SpielByWeb Forum Index SpielByWeb
http://www.spielbyweb.com/
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   Find a UserFind a User   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 Your GamesYour Games   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

4 player Tournament 15 draw
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SpielByWeb Forum Index -> Hacienda
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Joshuaaaaaa



Joined: 15 Oct 08
Posts: 85

Location: Lovely Las Vegas, NV

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey, for my 1st tourney, I'll take a 10th place finish.
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Zaui



Joined: 29 Mar 06
Posts: 120

Location: Sandy, Utah, USA

PostPosted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GamesOnTheBrain wrote:
Also, half-points in the totals column are given to players who tie a winning score but lose on the money tie-breaker.

Just noticed IBX won two games on $ tie-breaks.
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message Send e-mail
Kanga



Joined: 27 Oct 05
Posts: 1503

Location: Moe, Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 1:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

40/42 done. The last two games dont affect the final placements.

tphon, almondralf, Kanga and Games play in the final.

tphon creates a v0 game, ralf the V1, I get the V2 and Games the V1,2 game.

Game name:
4player T15 Final A/B/C/D
password: final

Map: your choice, or, if you dont want to choose... here are some suggestions:

514
117
497
493
271

Standings:

Code:
Player                 Played    Wins      Total 
tphon                  6         5         30     
almondralf             6         4         21     
Kanga                  6         4         28     
GamesOnTheBrain        6         4         36 
   
Dobinator              6         4         53     
marcx                  6         3         20.5   
IBX                    6         3         44     
gische                 5         2         34     
cterrell               6         2         55     
Joshuaaaaaa            6         2         81     
borisumi               5         1         107   
NoMoreCheese           6         1         62.5   
skk7878                6         1         76     
Payton3434             6         1         85     
Adriaan Pieters        6         1         108   
Zaui                   6         1         111.5 
mooka                  6         1         115   
danbar1963             4         0         86     
brianlcarr             5         0         35.5   
lindalait              5         0         91     
yahkeh                 5         0         115   
Alashar                5         0         130   
kxw                    6         0         72.5   
Early_10               6         0         76     
swok                   6         0         85     
BryJones               6         0         142   
kekeweb                6         0         156   
ats2630                6         0         315   
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message Send e-mail
Dobinator



Joined: 18 Jul 07
Posts: 383

Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 3:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Can't believe I don't make the final with four wins. Sad

If I'm griping, using the margin of loss for tiebreaks is only one indicator of skill, and not always a telling one - I had one game here where I was blocked by several opponents, so I couldn't score anything, and ended up with a big deficit. Conversely, in another game, I won by like 15. It might be fairer to also give tiebreak points for margin of victory over the nearest opponent in wins.

Under the current system, you get lots of credit for coming in a close second, but no credit for a runaway victory, and both of those seem identical indicators of skill to me. The runaway victory even more, maybe, because often you achieve a narrow margin of loss if the other guy buys out animals to finish, even though you weren't really that close to winning.

Overall positions, like Gad uses in Amun Re, is maybe even better, if harder to keep track of.

OK, sour grapes mode off. Good luck to the finalists.
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message
Kanga



Joined: 27 Oct 05
Posts: 1503

Location: Moe, Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 5:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dobinator wrote:
Can't believe I don't make the final with four wins. Sad

If I'm griping, using the margin of loss for tiebreaks is only one indicator of skill, and not always a telling one - I had one game here where I was blocked by several opponents, so I couldn't score anything, and ended up with a big deficit. Conversely, in another game, I won by like 15. It might be fairer to also give tiebreak points for margin of victory over the nearest opponent in wins.

Under the current system, you get lots of credit for coming in a close second, but no credit for a runaway victory, and both of those seem identical indicators of skill to me. The runaway victory even more, maybe, because often you achieve a narrow margin of loss if the other guy buys out animals to finish, even though you weren't really that close to winning.

Overall positions, like Gad uses in Amun Re, is maybe even better, if harder to keep track of.

OK, sour grapes mode off. Good luck to the finalists.


no matter what system I use there's plusses / minuses. Using placings theoretically encourages people to play for second rather than try to catch the leader if there's a runaway leader.

Also placings dont distinguish a narrow loss from a big loss.

In practice I doubt it matters much which system I use. Adding in winning margins is an interesting idea, not sure how practical it is.
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message Send e-mail
tphon



Joined: 02 Nov 07
Posts: 219

Location: Wirral, England

PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 6:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dobinator wrote:
Can't believe I don't make the final with four wins. Sad


Should have gone for the five, to be sure Laughing Laughing

It just doesn't seem right that topping the chart has no bonus for the final.
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message
Kanga



Joined: 27 Oct 05
Posts: 1503

Location: Moe, Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 7:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tphon wrote:
Dobinator wrote:
Can't believe I don't make the final with four wins. Sad


Should have gone for the five, to be sure Laughing Laughing

It just doesn't seem right that topping the chart has no bonus for the final.


Any suggestions?
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message Send e-mail
Dobinator



Joined: 18 Jul 07
Posts: 383

Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Margin of loss is also not fair if the maps and variants aren't the same for all players - some maps tend to be much higher scoring, and variant 2 cuts down on overall scoring by a lot. Variant 1 is often lower-scoring, too, I think, depending on the map layout.

