<div dir="auto">From what I remember, someone whined that it’s not possible for new players to win “A” since they are dropped at the bottom of the ladder at the start of the season. So, IFPA mandated the random pairing in the beginning to mitigate that. It makes sense if you are an experienced player moving to another league location—your IFPA record should dictate that you belong higher up—but generally new/inexperienced players will never make “A”, period.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I am personally not a fan of the new format. It needs tweaking. Ocelot (non-FSPA) I believe is trying swiss pairing this season so we’ll see how that works out (we knocked out Week 1 last week, I will find out tomorrow). At MSB it was fully random last season. I enjoyed meeting new players but ended up demolishing them. Some thought it was fun, but others I could tell weren’t having a good time. Also, I play to compete/stay sharp, and if I am paired with people that don’t really belong in “A”, then I am generally not having a good time either. If I want to play by myself, I don’t need a league to do that. But on the other hand, if I want to make States then league is my primary way of doing it due to my work schedule, so the WPPR aspect is important to me. I probably wouldn’t do more than guest occasionally if no ranking points were involved.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Also, someone mentioned prizes/trophies. I really like that stuff. They are mementos of a time that’s in the past. For instance, I still have one of those sweet pinball machine trophies from when I first won “A” at John’s Place. I have an old Bally Eight Ball playfield hanging on my wall from winning a season at Red Zone. If I simply got cash (like has been the case the last couple of years), I would have forgotten those things by now. When we went to cash only, Edan offered to deduct the cost of a trophy from the winnings, which I opted for, and that’s another memento I still have (and I like it). That option hasn’t been offered in subsequent seasons.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Party: I do enjoy it and would like to continue to see it happening. It has lost a bit of luster since it’s at public locations I already play at, but still, it gives me a chance to catch up with cool people I don’t get to see very often. (And on that note, I love pizza and am OK with that; the BBQ at MSB last time though.. ugh 🤮).</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">-Austin</div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 6:05 PM Wei-Hwa Huang via FSPA <<a href="mailto:fspa@fspazone.org">fspa@fspazone.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Did the IFPA give any specific details as to why the old FSPA ladder system would not be eligible for any WPPRs? If not, how did you know what to change to qualify for WPPRs?</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 10:55 AM Dan Reynolds via FSPA <<a href="mailto:fspa@fspazone.org" target="_blank">fspa@fspazone.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">IFPA indicated, with zero wiggle room or debate, that they would not recognize (as in ZERO WPPRs) the traditional FSPA league format as of Jan 1, 2024. The changes in format were made to accommodate IFPA requirements while still retaining some semblance of the ladder format.<div><br></div><div>I would not describe the IFPA’s actions as “generous” or “giving free rein”. Also this wasn’t about maximizing WPPRs, it was about merely qualifying for them at all.<br><div><br></div><div><br id="m_-692678027919795124m_7893622786598672072lineBreakAtBeginningOfSignature"><div dir="ltr">Sent from my iPhone</div><div dir="ltr"><br><blockquote type="cite">On May 12, 2024, at 1:10 PM, Wei-Hwa Huang via FSPA <<a href="mailto:fspa@fspazone.org" target="_blank">fspa@fspazone.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></blockquote></div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">On Sat, May 11, 2024 at 8:08 AM Sergio Johnson via FSPA <<a href="mailto:fspa@fspazone.org" target="_blank">fspa@fspazone.org</a>> wrote:</div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div>The private feedback that I’ve gotten so far is that folks really hate the wide disparities in skill levels seen in the early weeks of the new system. It was not a fun experience for them. Unfortunately that’s the cost of doing business with the IFPA. If anyone has any additional feedback on that or other topics, I’d love to hear it!</div></div></blockquote><div><br>Encountering the wide disparity in skill level was the first big culture shock when I moved from FSPA to BAPA twenty years ago. Over here at BAPA there's not really a ladder; everyone justs get re-sorted based on the previous week's score. So I was often playing against players of much wider skill level, and frankly, I hated it too.<br><br>But in those early years, when I asked around if people would prefer a system more like FSPA's ladder, the common refrain I got was "I like being able to play against a wide range of players and meet more people in the league. Playing against the same group of people week after week sounds boring." <br><br>I highly doubt this is due to some Washington vs. California culture clash; I think this mostly goes to show how strong factors like tradition and "what you're used to" matter in things like this. So my perspective on that point is, if the league is growing, don't worry too much about people who don't like the new system. There are good and bad things about it, and after a few years most people will get used to it. There will always be some folks who like the "traditional ways" but they'll be offset by the folks who like the new ways more.<br><br>Having said that, though, I would be curious to know what specific interaction with the IFPA caused the redesign. Based on my interaction with the IFPA, my understanding is that they are rather generous with giving leagues free rein in how league competition is structured. Some structures may result in fewer WPPRs than others, but that doesn't seem to be your problem. Looking at the league rules for IFPA ( <a href="https://www.ifpapinball.com/definitions/" target="_blank">https://www.ifpapinball.com/definitions/</a> ), the only thing I see is the rule "All participants of an IFPA sanctioned tournament must have a chance to win the highest division available if they want to be included in the results submitted to IFPA." But that doesn't prohibit the ladder system per se, it just means that, for anyone who doesn't have a chance of winning (say someone in the lowest groups on the ladder system), you can't include their names in the IFPA submission and they don't get WPPR points. But for those people, WPPR probably doesn't matter anyway, they're in the lower groups! So what am I missing here? Why did the FSPA decide that the old system wasn't compatible with the IFPA?</div></div><div><br></div><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Wei-Hwa Huang, <a href="mailto:onigame@gmail.com" target="_blank">onigame@gmail.com</a><br>-----------------------------------------------------------<br><div>Mad scientists are often wrongfully accused of using science for evil. We're using evil for science; that's totally different!</div></div></div></div>
<span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>FSPA mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:FSPA@fspazone.org" target="_blank">FSPA@fspazone.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa" target="_blank">http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa</a></span><br></div></blockquote></div></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
FSPA mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:FSPA@fspazone.org" target="_blank">FSPA@fspazone.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Wei-Hwa Huang, <a href="mailto:onigame@gmail.com" target="_blank">onigame@gmail.com</a><br>-----------------------------------------------------------<br><div>Mad scientists are often wrongfully accused of using science for evil. We're using evil for science; that's totally different!</div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
FSPA mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:FSPA@fspazone.org" target="_blank">FSPA@fspazone.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.fspazone.org/mailman/listinfo/fspa</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>