from another thread, but obviously it is relevant. I agree with what Nickname is saying here.

Perhaps it is simply a perspective change. Don't think of it as being punished for a 2 point win. Think of it was being awarded with a three point win. You did something awesome - you get an extra point.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 9:11 am 
One of The Ones
One of The Ones
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:08 pm
Posts: 8395
TimmerB123 wrote:
I am one of the people who has been consciously running squads that allow you to finish in time.


You mean after Kokomo, right? ;)

Quote:
There are very tough squads out there that I refuse to play in tournaments (Eric's IG swarm, Jake K's Nom Bombs with Cad Bane) because they are too hard to finish games with regularity. This system was created to encourage people to play faster. 200 or 2 only emphasizes that point. It has become get on board or get left behind.


It really has become that. The tournament rules structure, like it or not, is predicated around the idea of being the player with the most points when the game ends, whether that be when all the opponent's pieces are defeated or when time is called.

The only real way to encourage faster play is to set caps on activations as was done in DDM. It's not an approach I would support, but nothing short of that will ever stop people from mainpulating the loophole in the system.

_________________
Click here to check out all the people who have realized the truth. Someday you will, too.

"I would really, really like to not have anything else happen at the end of the round other than things just ending." -- Sithborg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 9:20 am 
Name Calling Internet Bully
Name Calling Internet Bully
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:10 pm
Posts: 6172
Location: Gurnee, IL
TimmerB123 wrote:
NickName wrote:
I've never felt like the 60 minute time limit was enough for the typical SWM player to complete a 200 point game which was one of two reasons I opposed moving the championship to 200 points.

So the typical player is going to have to play a bit less cautiously than they prefer. Playing quickly well is a skill as much as anything else in the game. Now it's one that's being rewarded fairly heavily. Players not interested in developing that skill are unfortunately going to suffer a lot of 2 point wins.



I pulled this from another thread, but obviously it is relevant. I agree with what Nickname is saying here.

Perhaps it is simply a perspective change. Don't think of it as being punished for a 2 point win. Think of it was being awarded with a three point win. You did something awesome - you get an extra point.


Exactly. Like I told Brad yesterday, I would 100% support a 200 or 2 ruling from a judge, or a judge willing to look at a game at time and award 3 based on a clear winner being able to be determined (like a 187-100) with one piece left at low hps, or a couple of commanders left still in the back, where clearly the guy is going to win in another round or two. Either situation is acceptable to me. What is not acceptable are people reporting full wins that were 187-102 without the judge deciding that.

As the head judge, you have the power to award a full win when you deem it necessary, but that doesn't mean you have to use that power other than the issue of slow play. I'm totally fine with that. Sounds like for Gencon, we are better off going the strict route of 200 or 2, that's fine with me. It adds even another level of encouragement to finish games fully in the time limit for both players, and will hurt those players who either won't play fast enough. At Gencon we can/will have slips to sign. I'm not really sure what you all think this would actually do, but it's not an issue to have them.

Honestly, I think a much bigger issue is not this point is related to the top 4/8 games. Sure, a slow player could be eliminated in the swiss by this, but how do you stop it in the top 4/8? I've seen this actually be a potential problem without an easy fix. Generally however, the people who make the top 4/8 aren't the type of players who are really playing slow, but there it does exist that there is no motivation outside of extreme slow play/DQ threat for a player in this position.

_________________
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: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:11 am 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: Ontario
billiv15 wrote:
Honestly, I think a much bigger issue is not this point is related to the top 4/8 games. Sure, a slow player could be eliminated in the swiss by this, but how do you stop it in the top 4/8? I've seen this actually be a potential problem without an easy fix. Generally however, the people who make the top 4/8 aren't the type of players who are really playing slow, but there it does exist that there is no motivation outside of extreme slow play/DQ threat for a player in this position.

Yes, wasn't that a factor at last year's Championship playoffs? Once you're in the Top 8/4, you really have no incentive to play quickly anymore, other than honor and sportsmanship.

Around that time, someone suggested that perhaps the time limit could be increased for the Top 8/4, but the idea was quickly pushed aside.

Instead, I wonder if we could somehow establish a greater judge's prerogative in the Top 8/4, where the judge (or maybe 2 judges) keeps track of the speed of the games and adds as many rounds as he wants to. That might help to encourage players to play faster if they're in the lead, because they wouldn't want to have a "surprise round" added when they're up by 22 pts.

_________________
"Try not! Do, or do not. Thereisnotry." --Yoda


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Clearing up confusion about 3/2 pt scoring system
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:45 am 
Major Tierce
Major Tierce

Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 11:21 pm
Posts: 4268
I like the judge to have the ability to make judgement calls. If I have defeated all your damage dealers and all you have is "100 points of commanders" in the back and I have dominated gambit (and we have played a good number of rounds) and finally in 1 hr time eliminated your final threats is it fair to me that the game is 130-77 and I only get a 2 point win because there are 100 points of commanders in the back.

Many squads are based around high-point commanders / tech pieces who don't engage or if they do engage it is as a last resort.

Jaster/Lobot/Atris/Thrawn/Mas/Panaka/Ozzel/Dodonna/Reiken/etc. IMO if I have defeated all my opps attackers (and it will take some high nu,ber of crits by my opps command squad and a same number of misses by me) then it should be a 3 pt win even if the score is 130-70.

_________________
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: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:51 am 
Name Calling Internet Bully
Name Calling Internet Bully
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:10 pm
Posts: 6172
Location: Gurnee, IL
@Jason - the judge does have that power. I think Brad is saying he prefers in the future not to use it (which is key since he's the head judge for the championship). I too think the judge should use some leeway, but I'm also fine with a judge doing as Brad is suggesting. Really the issue is consistency more than anything else. As long as the same rules are applying to everyone, it isn't going to be a major issue.

As a general rule of thumb, I consider the score needing to be above 180 when time is called for awarding 3pts, barring of course slow play issues. It has to be obvious to me that the guy is going to hit the build total in a couple of rounds with ease (kill one piece, 2 rounds of gambit, yada yada yada). I would definitely not support a 130-77 game as a legitimate 3pt win, no matter what is remaining.

_________________
Image

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


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

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 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