I wasn't suggesting giving partial tournament points for 2nd or 3rd - just using those placings as the tiebreakers after number of wins, since ordinal placing seems to me to be a less-random measure of prowess than margin of loss. I don't see how that would get folks to play for second.

I agree that no system is perfect, and if the margin is easier to record than something else, then that's a significant plus. Thanks for running the tournaments.
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message
Knave



Joined: 28 Jun 08
Posts: 258


PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have an idea is almost certainly unfeasible, but I like it nonetheless...

Find the mean of the margin that each placing lost by. Then, every loss is increased by an amount equal to the mean of the loss by somebody in that placing.

Hypothetical example:

At the end of the round, the mean margins of victory over each placing are as follows

1st: 0
2nd: 13
3rd: 19
4th: 27


Now, Kanga, Tphon, Dobby and Knave play a game. The final score for that game is as follows:

Kanga: 180
Tphon: 175
Dobby: 149
Knave: 148


The margins of loss are as follows

Kanga: 0
Tphon: 5
Dobby: 31
Knave: 32

Now we add the placing penalty to these margins

Kanga: 0
Tphon: 18
Dobby: 50
Knave: 59


So, Dobby only beat knave by a point, but gets a 9 point spread in the standings because he squeezed into 3rd place. More importantly though, both Knave and Dobby got smacked around appropriately for their 30+ point loss.

The above would only be a tiebreak of course. I just invented it now, so I haven't fully thought through any flaws. Some easy adjustment is possible, you can multiply either the means or the game margins by some arbitrary constant to weight one or the other higher. You can square one of the measures if you really want to punish big losses and/or poor placings.

The main drawback I see is that it would be a nightmare for the tourney organizer, but a spreadsheet could probably handle the calculations... if that is what the tourney people use for these standings. I could make the spreadsheet Smile, but I'm not entering scores or looking them up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GamesOnTheBrain



Joined: 14 Jun 07
Posts: 191

Location: Cleveland, OH

PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kanga wrote:
tphon wrote:
Dobinator wrote:
Can't believe I don't make the final with four wins. Sad


Should have gone for the five, to be sure Laughing Laughing

It just doesn't seem right that topping the chart has no bonus for the final.


Any suggestions?


One option might be... if there is a tie in the finals, the victor, rather than point differential as the tie-breaker, is the one who came in a higher rank in the qualifying round. That would give a nice advantage to the higher ranked qualifiers.

I'm not saying I'd prefer this -- I don't know what I think -- I'm just offering an option.
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message Visit poster's website
GamesOnTheBrain



Joined: 14 Jun 07
Posts: 191

Location: Cleveland, OH

PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 12:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dobinator wrote:
Margin of loss is also not fair if the maps and variants aren't the same for all players - some maps tend to be much higher scoring, and variant 2 cuts down on overall scoring by a lot. Variant 1 is often lower-scoring, too, I think, depending on the map layout.

I wasn't suggesting giving partial tournament points for 2nd or 3rd - just using those placings as the tiebreakers after number of wins, since ordinal placing seems to me to be a less-random measure of prowess than margin of loss. I don't see how that would get folks to play for second.

I agree that no system is perfect, and if the margin is easier to record than something else, then that's a significant plus. Thanks for running the tournaments.


In other words, if multiple people are tied for the final (which will likely be the case in every tournament), the tie-breaker is first, the number of second places, then thirds. If there is still a tie, then you could use point differential.

If that is what you mean, then that might be worth trying. I wonder whether it that would be easier or harder to track than point differential.
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message Visit poster's website
Dobinator



Joined: 18 Jul 07
Posts: 383

Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That is what I mean.
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message
Kanga



Joined: 27 Oct 05
Posts: 1503

Location: Moe, Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have actually paid attention to the above discussion and am toying with changing things for future tournaments.


This tournament has now concluded. Final standings:

Code:
Player                 Played    Wins      Total 
tphon                  6         5         30     
almondralf             6         4         21     
Kanga                  6         4         28     
GamesOnTheBrain        6         4         36     

Dobinator              6         4         53     
marcx                  6         3         20.5   
gische                 6         3         34     
IBX                    6         3         44     
cterrell               6         2         55     
Joshuaaaaaa            6         2         81     
NoMoreCheese           6         1         62.5   
skk7878                6         1         76     
Payton3434             6         1         85     
lindalait              6         1         91     
borisumi               6         1         108   
Adriaan Pieters        6         1         108   
Zaui                   6         1         111.5 
mooka                  6         1         115   
brianlcarr             6         0         39.5   
kxw                    6         0         72.5   
Early_10               6         0         76     
swok                   6         0         85     
yahkeh                 6         0         122   
danbar1963             6         0         130   
Alashar                6         0         137   
BryJones               6         0         142   
kekeweb                6         0         156   
ats2630                6         0         315   
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message Send e-mail
Kanga



Joined: 27 Oct 05
Posts: 1503

Location: Moe, Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The final saw my luck finally return and allowed me to win 3 out of 4.

Winner: Kanga (3 wins)


Runner up: almondralf (1 win)

Finalists: GamesOnTheBrain, tphon
Back to top
View user's profile BoardGameGeek Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SpielByWeb Forum Index -> Hacienda All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
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 vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group