[FSPA] Preplays are better

[Joe P. Said]

What Pittsburgh does is generates the groups from the players that are
present. We should aim to adapt the rules to that if we want the drop 2 to
be successful.

On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 11:46 PM Daniel Cotter via FSPA <fspa at fspazone.org>
wrote:

> Daniel Cotter here, miss you guys. I have been running a couple seasons of
> a social distance league at the Richmond Pinball Collective that was
> basically a preplay league. You had the set week to come in while the
> collective was open and play a set bank of games (solo if you wanted to
> avoid human contract) and submit your scores, but no actual preplays, if
> you missed a week you forfeited. My intent was not to remove anyone based
> on forfeits and everyone would make the finals, so forfeits equaled less
> points and lower seeding for finals. The aim was just fun and to have some
> reason to play each week during the pandemic. The first season I did 3
> player(or default) groups and didn't like that those forfeits caused to
> many two player match ups as I felt it skewed the points a bit if it
> happened to frequently. The second season I went for 4 player groups and
> this greatly cut down on 2 player match ups and I feel was a good offset
> for not dealing with preplays. I know this summer season was a kind of fun
> test the waters so I wanted to share my experience with something similar.
>
> Daniel
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* FSPA <fspa-bounces at fspazone.org> on behalf of steve via FSPA <
> fspa at fspazone.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 30, 2021 3:01 AM
> *To:* FSPA main discussion list <fspa at fspazone.org>
> *Cc:* steve <flynnibus at yahoo.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FSPA] Preplays are better
>
> Option 1: Prioritize 4 player grouping to minimize risk of 1 player
> groups.  Consequence, everyone plays in 4 player groups, in preparing to
> avoid the potential of someone not being there.
>
> (this was actually my pre-season recommendation - but the hate for 4
> player groups was too strong)
>
> Option 2: Stick to the 'default' grouping which prefers 3 player groups,
> and face risks of 2 and 1 player groups more frequently.  Rules account for
> all the scenarios, so you can just 'play on' w/o extra intervention.
> Consequence... you have 2 and 1 player scoring more frequently.
>
> As Matt mentioned, we have discussed and are sticking with #2 with the
> modification we will have the single player play with the group below them
> if there is space (or above) so they can play in a group - but we will
> still score them as their independent groups.
>
> The other options are far more disruptive change and not for something
> mid-season.  You either change the ladder and movement system, and in turn,
> the handicapping model used for the whole league, or you use ghost scores
> of some format.
>
> Personally I think 4 player groups are far less disruptive and provide
> 'cheap' defense to the problem.. but it seems everyone hates every scoring
> format but 3 player groups :D
>
> -Steve
>
> On Tuesday, June 29, 2021, 08:58:27 PM EDT, Kevin Stone via FSPA <
> fspa at fspazone.org> wrote:
>
>
> I thought dropping 2 scores would be better than preplays, but it is
> absolutely not. We would have had two 1 actual player groups tonight in
> first and last group,  but adjusted groups.
>
> 2 player groups SUCK.  You can crush a game and still get 1 point for 2nd
> place.
>
> If you can figure this shit out,  I'm impressed. Edan and I got it
> re-organized but it was a pain.
>
> [image: Image]
>
>
>
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210630/f6c33521/attachment.htm>