[FSPA] Preplays are better

[steve]

 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> wrote:

On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 9:38 AM Daniel Northover <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
http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa

_______________________________________________
FSPA mailing list
FSPA at fspazone.org
http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa
  -------------------------------------------------------------This email was processed through Xeams to filter junk messages.If you feel this message has been tagged incorrectly, you canchange its category by clicking the link below. Click here to mark email as junk.-------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity._______________________________________________
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/20210630/9b745fce/attachment.htm>