[FSPA] Preplays are better

Thu Jul 1 08:49:29 EDT 2021

That is a season specific setting in the software...default is 8 forfeits
(2 weeks) I believe.

I don't know that anyone talked explicitly about it, but I assumed that
with the drop 2, you'd be able to drop those 2 weeks and then also forfeit
2 more weeks for a total of 4 weeks missed.

That's the way I plan to treat it at Lost Rhino.  SLO can also make
determinations of which FORFEIT code to use for a match to control this.

Hope that helps,
Bryan

On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 8:43 AM Kevin Stone via FSPA <fspa at fspazone.org>
wrote:

> Anyone know the rule on how many forfeits this year before getting kicked
> out?  Used to be 8 but that was with up to 3 weeks of pre-plays for a no
> show of 5 weeks out of 10.  I’m guessing you don’t show 4 weeks and you’re
> out?
>
>
>
> *From:* FSPA [mailto:fspa-bounces at fspazone.org] *On Behalf Of *Dave
> Hubbard via FSPA
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 30, 2021 10:57 PM
> *To:* FSPA main discussion list
> *Cc:* Dave Hubbard
> *Subject:* Re: [FSPA] Preplays are better
>
>
>
> > There are events that could change that like people dropping out or
> joining in late, but otherwise it’s set.
>
>
>
> That's why it's incorrect to say that next week's groups are set in
> stone.  They can change.  In fact, section 6.4 lays out how to deal with
> drop-outs.
>
>
>
> Whether this is a good system or not is of course a matter of opinion.
> I'm personally not a fan of declaring next week's groups ahead of time and
> potentially playing with a physical 2 or 1-player group (preplays or not)
> but that's the system we have.
>
>
>
>            --- Dave
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 9:57 PM Stephen Jonke via FSPA <fspa at fspazone.org>
> wrote:
>
> Groups do matter. I don’t understand why we are arguing. I just dropped
> another group because I’m playing really poorly so far. There are events
> that could change that like people dropping out or joining in late, but
> otherwise it’s set.
>
>
> Steve
>
> On Jun 30, 2021, 9:29 PM -0400, Bob K Mertz via FSPA <fspa at fspazone.org>,
> wrote:
>
> All that may be true but that's literally what this argument seems to be
> about... The groups don't matter so we should all just ignore them .....
> but here's a list of the groups that don't matter anyway because it's
> interesting but, remember, they don't matter.
>
> I'll be honest with you, I've been in FSPA for years and until this
> discussion began I always thought it was set in stone that if you win
> your group you move up to the next group and if you lose you move down a
> group and that the ladder was a completely seperate thing (perhaps this
> is why it seems like I feel the "taking 0s" thing is more absurd than
> others). My understanding of that was based solely on what I saw every
> week - for all of those years. It's easy to say that it's just always
> been about the ladder but for those of us that have watched the grouping
> formula consistently remain true week after week it *feels* like you're
> rewriting the rules even though you aren't.
>
> I agree that it's interesting to know where you are playing next week
> but if that's not set in stone then it's a "fantasy". Those fantasies
> may essentially be fact right now since no one ever seems to actually
> change the groups before league but watching the FSPA leaders get upset
> because no one seems to comprehend that groupings don't matter while
> they simultaneously say they are important because they are interesting
> only adds to the confusion.
>
> Obviously I've not understood this system and I never had any reason to
> expect that I didn't. Previously I just ignore emails that turn into
> these huge discussions but I got caught up in this one..... From a
> practical sense others in the league may be making the same assumptions
> I had been and having no reason to ask how things really work and aren't
> reading this discussion to learn otherwise.
>
> I've never felt comfortable really voicing my opinions about these huge
> issues because it always seems to turn into a battle with those that
> have been in FSPA for more than 10 years..... It usually doesn't seem
> the take away ever is "hey, new comers or even those who have been
> around for less than 15 years may see things differently". This time I
> might have actually learned something but I'm not expecting the outcome
> to be any different than any other huge discussion about the league.
>
>
> On 6/30/21 3:46 PM, steve wrote:
>
> Bob, what you are highlighting is a byproduct of practical
> implementation details.
>
> Sure we could not publish groups as part of prior week's results, but
> knowing where people are playing is very interesting stuff to most
> people.  And in the VAST majority of cases, what was projected when last
> week's results, will still ring true when the next week starts.  So, for
> the majority of cases, it's GOOD info and accurate to the future.  I
