Nullpo Tetris League: SEASON TWO HAS BEGUN

[ManOfMiracles]

I'm in as MoM
Nullpo- 34.04

[cubixcreature]

Sign Me Up!

BB - 32.41
Nullpo - 32.38

[Anonymous]

I'll join c:

although I might be really busy this semester, but most likely I will play!

anonymous : 27.20 seconds

[Dakhath]

Sure, why not?

TF: 52.08
Nullpo: 51.56

[crzy242]

crzy242 - sign me up with 29.05 on BB

[coolmaninsano]

crzy242 - sign me up with 29.05 on BB

I thought you had 27.79?

[crzy242]

I thought you had 27.79?

i dont use instant AR anymore

[Magnanimous]

Joining.

43.26 NP

[myndzi]

Re: points

First, decide what qualities you want to consider "the best player", then decide how to translate that into numbers.

Most games won makes the most sense to me, with win margin as a tie-breaker. There's no necessity to merge the two factors into one system.

If you want people who have played fewer games to be able to rank higher than people who have played more games, then some sort of points system is called for. If you do not want that, then you should avoid points systems.

If you decide to use a points system and allow people who have played fewer games to rank higher than people who have played more games, you have to decide at what point you want one to overtake the other, and that will tell you how many points to award for wins and losses.

For example, if you want a player who played 7 games and won by an average of 5 points to rank higher than a player who played 8 games and won by an average of 3 points, you can use a formula:

7g + 5k = 8g + 3k

to determine the point where they overlap. In this case, k = g/2, so you would choose values of k and g such that the left side overbalances the right side by say, 1 point.

g = 15, k = 8 ->
7(15) + 5(8) = 145
8(15) + 3(8) = 144

Now you have a scoring system where the threshold for a one game disadvantage to win is an average score margin of 2 or greater.

Cool, huh? :)

As for losing games, math can be applied to that, too, I'm certain - but I don't have the time to do it all up.

The important thing is that, if you want to have three score factors, you need to decide how important each one is, then the points are easy.

[Rosti_LFC]

If you want people who have played fewer games to be able to rank higher than people who have played more games, then some sort of points system is called for. If you do not want that, then you should avoid points systems.

For clarity, I'm perfectly fine with that happening. The ability for people with fewer games to rank above people with higher games is pretty much a necessity if I also want people to gain meaningful points from playing matches, because otherwise more games played = more points, regardless of relative win/loss ratios.

Ideally with small divisions all the matches will all get played anyway (which almost certainly won't happen lower down, but I'd expect the higher divisions to get close to it), and the number of games played becomes irrelevant anyway.

[jemm_4]

I guess I'm in:
Nullpo: jemm_4-53.18
TF: HD_jemm_4- 58.84

[larrytetris]

TF: 41.76
Nullpo: 39.95

HR_Larry on TF, Larry on nullpo

____________________________

Re: Scoring

Perhaps have RP (ranking points) won = 15 - |15-Winning score| + |15-Losing Score|

What this accounts for:
-A "normal" win, i.e. winning score of 15, is not penalized.
-Win by 2 abuse prevention
-"Luck" matches (i.e. Overtime) are rewarded less
-Greater reward for larger score gap

You could also have RP secondary to Win points (2 for win, 0 for loss), or vice versa, to break ties.

[coolmaninsano]

Two points for a win, one for an overtime loss, and zero for a "regulation" loss.

[Paradox]

59.99 TF time

or you can use 28.407 from keyblox. Up to you.

[larrytetris]

Two points for a win, one for an overtime loss, and zero for a "regulation" loss.

For robotics, in the situation of a tie, it'd go 1-1 for Win points, so I'm not sure for a close win. I don't like that a match awards 3 points rather than 2 though. perhaps 3 for regulation win, 2 for OT win, 1 for OT loss, 0 for regulation loss.

Does the RP formula make sense though?