• Enraged
  • Embarrased
  • Drunk
  • Down
  • Depressed
  • Crying
  • Crazy
  • Cool
  • Cocky
  • Bemused
  • Awesome
  • Annoyed
  • Angry
  • Amused
  • Friendly
  • Geeky
  • Godly
  • Happy
  • Hateful
  • Hungry
  • Innocent
  • Meh
  • Piratey
  • Poorly
  • Sad
  • Secret
  • Shy
  • Sneaky
  • Tired
  • Wtf
  • Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
    Results 1 to 10 of 128

    Thread: Flip Frenzy Scoring/calculation idea

    1. #1
      robm's Avatar
      robm is offline
      This user has no status.
       
      ----
       

      Join Date
      Dec 2008
      State
      Townsville
      Posts
      3,238
      Mentioned
      174 Post(s)
      Quoted
      742 Post(s)

      Flip Frenzy Scoring/calculation idea

      All,

      With concerns (particularly with IFPA) about the flip frenzy format and ability to 'throw' games and not in the spirit of IFPA comps, wondering if there is a way to calculate final scores through a formula that evens things out.

      I know @Ryza mentioned an idea on H2H about penalising losses by more - and that might work (eg: lose 0.5 point for a loss).

      Its been a while since i've gotten right into maths equations, but surely there is a way to create a formula that would account for the win:loss ratio and somehow consider the total number of games played. I guess my thinking is that if someone gets selected on longer games, and is a very good player and say they have 8 wins and 0 losses, most would think this player is 'better' than someone who drew all short games and had 10 wins and 7 losses. So therefore the greatest reward should go to the person with the highest ratio or wins:losses, not the person who drew the most short games.

      Eg: The formula could look like:

      ((Number or wins/number of losses + 1)/total number of games played) x 100


      1. The only reason i put a "+1" there was if someone had a perfect run, it would result in a division by 0 which doesn't work. Would be keen for someone with sharper maths skills to have a look and work out something that creates an even distribution.

      2. I put a x 100 there, otherwise you end up with small decimals - could also be x 1000.

      I think the feeling is pretty universal that flip frenzy is a super fun format, so we would all like it to stay. The only danger of my suggestion (if it works mathematically), is it becomes a little complicated to explain.

      Thoughts? @ifpapinball

    2. #2
      nich2pat's Avatar
      nich2pat is offline
      This user has no status.
       
      ----
       

      Join Date
      May 2013
      State
      NSW
      Posts
      875
      Mentioned
      91 Post(s)
      Quoted
      494 Post(s)
      Australia
      What are the concerns about throwing games? Cant a player concede if they think they are too far behind and don't think they will be able to catch up? Is that what you mean about throwing games? I thought that was part of the idea of flip frenzy, play as many games as you can.

      I always struggle with purposely ending a game when I am playing well. At Melbourne Flip Frenzy against Rob Singh we both had great games on Walking Dead and I ended up on the high score table.

      So if we look at the Brisbane Master Flip Frenzy's: is this the equation you would see?

      FLIP FRENZY SATURDAY (95 players)
      1. Michael Costalos (18-6) - (18/7x100) = 257 - 3rd
      2. Paul Jones (17-6) - (17/7x100) = 242 - 4th
      3. Grant Stephens (17-7) - (17/8x100) = 212 - 6th
      4. Luke Marburg (17-8) - (17/9x100) = 188 - 7th
      5. Pat Nichols (16-5) - (16/6x100) = 266 - 1st
      5. Richard Rhodes (16-5) - (16/6x100) = 266 1st
      7. Peter Watt (16-6) - (16/7x100) = 228 - 5th
      8. Thibaut Allender (16-8) - (16/9x100) = 177 - 8th
      8. David Loewy (16-8) - (16/9x100) = 177 - 8th

      This would then change the placings so that the people with a better win/loss ratio would move up. Would this cause a problem say if a player has 5 or 10 wins in a row and then mysteriously disappears for a while only to return right at the end with an unbeaten record? Just a hypothetical but I'm sure there are people out there who would do this. I really like this idea of not just awarding the person with the greatest number of wins, but takes into account the fewest losses as well. As you say Rob, there are probably those here with better maths skills than us who could find a fair equation to work things out. Total number of games played would probably need to be factored in to the equation somewhere...