> mean.. if you wanted to get technical, maybe the right takeaway is to
> label the table "Projected Groups"
>
> The software is just presenting a simplified view of the world for easy
> consumption.  Prior implementation were more precise and dumped more
> details, but most didn't use the info anyway, so it was streamlined.
> The 'next week' table really shows two things - The stacked ladder, and
> groupings overlaid on that if things stay as they did when the
> scoresheet was published.
>
> People are just holding onto it 'too tightly' vs what the information
> really is.
>
>
> TLDR: SLOs scream that the groupings don't matter but every week we
>
> get emails that paint a
>
> picture of how "crucial" the groupings actually are.
>
>
> That is a misunderstanding of what is being said.  No one said
> 'groupings don't matter'.  It's that groupings are not what is SET first
> nor are the 'fixed'.  They come last and are laid over whatever other
> decisions are made ahead of it.  The tail doesn't wag the dog...
>
> -Steve
>
> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021, 02:21:29 PM EDT, Bob K Mertz via FSPA
> <fspa at fspazone.org> wrote:
>
>
> I think there is another huge problem being overlooked.... Well, the
> creation of that problem is being overlooked. You're right that the
> ladder doesn't gel well in the minds of many (myself often included) and
> the one thing that seemingly is repeated over and over here is that
> groups are never assigned until just before league starts......
> ...... Except that we get an email that tells us what group we are in
> next week as soon as the results are posted.
>
> I trust the ladder and I trust that the software is doing is thing so
> why do the results emails we get try to paint a picture in the hopes of
> explaining something that, apparently, doesn't at all seem to be the
> case? Just don't tell us on advance what our groups are (or are supposed
> to be) and tell us what groups we are in when we start league play and
> this "false narrative" eventually disappears.
>
> TLDR: SLOs scream that the groupings don't matter but every week we get
> emails that paint a picture of how "crucial" the groupings actually are.
>
>
> On June 30, 2021 1:45:54 PM EDT, steve via FSPA <fspa at fspazone.org> wrote:
>
>
> The difference with FSPA seems to be that you guys try to
>
> 'pre-make' your groups of 3,
>
> which obviously causes scrambling when people don't show
>
>
> There are no 'pre-made' groups.  This is a common misunderstanding
> about Groups in the FSPA design.  Groups are not pre-set before
> league... a SLO could define groups at 5mins before league start if
> they needed to.  What is 'fixed' in the FSPA system is the LADDER -
> which is the stacking of players in order which serves as the
> fundamental handicapping system in the FSPA match play system.  The
> ladder starts with everyone's initial seeding, and is refined each
> week by the movement defined by player performance against their
> peers.  Group movement is the feedback loop that 'refines' the
> ladder each week.  (Group Movement also gives people more variety in
> competition you see.. but that's more a side-benefit)
>
> FSPA is a match play system.. so a fundamental concept in match play
> is "Who do you play in your match"
>
> You could have
> - random assignments
> - groupings based on skill assessment/external rankings
> - some non-random scheme designed to rotate or assign people by some
> distribution (Example: Round robin)
>
> The first and third systems generally will mix up players of
> different skill, and there are pros and cons to such models.  But
> over the long haul, you can expect the better players to score
> better at the expense of their under matched opponents.
>
> The second model tries to group similar skilled players together.
> But is highly dependent on how you measure/assess/assign those skill
> rankings.  This is difficult to do with new players, new locations, etc.
>
> Systems like Pinburgh were 'skill' based, but rather have you only
> play against your peers, it used a converging model.  So #1 didn't
> always play against #1, #2, #3, they played against other ranks
> until ultimately converging there.  Like the FSPA model, their
> 'ranking' was not fixed, but refined each round based on
> performance.  (They used total points, FSPA instead uses group
> promotion/demotion to refine your rank in the ladder).
>
> FSPA fundamentally is setup to allow players of different skill
> levels to compete together.  This isn't just about breaking into
> divisions.  It's the fundamental concept that we have inherent
> handicapping built into the system by grouping similar skill levels
> together.  This functions so it makes sense to compare the 12 points
> I got in a week in group 1, to someone in group 4 who also got 12
> points.  We both got 12 points...  are we equal players?  Probably
> not, but our handicapped output is the same.. and you win/lose the
