UKCS

[Wayne J]

so I'm guessing you'll be managing the scores etc all manually for the finals?

Makes it much tougher for streaming but I can chat to Karl or Andreas and see if any of them would code this up for you.

Key question though is a date and location for the finals - when will this be known?

regards,
Neil.

Plan is to use the attached spreadsheet - shared as a view only Google doc so everyone has full visibility - wherever they may be. The only thing needed to be entered throughout the tournament is the machine chosen, and the actual scores - everything else is automatic - and tested!

Waiting to actually meet up with preferred initial host in the near future to discuss details.

 

[Deleted member 2463]

Microsoft excel the gift that keeps giving! - I thought you had picked a venue already would be great to know ahead of time.

 

[Wayne J]

With a spreadsheet I've written myself I know I can trust there's no bugs, or someone else's server going down, or WiFi playing up - both of which I've experienced at large tournaments.

I'm yet to have one of my spreadsheets fail me, so far

 

[Deleted member 2463]

sure, sharing without connectivity.

when do you think then venue details will be public?

 

[Wayne J]

Now that the results from Neil's have been inputted on to the IFPA website I have updated the current standings of the UKCS (post 3 in this thread).

A reminder that the next leg of the UKCS is being held at Medway Pinball on 28th May.

I also hope to be able to announce the venue and date of the final to be held early Feb 2023 shortly, along with other events that will be happening over the weekend.

 

[mufcmufc]

Shouldn’t people who only played in two events if it’s a three event weekend, have their scores divided by two?

 

[Wayne J]

Shouldn’t people who only played in two events if it’s a three event weekend, have their scores divided by two?

It was said right from the start that it was a 3 event weekend and the scores would be divided by 3. Likewise for Pinfest being 2 events, UK Open being 4 etc.
(I've just gone back and checked that I said as much in the rules - 2nd post. I did)

It's to encourage people to attend all comps, and judge who plays best over the whole event/weekend.

Over the weekend the max pts achievable was 24.87 (if you won all 3 comps) In fact Craig had the best average with 16.89

 

[Jackpot]

Shouldn’t people who only played in two events if it’s a three event weekend, have their scores divided by two?

Wayne outlined earlier it would be divided by the total number of tournaments irrespective of how many they played.

But if possible I think it should be as you suggest - the current situation penalises people who have made the effort to attend an event but can't stay for multiple days. It will be similar for the November PBR events as an example - most times those run for 4 days and tough for many to attend for the entire time period.

 

[roadshow16]

To be honest, the whole dividing thing is a little strange in my opinion. Yes there were 3 events held over the 2 days, which requires a lot of effort and time to attend. But the current system massively impacts those events going to those lengths of holding more than 1 comp. I understand it was in the rules prior, I just think it’s wrong. Surely how hard it was to win each comp has been made clear by the points awarded by the IFPA? I also get that you want to encourage people going to all the events, rather than just those holding multiple tournaments. It just seems a crazy penalty at the moment and not indicative of the actual skill involved. To win all 3 tournaments at Neil’s would be worth 7 points less than winning the one tourney at EC! That’s a bit crazy right? I think separating them into 3 separate comps would probably be fairer, but I do understand the decision that was made and why

 

[Wayne J]

Wayne outlined earlier it would be divided by the total number of tournaments irrespective of how many they played.

But if possible I think it should be as you suggest - the current situation penalises people who have made the effort to attend an event but can't stay for multiple days. It will be similar for the November PBR events as an example - most times those run for 4 days and tough for many to attend for the entire time period.

It's not penalising anybody - If you want to qualify for the finals of the UKCS you have to play the events. The more you play, the better chance you have of being able to discard a poor showing (for whatever reason).

 

[Wayne J]

The reason to divide events was so as to 1 event per venue, and to treat the weekend as an event. It would severely impact the standings if the UK Open was treated as 4 events - so much so that over a quarter of the UK players wouldn't even qualify for the overall finals due to the points being so heavily weighted. There is a significant advantage if you are playing the same machines at your local venue week in week out and then that event has 4 comps which are all classed individually.

The format is specifically designed to encourage people to travel to different events - not just rock up over 1 weekend and 'point farm' then ignore other smaller comps at newer venues, which would probably benefit from more promotion and inclusion in the UKCS.

The fact that 3 comps of Neil's didn't gain as much TGP as the event at EC is purely down to the format chosen by the host - there's not a great deal I, or anybody else can do about that!

