[jojobinks]

week 7 results:



overall standings through week 7:

psname/chiptalk name Total points
1 spacemonkey 150
2 pokerdwarf 125
3 deanmoriarty (smoore) 115
4 VARoadsttr 105
4 scottoc 105
4 conradperil (puzzlemonkey) 105
7 double eagle 90
8 hunterking 85
9 captlego 80
10 occabid (x-files) 75
10 johnny5 75
10 lilil (JM) 75
13 ky70 70
13 mattythatguy 70
15 mwfeldman (jojobinks) 65
15 debaser (tenpercenter) 65
17 darvcus (speakeasy) 55
18 chicagosox 50
18 mspatton 50
20 triple-dd 45
20 hachkc 45
20 seitz333 45
20 technoguru 45
24 Omar 40
24 philly14 (philthethrill) 40
24 guyfox 40
27 deckard26354 35
28 maineyankee7 30
28 pjoner 30
30 daveyboy808 25
30 pietaster 25
30 flomby (fast frank) 25
30 fredcgarvin (Jldecarlo) 25
30 Wooderson 25
35 jlockwood 20
35 dag69 20
35 ericpop 20
35 lkahn (yaw) 20
35 phiace 20
35 sweeptheleg 20
35 warewulf619 20
42 craiture (fins) 15
43 scottwire 10
43 deejay 10
43 niagraallin 10
43 mfrasc (who's this?) 10
47 rheddsontilt 5
47 gte792i 5
47 bpchips.com 5
47 murf2073 5
47 3rdworldlove 5
47 clonexx 5
47 justinhem104 5
47 other-1 5
47 phil_primo 5
47 pokercracker 5
47 steph16mtl2 5
47 steveb334 5
47 temujin (tomhimself) 5
47 thekamikaze 5
47 theredwave 5
47 tommyjr. 5
47 txpyup 5
47 txwiz 5
47 will4445 5
47 xproffesorx (deuce) 5


i fixed your points, JM. i've been emailing the spreadsheet to matthythatguy each week, and i'd be happy to do the same to anyone else that's interested (plus i feel more comfortable if there's oversight). let me know.

to all...let's talk about where this thing is gonna go. should this run through december, and then have a TOC in january some time? should we eliminated X number of each players worst performances? should we adjust the points payout scale if we start getting more players? are there other tweaks we need?

talk it up out there!

[chipper57AA]

Good topic for discussion jojo - and thanks for posting the on-going stats.

I'm certainly open for extending this tournament series out a ways but not sure if we should go all the way out to a year. Perhaps shorten it to 4 months and do a mini-TOC for the top 9 players. Then the top 3 from each 4-month mini-TOC would make up a final 9 TOC at the end of the year.

As for throwing out scores, if we do a 4-month run (16 weeks + 1 week for the mini-TOC) we could throw out the worst 6 scores. This way you could miss 6 tournaments or a combination and get rid of a few of those early exit showings.

If you happen to get in the top 3 at the mini-TOC more than once then you'd still only get 1 seat at the final TOC - but it would just eliminate 1 seat from competing against you.

That way, if some people happened to have a bad start, they could start over each 4 months and have another shot at it.

As for the stakes for the mini-TOC and the final TOC, perhaps the mini-TOC stakes could be $20 and the final TOC could be $50.

Thoughts?

[jojobinks]

Originally Posted by chipper57AA

Good topic for discussion jojo - and thanks for posting the on-going stats.

I'm certainly open for extending this tournament series out a ways but not sure if we should go all the way out to a year. Perhaps shorten it to 4 months and do a mini-TOC for the top 9 players. Then the top 3 from each 4-month mini-TOC would make up a final 9 TOC at the end of the year.

As for throwing out scores, if we do a 4-month run (16 weeks + 1 week for the mini-TOC) we could throw out the worst 6 scores. This way you could miss 6 tournaments or a combination and get rid of a few of those early exit showings.

If you happen to get in the top 3 at the mini-TOC more than once then you'd still only get 1 seat at the final TOC - but it would just eliminate 1 seat from competing against you.

That way, if some people happened to have a bad start, they could start over each 4 months and have another shot at it.

As for the stakes for the mini-TOC and the final TOC, perhaps the mini-TOC stakes could be $20 and the final TOC could be $50.

Thoughts?

that's a cool idea. i think going a year is fair, and allows people to make up lots of ground, but from a psychological standpoint, restarting is a good idea. and it will encourage new people to join up as the year goes on.

[hachkc]

Two thoughts, about all I'm good for today:

1. I like the 3 4-month mini-TOC's with a final TOC at the end of the year. The top 3 from each mini-TOC advance to the final.

2. How about splitting the TOC entries between the top total points for all tournies (5 places) and then the top average points per tourney with some minimum number of appearances (4 places). This rewards those that play about every week but don't necessary place high and those that place high but can't make it every week.

[chipper57AA]

restarting is a good idea. and it will encourage new people to join up as the year goes on.

Exactly, if we want the number of players to keep growing you have to have a couple of entry points available throughout the year, else after X number of weeks in a year-long tourney you won't get any more new players joining in.

[JM]

Originally Posted by jojobinks

i fixed your points, JM. i've been emailing the spreadsheet to matthythatguy each week, and i'd be happy to do the same to anyone else that's interested (plus i feel more comfortable if there's oversight). let me know.

Thanks jojo! Can we post a sticky in this forum that shows how the points are done. I tried to find that thread, but can't remember where it was. I think it would be handy for others who are thinking of joining in, paricularly with the talk about a TOC.

[SpaceMonkey]

I like the dwarf's idea of 4 month periods, and mini ToC's leading up to a year end ToC. I like the escalation of stakes too.

I do think we should come up with a tweak to the point system for events that pay five spots.

[VARoadstter]

Ok, let me take a stab at this...

Here's a setup based on what a friend's league does that I've adapted to take into consideration the ideas of the posts already in the forum:

Year is divided up into 4 quarters.

In each quarter, your top ten finishes are used to compute points (the average quarter would be 13 weeks, so missing up to 3 events doesn't make it too difficult to qualify).

Each quarter, the top 2 players automatically qualify for the year-end tourney.

If an automatically qualified player is again in position to auto-qualify, then the next highest non-qualified player earns a spot.

At the end of the year, excluding the eight auto-qualified players, ten at large qualifiers are added to make up a final tournament of 18. The ten at large qualifiers are determined by adding together the quarterly scores and taking the ten highest (that are not already qualified).

If two tables seems to be too large then cut all the numbers of qualifiers in half so only the top 4 quarterly players plus 5 at large players make the final tourney.

Thoughts?

[imthatguy]

I'm all for this, set it up and I'll be in. I especially like the idea of throwing out the worst score!

[Spaceman Spiff]

Originally Posted by VARoadstter

Year is divided up into 4 quarters.

In each quarter, your top ten finishes are used to compute points (the average quarter would be 13 weeks, so missing up to 3 events doesn't make it too difficult to qualify).

Each quarter, the top 2 players automatically qualify for the year-end tourney.

(DETAILS SNIPPED)

Thoughts?

I think this sounds like a great format. The auto-qualifiers into the final works well. If we're assuming that the tourneys will grow, I don't think 2 tables for the big finish is too much. Hell, even if numbers stay around where they are or a little higher, I still think it would be nice if there were a lot of qualifiers for the final game. If it's too restrictive, I think you will lose people mid-season that are basically already out of it.

Definitely having things on a quarter system is key. There's still something to shoot for over the course of a year, but you're not completely out of it with one bad quarter.