      FLIP FRENZY SUNDAY (84 players)
      1. Paul Jones (19-5) - (19/6x100) = 316 - 1st
      2. Mike Pascale (19-6) - (19/7x100) = 271 - 3rd
      3. Pat Nichols (18-5) - (18/6x100) = 300 - 2nd
      4. Richard Rhodes (18-7) - (18/8x100) = 225 - 4th
      4. Chris Wade (18-7) - (18/8x100) = 225 - 4th
      6. Connor Stowe (18-8) - (18/9x100) = 200 - 6th
      7. Grant Stephens (18-9) - (18/10x100) = 180 - 7th
      8. William Gill (18-10) - (18/11x100) = 163 - 8th

    3. #3
      Michi's Avatar
      Michi is offline
      is having a status just so he
      doesn't have no status.
       
      ----
       

      Join Date
      Mar 2016
      State
      Queensland
      Posts
      1,732
      Mentioned
      88 Post(s)
      Quoted
      619 Post(s)
      Australia
      Quote Originally Posted by nich2pat View Post
      What are the concerns about throwing games? Cant a player concede if they think they are too far behind and don't think they will be able to catch up? Is that what you mean about throwing games? I thought that was part of the idea of flip frenzy, play as many games as you can.

      I always struggle with purposely ending a game when I am playing well. At Melbourne Flip Frenzy against Rob Singh we both had great games on Walking Dead and I ended up on the high score table.
      You are free to concede a game any time you like. That's not against IFPA rules. You can do that in a Flip Frenzy, or any other tournament format.

      The concern is that people can agree to play only one ball and let that determine the result. Because there is no penalty for losses, there is a huge advantage to having short games. But agreeing to play only one ball is collusion (as opposed to conceding a game if you think there is no chance of winning it in reasonable time). And collusion is against the rules because it gives the colluding players an unfair advantage (a shorter game than it would have been otherwise).

      And, yes, it sucks when I'm having the ball 1 of my life on Addam's and let it drain with > 100 million on the score board, just so I get away from the game…

      Michi.
      May the pinballs tumble in your direction!

    4. #4
      capsule's Avatar
      capsule is online now
      is draining
       
      Drunk
       

      Join Date
      Oct 2014
      State
      Brisbane, QLD
      Posts
      323
      Mentioned
      9 Post(s)
      Quoted
      121 Post(s)
      Australia
      Quote Originally Posted by nich2pat View Post
      Would this cause a problem say if a player has 5 or 10 wins in a row and then mysteriously disappears for a while only to return right at the end with an unbeaten record? Just a hypothetical but I'm sure there are people out there who would do this.
      Yes, that. You don't need to disappear, just concede all your games.
      I actually had an amazing run for the first 2 hours in one of the frenzy with only 2 losses, but tanked the last. I could have conceded all my games and win it using this calculation.

    5. #5
      robm's Avatar
      robm is offline
      This user has no status.
       
      ----
       

      Join Date
      Dec 2008
      State
      Townsville
      Posts
      3,238
      Mentioned
      174 Post(s)
      Quoted
      742 Post(s)

      Quote Originally Posted by nich2pat View Post
      What are the concerns about throwing games? Cant a player concede if they think they are too far behind and don't think they will be able to catch up? Is that what you mean about throwing games? I thought that was part of the idea of flip frenzy, play as many games as you can.

      I always struggle with purposely ending a game when I am playing well. At Melbourne Flip Frenzy against Rob Singh we both had great games on Walking Dead and I ended up on the high score table.

      So if we look at the Brisbane Master Flip Frenzy's: is this the equation you would see?