> overall league based on your handicapped output - your match points.
>
> The premise of allowing players of different skill level to compete
> and enjoy league is one of the core premises behind the FSPA rules
> design.
>
> Everyone generally agrees getting creamed in a group is not fun long
> term - thus there is extra attention to the idea of not placing
> players where they would be setup for failure for no fault of their
> own.  Additionally, on the competitive side, it creates significant
> disparities when people are not aligned with their skill group,
> while other players are.  (easier/harder to get points, etc)
>
> The point of all this is to try to explain why the Ladder is a
> central pillar of the concept of how we pair players to play
> together.  The more you move people around, the more you shake the
> principal of how people are intended to be 'fairly' matched up which
> is how we establish the equality of match points between different
> groups.
>
> Match points are comparable across groups as the measure of success
> because of handicapping.  Instead of adding/subtracting to scores as
> a handicap, we use who you compete against as the handicapping in
> the system.  The ladder is the construct to do this.
>
>
> *So, TLDR - what the f are you talking about?*  It's important you
> keep people playing against similar skill (within our ability) as a
> fundamental construct of how the competitive and fun factors of our
> scoring model operates.  Obviously you can start over with another
> model entirely, and do away with the handicap FSPA is built on, but
> understand it's not just a 'group change' but cuts much deeper when
> you move people around the ladder or who they are grouped with.
>
> Skipping people not present when grouping is entirely feasible, the
> messier part is how to systematically handle group movement after
> the fact.  It would probably look a LOT more messy to players to
> understand.  (only move winners and losers from their initial
> position, not where they actually played, etc).
>
> But players don't generally understand ladder movement in the first
> place... so...  :)
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021, 10:16:19 AM EDT, Elliott Keith via FSPA
> <fspa at fspazone.org> wrote:
>
>
> Even though I had to drop out of MOM's league this season due to
> personal stuff, I felt the need to chime in with a 'simple' solution.
>
> Pretty much every other league I've played in besides FSPA had a
> drop 2 format, with no headache. The difference with FSPA seems to
> be that you guys try to 'pre-make' your groups of 3, which obviously
> causes scrambling when people don't show. The 'drop 2' and 'pre-made
> groups' just don't seem compatible to me. Most all other leagues
> randomly dole out groups at the start of the night, and
> Crabtowne's league had a 'division split' halfway through so you'd
> play with people somewhat around your skill level.
>
> My solution idea is that instead of trying to 'pre-make' groups, why
> not just keep track of ladder position? Like, after confirming who's
> not there, the top three present are group 1, next three group 2,
> etc. all the way down, with the last group being a 4 or 2 if
> necessary. Keeps the similar skill level thing going, and seems
> pretty easy to implement, since you guys keep track of that anyway.
>
> Just my two cents. Hope to be back in a league next season, and
> happy 4th!
>
> -Elliott
>
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 9:57 AM Rob Wintler-Cox via FSPA
> <fspa at fspazone.org <mailto:fspa at fspazone.org>> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 9:38 AM Daniel Northover
> <northovr at verizon.net <mailto:northovr at verizon.net>> wrote:
>
> Just ribbing you Rob your doing a awesome job
>
>
> After last week my ribs are pretty sore. ;)
> _______________________________________________
> FSPA mailing list
> FSPA at fspazone.org <mailto:FSPA at fspazone.org>
> http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa
>
> _______________________________________________
> FSPA mailing list
> FSPA at fspazone.org <mailto:FSPA at fspazone.org>
> http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa
>
>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> _______________________________________________
> FSPA mailing list
> FSPA at fspazone.org <mailto:FSPA at fspazone.org>
> http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa
>
> _______________________________________________
> FSPA mailing list
> FSPA at fspazone.org
> http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa
>
> _______________________________________________
> FSPA mailing list
> FSPA at fspazone.org
> http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa
>
> _______________________________________________
> FSPA mailing list
> FSPA at fspazone.org
> http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fspazone.org/pipermail/fspa/attachments/20210701/8dde30b9/attachment.htm>