TSP Poker Club

Sort by newest Sort by date
Tourney (FOR POINTS) Scheduled for next Monday, 8pm ET (March 14).

Here's a copy/paste of the latest Poker Room Announcement in the Lobby of the poker room:

***********************************
* CONSENSUS: *
***********************************

* No prizes this season except bragging rights
* Custom Stats instead of PS
* Alternating Sun. and Mon. nights
* Once per week.
* Regular instead of KO format
* Stats continue from previous Room.
* Prizes (Silver, Mugs) start next season.
* Tourneys start at 8pm ET


***********************************
* UNDECIDED: *
***********************************

There are approx. 13 games per season:

HOW MANY GAMES MUST A PLAYER HAVE PLAYED BY THE END OF THE SEASON TO BE ELIGIBLE TO RANK?

HOW SAY WE?

I suspect we'll have to go with an average per game metric rather than a total points metric since we are allowing players to skip games.

This keeps those that play more games from having an advantage over those that play fewer.

***********************************
 
userque said:
...

***********************************
* UNDECIDED: *
***********************************

There are approx. 13 games per season:

HOW MANY GAMES MUST A PLAYER HAVE PLAYED BY THE END OF THE SEASON TO BE ELIGIBLE TO RANK?

HOW SAY WE? ...
Click to expand...

8 ?

Requiring at least 8 games allows missing at least one game per month, on average.
 
Haha, it making sense to do, and being able to do it in the spreadsheet, are two very different things :worried:. This one would be quite a bit more painful than the time range, but I'll see what I can do. Even if we have to do it by manually removing the lowest games, we can do that. Obv not ideal, but its in our back pocket.

userque said:
Since k0n also suggested taking the best out of so many games too, I guess he can make so! :)
Click to expand...

To all:
I don't think we have to use an averaged-stat; we can still use a Total. Just the top x-number of games counts towards the total.

You want it to be an advantage to play in ALL the tournaments, you just don't want those who cant to be completely out of the running. And dropping scores does that for you. If you only do the minimum number of games, you don't get the 'luxury' of dropping any bad games, but at least you're still in it. And if you play in ALL the games, you have the most opportunities to improve your top scores.

I don't think I'd recommend counting any less than half the games. And I think we should still do it based on Total points, summing only the top x-number of games for each player.

for reference:
PokerStars does best 10-games for their weekly leader board, top 20 for monthly, and top 100-games for their yearly leader board. Obviously they are expecting a significant more amount of games than we are. Some of these people are probably playing 10+ a day (Dang college kids!)
 
I think best x of y-total points is fairest to the frequent players. let's not do averages, for reasons KO gave.
 
oh and userque... how would you like me to handle the change in prize money? Do you want me to use ACTUAL amounts, change them all to $1k buyins, or change them all to $500 buyins? Using the actual will make these new games less meaningful than the previous games. The spreadsheet is setup to handle prize money based on a different total pool for each tourney, but that doesn't mean we HAVE to do that. I artificially set last night's pool to 5000, since there were 5 players, to keep it consistent with all the previous games, but I can change it to 2500. I don't think we need to put too much meaning into the actual amounts, since we changed it purely as a convenience to get more people in the tournaments, and NOT to change the stakes.

Since we will be using 500 going forward, it might make sense to just change the previous results to 500 per person, instead of 1000. So the stats aren't skewed.

Just my 2-cents. I might be alone in this, but I personally don't care about the actual prize payouts, outside of the finishing place it represents. Winning 5000 chips, or 2500 chips... at the end of the day... doesn't really matter. What does matter is what place you finished and that you were 'in the money' (the only REAL thing that matters in poker).
 
Sorry about yesterday everyone. Wanted to be there but we had a wind storm and all our utilities were out. Looking forward to next week. Today's job is fix the computer. I upgraded it recently with a new SDD drive and my RAM to 32GB from 16GB. The computer is faster for sure, but crashes about every 20 minutes or so. No idea why...So, that's my journey today.. Here's something for everyone who want to seize the day...just a little..

View attachment 37474

FS
 
I say keep the 8 best games, max, per 3 mo. season. This will allow players to miss about 5 games without being disadvantaged.

k0n's suggestion is to keep more than half, so 8 qualifies.

8 is the consensus thus far.

How do we deal with the previous games in this regard?

As this season will be slightly longer due to the change in rooms, it is a special case. It's about 4 months instead of three, so I recommend keeping 10 for this season only.