      FLIP FRENZY SATURDAY (95 players)
      1. Michael Costalos (18-6) - (18/7x100) = 257 - 3rd
      2. Paul Jones (17-6) - (17/7x100) = 242 - 4th
      3. Grant Stephens (17-7) - (17/8x100) = 212 - 6th
      4. Luke Marburg (17-8) - (17/9x100) = 188 - 7th
      5. Pat Nichols (16-5) - (16/6x100) = 266 - 1st
      5. Richard Rhodes (16-5) - (16/6x100) = 266 1st
      7. Peter Watt (16-6) - (16/7x100) = 228 - 5th
      8. Thibaut Allender (16-8) - (16/9x100) = 177 - 8th
      8. David Loewy (16-8) - (16/9x100) = 177 - 8th

      This would then change the placings so that the people with a better win/loss ratio would move up. Would this cause a problem say if a player has 5 or 10 wins in a row and then mysteriously disappears for a while only to return right at the end with an unbeaten record? Just a hypothetical but I'm sure there are people out there who would do this. I really like this idea of not just awarding the person with the greatest number of wins, but takes into account the fewest losses as well. As you say Rob, there are probably those here with better maths skills than us who could find a fair equation to work things out. Total number of games played would probably need to be factored in to the equation somewhere...


      FLIP FRENZY SUNDAY (84 players)
      1. Paul Jones (19-5) - (19/6x100) = 316 - 1st
      2. Mike Pascale (19-6) - (19/7x100) = 271 - 3rd
      3. Pat Nichols (18-5) - (18/6x100) = 300 - 2nd
      4. Richard Rhodes (18-7) - (18/8x100) = 225 - 4th
      4. Chris Wade (18-7) - (18/8x100) = 225 - 4th
      6. Connor Stowe (18-8) - (18/9x100) = 200 - 6th
      7. Grant Stephens (18-9) - (18/10x100) = 180 - 7th
      8. William Gill (18-10) - (18/11x100) = 163 - 8th
      Pat - i think you missed my part of the equation that had the ratio divided by the number of games - which you noted should be included. That should then account if someone 'mysteriously dissappears!". I don't have time to run some quick scenarios to see how it works out at the moment though

      - - - Updated - - -

      Quote Originally Posted by capsule View Post
      Yes, that. You don't need to disappear, just concede all your games.
      I actually had an amazing run for the first 2 hours in one of the frenzy with only 2 losses, but tanked the last. I could have conceded all my games and win it using this calculation.
      Not sure about that. Say you had 10 wins and 2 losses in first 2 hours, so that is (10/3)/120*100 = 1.6 ****i'm making up the 120 as total number of games****

      Then, if you conceded (i'm assuming you mean deliberately drain and lose) the next 5 games, that would mean the calculation would be (10/8)/120*100 = 1.19

      ie: you are worse off by conceding games, and i think the ratio of wins/losses divided by total number of games overcomes the ability to skew the result by deliberately losing, and does not punish someone who gets drawn a long playing game

    6. #6
      capsule's Avatar
      capsule is online now
      is draining
       
      Drunk
       

      Join Date
      Oct 2014
      State
      Brisbane, QLD
      Posts
      323
      Mentioned
      9 Post(s)
      Quoted
      121 Post(s)
      Australia
      Quote Originally Posted by robm View Post
      you are worse off by conceding games

      Yeah sorry, my bad, I was not thinking straight. Indeed, you would have to disappear (which has happened, some players could not stay for the full length of the Frenzy), they are then removed from the queue or bumped back at the end of the queue if they don't show up on the game.

    7. #7
      robm's Avatar
      robm is offline
      This user has no status.
       
      ----
       

      Join Date
      Dec 2008
      State
      Townsville
      Posts
      3,238
      Mentioned
      174 Post(s)
      Quoted
      742 Post(s)

      Quote Originally Posted by capsule View Post
      Yeah sorry, my bad, I was not thinking straight. Indeed, you would have to disappear (which has happened, some players could not stay for the full length of the Frenzy), they are then removed from the queue or bumped back at the end of the queue if they don't show up on the game.
      Yep, and that is easy to manage... Just state in the rules you get a loss if you are not available for you game at any time and next person in the queue gets your playing position

      Sent from my ALP-L29 using Tapatalk

    8. #8
      Michi's Avatar
      Michi is offline
      is having a status just so he
      doesn't have no status.
       
      ----
       

      Join Date
      Mar 2016
      State
      Queensland
      Posts
      1,732
      Mentioned
      88 Post(s)
      Quoted
      619 Post(s)
      Australia
      Another thing regarding the frenzies is that they seem to be worth too much. I'm saying this because the luck factor can be huge in a flip frenzy. I've gotten a place in a flip frenzy more than once because I was lucky: started with a game straight up instead of starting in the queue, getting mostly short-playing games, and getting mostly opponents who were weaker players than me. The luck of the draw can be more important than the skill of the player.