 

[roadshow16]

The reason to divide events was so as to 1 event per venue, and to treat the weekend as an event. It would severely impact the standings if the UK Open was treated as 4 events - so much so that over a quarter of the UK players wouldn't even qualify for the overall finals due to the points being so heavily weighted. There is a significant advantage if you are playing the same machines at your local venue week in week out and then that event has 4 comps which are all classed individually.

The format is specifically designed to encourage people to travel to different events - not just rock up over 1 weekend and 'point farm' then ignore other smaller comps at newer venues, which would probably benefit from more promotion and inclusion in the UKCS.

The fact that 3 comps of Neil's didn't gain as much TGP as the event at EC is purely down to the format chosen by the host - there's not a great deal I, or anybody else can do about that!

And I respect all of those decisions and know that you make the decisions with due diligence and consideration for wanting to grow the UK scene.

I just don't think it's a true indication of skill. Which surely will always impact what the UKCS is and can be. Surely more pinball is always better, in this instance it absolutely isn't. The UKCS is actually discouraging multi day events (in terms of the points being distributed) happening which I think is wrong.

 

[Deleted member 2463]

The reason to divide events was so as to 1 event per venue, and to treat the weekend as an event. It would severely impact the standings if the UK Open was treated as 4 events - so much so that over a quarter of the UK players wouldn't even qualify for the overall finals due to the points being so heavily weighted. There is a significant advantage if you are playing the same machines at your local venue week in week out and then that event has 4 comps which are all classed individually.

I kinda predicted this stupid outcome but want to see the results first - but honest what you have written above is even funnier than my yardstick gag this week (the company isn't making them any longer), honestly Wayne read that a gain and look in the mirror. Firstly 48% of the games at the Open in 2022 didn't come from the club. Secondly, you are telling me that against world champions, European champions, national champions that you have an advantage on games that have been moved to a new location, have every tilt adjusted, different flipper rubbers, different pitches on a different surface in a different location. "hmm OK THEN!' So those who lifted their performance for the UKOpen, focused on it, practised for it and come in the top 4, maybe skips the three other comps to ensure they know the games well gets a smack in the mouth when it comes to the UKCS? Now you have to harvest the points if you want to be in the UKCS, you don't have a choice because even if you play in one event only you'll get your score divided by 4.

The format is specifically designed to encourage people to travel to different events - not just rock up over 1 weekend and 'point farm' then ignore other smaller comps at newer venues, which would probably benefit from more promotion and inclusion in the UKCS.

So will the winner of the UKCS be the person who brings a google map listing with how far they have travelled to all the events? The DOMINO Organisation will give that person £250, a special silver domino and a Kojak "Who Loves you Baby" Lollipop.

The fact that 3 comps of Neil's didn't gain as much TGP as the event at EC is purely down to the format chosen by the host - there's not a great deal I, or anybody else can do about that!

ignore the IFPA scores and use a points count back. easy as pie.

so the Monster meet is now 3 matchplay competitions with 20 rounds each, saddle up!

Cheers,
Neil.

 

[David_Vi]

Neil I think you're misunderstanding Wayne's points. I took something different from them.

Just for a differing opinion... Surely to combat the multiple events issue you'd have just picked one of the comps to count rather than the whole weekend? Eg, just the UK open main, or peoples bank. Or at Domino just one of the group Matchplay events.

So will the winner of the UKCS be the person who brings a google map listing with how far they have travelled to all the events? The DOMINO Organisation will give that person £250, a special silver domino and a Kojak "Who Loves you Baby" Lollipop.

You know that's not what Wayne means. It's to encourage people to visit different venues and helps build the UK scene. I think it's great for both players and venues.
But if you wanted to give points for distance traveled Greg's your man

 

[Deleted member 2463]

Neil I think you're misunderstanding Wayne's points. I took something different from them.

Just for a differing opinion... Surely to combat the multiple events issue you'd have just picked one of the comps to count rather than the whole weekend? Eg, just the UK open main, or peoples bank. Or at Domino just one of the group Matchplay events.

I’m looking at the maths David. the points don’t add up when you look at the maths.

You know that's not what Wayne means. It's to encourage people to visit different venues and helps build the UK scene. I think it's great for both players and venues.
But if you wanted to give points for distance traveled Greg's your man

I hope Greg likes lollipops.

 

[C&C]

To be honest, the whole dividing thing is a little strange in my opinion. Yes there were 3 events held over the 2 days, which requires a lot of effort and time to attend. But the current system massively impacts those events going to those lengths of holding more than 1 comp. I understand it was in the rules prior, I just think it’s wrong. Surely how hard it was to win each comp has been made clear by the points awarded by the IFPA? I also get that you want to encourage people going to all the events, rather than just those holding multiple tournaments. It just seems a crazy penalty at the moment and not indicative of the actual skill involved. To win all 3 tournaments at Neil’s would be worth 7 points less than winning the one tourney at EC! That’s a bit crazy right? I think separating them into 3 separate comps would probably be fairer, but I do understand the decision that was made and why

And I respect all of those decisions and know that you make the decisions with due diligence and consideration for wanting to grow the UK scene.

I just don't think it's a true indication of skill. Which surely will always impact what the UKCS is and can be. Surely more pinball is always better, in this instance it absolutely isn't. The UKCS is actually discouraging multi day events (in terms of the points being distributed) happening which I think is wrong.

Personally, I agree with everything @roadshow16 has posted.

The fact that out of 3 competitions at Neil's, Craig came 2nd in one and won another, gaining a total of 50.67 IFPA points, yet gets 16.89 UKCS points, whereas @Jackpot came 3rd in the one Electric Circus event and gets 19.91 UKCS points doesn't accurately reflect the level of difficulty involved. I mean, even 4th place at EC was worth 16.63 points!

Looking forward to the UK Open, it's entirely possible (mathematically) that someone could win the main competition, beating some of the best players in the world, (taking Peter Anderson's score from last year of 75.42 points), and end up with 18.75 UKCS points, less than 3rd place at the EC event.

Don't get me wrong, I do understand that the rules were set at the start of this year, and that for 2023, the rules are the rules.
I also understand that the aim of the UKCS is to promote pinball and encourage people to go to as many different venues as possible.

I think it's also the case that when the rules were decided, they probably seemed ok, but as the season unfolds and actual scores are recorded, the reality then becomes far clearer.

I'm not claiming to have any answers to what should happen in 2024 (I don't), and I also understand that if multi competition events were counted individually, then someone just attending a few of these could score highly and there would perhaps be a disincentive to travel to more single comp events, which is counter to the aim of the UKCS.

I just think that given how things are panning out for 2023, there should be some careful thought put in to revising the rules for 2024 to achieve a more balanced outcome than the picture that is unfolding for this season.

 

[robotgreg]

So will the winner of the UKCS be the person who brings a google map listing with how far they have travelled to all the events? The DOMINO Organisation will give that person £250, a special silver domino and a Kojak "Who Loves you Baby" Lollipop.

I hope Greg likes lollipops.

I like the £250 and silver domino that you also mentioned earlier

 

[robotgreg]

Regarding all the earlier comments about dividng the points at a multi comp event, I think the reason Wayne has done this is due to the unbalanced impact that the Open and to a lesser extent PInfest have on the overall standings.

The UKCS is meant to be representative of a selection of comps (so far 10) during the year not just one or two events.

I ran the figures using WPPR points for last year (and no dividing) which resulted in 10 of the top 20 being NON UK players purely because they attended and did well at the Open. Surely this is not right that you can attend one event and qualify highly in the UKCS. Furthermore, although Andy attended several UKCS events, he only scored well at Pinfest and UK Open and came top of the UKCS standings purely on these two events alone (214 WPPRs). Again this is not what the UKCS was set up to achieve. Is Andy the best player in the UK? - yes. Should be top of the UKCS by having done very well at two events only? - I would say no.

I've attached the file so you can see the analysis.

Whilst Wayne's dividing WPPR by no of comps at an event is not perfect it goes some way to alleviate the imbalance of having two huge WPPR events vs all the other UKCS ones during the year.

 

[Wayne J]

It should be noted that the EC competition had 59 competitors as opposed to 44 at Domino. It also had a TGP of 112% rather than the 88% at Domino.

The pts achieved are based on IFPAs calculations per comp.

By having each comp counting rather than the average it can be too much of a detriment if you are unable to attend a comp for any particular reason. It will also increase the total number of comps available to be counted, meaning you can drop more, thus making the lower scoring comps virtually meaningless.

To qualify for the finals of the UKCS - you should expect to have to play across the country in many events.

If you don't want to, or can't, travel to many events for whatever reason - so be it.

The format will not be changing.

 

[Jackpot]

...I'm slashing the odds on a Dan Lewell, Gene Aw or Greg Mott UKCS win. Get your bets in quickly...

 

[Deleted member 2463]

So Greg - none of the UK players that went to Switzerland this year should not have been allowed to go because they only went to one event?!

 

[Deleted member 2463]

I'd buy Wayne's explanation but why is the UK league finals which is held at Daventry singled out as an event different to the Pinfest events? Oh I know why - WWJ hypocrisy. They are all at UKPinfest over the weekend, what a shambles.

Anyway, I'm out - enjoy this ****ed up, half baked format folks!

Neil.

 

[Deleted member 2463]

(and I'll still give the real prizes for those who travel the furthest which is the only valid competition in this farce). There will also be Kojak lollipops for the who are second and third.

 

[C&C]

Regarding all the earlier comments about dividng the points at a multi comp event, I think the reason Wayne has done this is due to the unbalanced impact that the Open and to a lesser extent PInfest have on the overall standings.

The UKCS is meant to be representative of a selection of comps (so far 10) during the year not just one or two events.



Whilst Wayne's dividing WPPR by no of comps at an event is not perfect it goes some way to alleviate the imbalance of having two huge WPPR events vs all the other UKCS ones during the year.

I agree reagrding the need to reduce the significant impact of stuff like the Open.

I also agree that Wayne's current way of doing this is not perfect, so should be revised for future years.

 

[robotgreg]

I also agree that Wayne's current way of doing this is not perfect, so should be revised for future years.

Problem is I don't think there is ever going to be a perfect solution.

 

[C&C]

Problem is I don't think there is ever going to be a perfect solution.

Probably not perfect, but there surely can be a "better" one than we currently have.

 

[Deleted member 2463]

Problem is I don't think there is ever going to be a perfect solution.

Tell me why this doesn't work:

do a reverse count back on each event - that is consistent across each event, 1st place gets 100, 2nd get 99 and so on.

(as an example)

Match Play Events

next.matchplay.events

oh but what about the UK Open? Well its 4 events, pinfest is 3, next inline is 3 monster meet will be 4, it encourages people NOT only to travel but organisers to put on events big enough to actually encourage folks to travel.

Regards,
Neil.

 

[roadshow16]

Regarding all the earlier comments about dividng the points at a multi comp event, I think the reason Wayne has done this is due to the unbalanced impact that the Open and to a lesser extent PInfest have on the overall standings.

The UKCS is meant to be representative of a selection of comps (so far 10) during the year not just one or two events.

I ran the figures using WPPR points for last year (and no dividing) which resulted in 10 of the top 20 being NON UK players purely because they attended and did well at the Open. Surely this is not right that you can attend one event and qualify highly in the UKCS. Furthermore, although Andy attended several UKCS events, he only scored well at Pinfest and UK Open and came top of the UKCS standings purely on these two events alone (214 WPPRs). Again this is not what the UKCS was set up to achieve. Is Andy the best player in the UK? - yes. Should be top of the UKCS by having done very well at two events only? - I would say no.

I've attached the file so you can see the analysis.

Whilst Wayne's dividing WPPR by no of comps at an event is not perfect it goes some way to alleviate the imbalance of having two huge WPPR events vs all the other UKCS ones during the year.

In this case, why not widen the field then? Make it top 64 like they do in Germany, that way if those top players who come to the UK Open and do well, from other countries, want to travel for the UKCS, they can. But UK players don't lose out and they get to play some of the best in Europe. Just like the GCS. It makes the UKCS finals worth something, with the 150% boost that it gets.

International Flipper Pinball Association!

www.ifpapinball.com

 

[Wayne J]

Tell me why this doesn't work:

do a reverse count back on each event - that is consistent across each event, 1st place gets 100, 2nd get 99 and so on

I'll invite the local school round to the next event, that'll be the same as beating 100 players at The UK Open.

Or winning a comp with only 20 people would award the same pts as winning a comp with 100 people.

I can go on.

I'd buy Wayne's explanation but why is the UK league finals which is held at Daventry singled out as an event different to the Pinfest events? Oh I know why - WWJ hypocrisy. They are all at UKPinfest over the weekend,

To qualify for the finals held at Daventry, you need to have competed around the country first - it is not a stand alone event at Pinfest.

I can think of numerous ways the system can be abused if the IFPA average wasn't used.

Many different formats were ran through with the numbers from previous years - without fail the weekends with multiple events had more influence on results than anything else.

As Greg said, half of the people who would have made the final last year if we had used every event would only have competed over a single weekend - noone who didn't play at The UK Open would have made the finals - not exactly a true representation of a SERIES comprising at least 35 events (the number Greg went to)

The other thing to note is the vast majority of formats came up with 17/18 of the same final qualifiers.

 

[Arv]

I'd buy Wayne's explanation but why is the UK league finals which is held at Daventry singled out as an event different to the Pinfest events? Oh I know why - WWJ hypocrisy. They are all at UKPinfest over the weekend, what a shambles.

Anyway, I'm out - enjoy this ****ed up, half baked format folks!

Neil.

You okay Hun?