How say you all with regard to using the best 8 games for normal seasons; and the 10 best games for this season only?
 
k0nkuzh0n said:
oh and userque... how would you like me to handle the change in prize money? Do you want me to use ACTUAL amounts, change them all to $1k buyins, or change them all to $500 buyins? Using the actual will make these new games less meaningful than the previous games. The spreadsheet is setup to handle prize money based on a different total pool for each tourney, but that doesn't mean we HAVE to do that. I artificially set last night's pool to 5000, since there were 5 players, to keep it consistent with all the previous games, but I can change it to 2500. I don't think we need to put too much meaning into the actual amounts, since we changed it purely as a convenience to get more people in the tournaments, and NOT to change the stakes.

Since we will be using 500 going forward, it might make sense to just change the previous results to 500 per person, instead of 1000. So the stats aren't skewed.

Just my 2-cents. I might be alone in this, but I personally don't care about the actual prize payouts, outside of the finishing place it represents. Winning 5000 chips, or 2500 chips... at the end of the day... doesn't really matter. What does matter is what place you finished and that you were 'in the money' (the only REAL thing that matters in poker).
Click to expand...

i agree that they should be normalized. Whichever is easiest for you: old ones to $500 or new ones to $1000 :)
 
whatever is easiest for KO re normalization; concur on 10 total this season, 8 best going forward next season.
 
top 8 of 13 sounds good to me. Slightly less than 2/3rds, and its an even number.

I say do this season top 8 as well. even if there are more games that will be dropped. Its not for prizes, and if we keep it to the same as what next season will be, people will have a benchmark for them self!
 
Current Consensus (But still open for discussion): Top 8 games per season per player, including this season.
 
Last one had an error in the All Time stats. I only had the top row converted and didn't down fill to the rest of the rows. Also testing image quality, as they seem to be reduced quite a bit when i upload them:
Untitled.jpg
I've selected Burro this time (combo box on the bottom right), that is why his name is highlighted.
 
k0nkuzh0n said:
Last one had an error in the All Time stats. I only had the top row converted and didn't down fill to the rest of the rows. Also testing image quality, as they seem to be reduced quite a bit when i upload them ...
Click to expand...

k0n, what's that, that looks like "cPoints" to me. It's above (to the left of) KO's. Thanks.
 
k0nkuzh0n said:
Last one had an error in the All Time stats. I only had the top row converted and didn't down fill to the rest of the rows. Also testing image quality, as they seem to be reduced quite a bit when i upload them:
View attachment 37488
I've selected Burro this time (combo box on the bottom right), that is why his name is highlighted.
Click to expand...

k0n, in the lower left table, you and I are tied in points.

How do you propose we rank players when there are ties? I suspect we would look to a different metric, and so on, until the tie is broken. If you are on that same page, which metrics and in what order of precedence?

Thanks.
 
userque said:
k0n, in the lower left table, you and I are tied in points.

How do you propose we rank players when there are ties? I suspect we would look to a different metric, and so on, until the tie is broken. If you are on that same page, which metrics and in what order of precedence?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

In this case, we only appear to be tied, because I'm only displaying 1 decimal place (its 5.3985... to 5.3711...). In reality, that number has a bunch of decimals.

But regardless, you are right. While ties are improbable, they are definitely possible. And the spreadsheet doesn't handle 2 people that are tied well at all because it will always find the 1st one and you'll have duplicate entries.

I handled it this way: I actually calculate a 'Total Score' which uses more than just points.
And uses this precedence:
1. Points
2. Average Points (So, same points, but fewer games wins. Given points is a tie, its likely this one will also be a tie)
3. Total Prize $
4. Average Prize Money
5. KOs

In each case, I take the value for the given person, and normalize it by dividing it by the SUM of all player's values. this ensures a value less than or equal to 1. Then, based on the precedence, I divide it by a power of 10. 1st precedence, points, is left alone (no dividing by SUM either). 2nd precedence is divided by 10^8. 3rd precedence by 10^10. 4th precedence by 10^12. 5th precedence by 10^14.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - Crazy market action - Did the TSP process transactions on Friday?
Replies
0
Views
1K
tsptalk
tsptalk
tsptalk
NFL Survivor Contest For 2021
2
Replies
21
Views
11K
tsptalk
tsptalk
tsptalk
Nasa1974 Hall of Fame!! 10000 posts!
Replies
5
Views
3K
ravensfan
ravensfan
Bullitt
MLB Releases Outline Plan to Re-Open
Replies
1
Views
4K
Bullitt
Bullitt
tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk: Bulls taking charge, despite the smoke and mirrors
Replies
0
Views
665
tsptalk
tsptalk
Back
Top