      Relative to the achievement of placing in the top three, I got too many points for those frenzies, IMO. When you contrast a flip frenzy that is, say, worth 15 points with, say, Flipswitch, also worth 15 points, Flipswitch is much harder to win, takes longer, and is far more a reflection of skill than a flip frenzy (at least on average).

      I think it would be reasonable to maybe halve the number of points that frenzies are worth at the moment, or even make them worth only 1/3rd of their current value. That way, the focus would be moved more towards what the format was intended for, namely, to play a lot of fun games in a fixed amount of time, and to make the comp attractive for people who are new to competitive pinball. As is, the frenzies are too much of a point harvesting fest for the better players.

      Michi.
      Last edited by Michi; 10th August 2018 at 12:49 PM.
      May the pinballs tumble in your direction!

    9. #9
      ItsUrFeminitzNYImNietYoma's Avatar
      ItsUrFeminitzNYImNietYoma is online now
      is puttin' his thing down,
      flippin' it and reversin' it!
      (watch?v=Xm-nxmUIfEM), but has
      finished serving 1 YEAR for
      Flatulism
       
      Meh
       

      Join Date
      May 2014
      State
      Poodegrah Vic
      Posts
      1,909
      Mentioned
      75 Post(s)
      Quoted
      792 Post(s)
      Australia
      FF was introduced to me as a fun/not too serious side tournament for non tournament players who don't do tournaments because they feel they're not good enough to compete or they don't like the 'serious' tournament vibe.

      The emphasis was on fun.

      You guys are now turning it into a serious tournament.
      My mission (if I choose to accept it ) is to find every TZ on the planet and get them corrected if their caps are in the wrong order. Hardest part will be getting the flyer corrected

    10. #10
      nich2pat's Avatar
      nich2pat is offline
      This user has no status.
       
      ----
       

      Join Date
      May 2013
      State
      NSW
      Posts
      875
      Mentioned
      91 Post(s)
      Quoted
      494 Post(s)
      Australia
      Quote Originally Posted by Michi View Post
      Another thing regarding the frenzies is that they seem to be worth too much. I'm saying this because the luck factor can be huge in a flip frenzy. I've gotten a place in a flip frenzy more than once because I was lucky: started with a game straight up instead of starting in the queue, getting mostly short-playing games, and getting mostly opponents who were weaker players than me. The luck of the draw can be more important than the skill of the player.

      ...As is, the frenzies are too much of a point harvesting fest for the better players.
      Michi.
      Sometimes it is better to be starting in the queue as you go in to your first game against a player who has already lost and if you win you will be staying on that machine. Possibly having 2 quick wins in a row.

      You are saying that the luck of the draw can be more important than the skill of the player, but then go on to say that frenzies are a harvesting fest for better players. So which is it? Luck or skill? Couldn't you then say that all tournaments are just point harvesting fests for better players?

    Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast

    Thread Information

    Users Browsing this Thread

    There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

    Similar Threads

    1. Flip Frenzy #16 at Netherworld - 5th of May from 9am
      By Jimmy Nails in forum Pinball Competitions, Tournaments and Leagues.
      Replies: 9
      Last Post: 5th May 2018, 05:58 AM
    2. Flip Frenzy #4 at Netherworld
      By Jimmy Nails in forum Pinball Competitions, Tournaments and Leagues.
      Replies: 28
      Last Post: 7th May 2017, 08:24 AM
    3. Flip Frenzy #3 at Netherworld
      By Jimmy Nails in forum Pinball Competitions, Tournaments and Leagues.
      Replies: 4
      Last Post: 4th April 2017, 07:21 PM
    4. Pinball HQ Flip Frenzy
      By DOG in forum Pinball Competitions, Tournaments and Leagues.
      Replies: 34
      Last Post: 1st February 2017, 01:42 AM
    5. Flip Frenzy Sydney
      By nich2pat in forum Pinball Competitions, Tournaments and Leagues.
      Replies: 154
      Last Post: 1st November 2016, 07:16 PM

    Tags for this Thread

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •