WE ARE MOVING SOON, We will be switcing forum software in the coming days. I am not sure of the exact time and date but sometime this week. I will do my best to make sure the disruption is as little as possible but the site could be down for a good hour for the move. If you want to know about the new forum sofware please visit this Discussion
Leaderboard System
I keep a leaderboard for my home game. Currently it is based on total tournament winnings, however, this year I have introduced 2 "main event" games with a higher buy-in. This means that it is possible for someone to come once and win a main event and then be at the top of the leaderboard. For next year I would like to move to a point system rather than $ won to avoid this so that the most consistent, regular player gets the trophy. My question is this: how do I account for different number of players ie. A first place where the field is 35 should be worth more than a victory over 12 people. Any suggestions?
Comments
/g2
/g2
First problem is, you've gotta know what you are looking for.
http://pokerforum.ca/showpost.php?p=43024&postcount=3
Why? Because you are playing only a portion of those players at any given time, it's the same reason that I hate it when they say "He defeated 6000 other players, to win this tournament". He outlasted 6000 other players but probably only knocked out a dozen or so on his own.
I developed a system for a local free-rolls that take into account regular success in-game and rewards attendance and finishing at the final table. We have/had a similar issue to yours where a first place finish could qualify a player in the monthly mini-tourney but finishing 5 times (we do 2 games a night) in 5th wouldn't. I haven't presented it to the free-roll but perhaps you could review and see if it meets your needs.
At the game I play we usually get between 20 and 35 players each week. So keep that in mind when I start throwing numbers around.
I'll try to keep this simple.
If you finish below 16th , you get 0 points
If you finish 10th-16th, you get 10 points per place incremental (16th gets 10, 15th gets 20 and 10th gets 70)
If you finish 6th-9th, you get 20 points per place incremental (9th gets 90 and 6th gets 150
If you finish in the top 5 you get 30 points per place incremental (5th gets 180 and first gets 300
This means that if you finish (over 4 games) 1st 9th, 12th and 16th you would receive
300+ 90 + 50 + 10 = 450
As opposed to someone who finished 3rd, 5th, 9th, 11 who would receive
240 + 180+ 90 + 60 = 570
So the more solid player ends up ahead. Something the existing system doesn't account for at all, in our current system the 1st place finish would score the player enough points to be so far ahead that the second player would stand no chance to catch up even with more final table apperances. This also takes a night where a player is running hot into account but doesn't make that night tip any scales in terms of overall importance.
I also added in a bonus system based on placing and attendance because this system does negatively impact a player who can only come to 1 game a night (so 50% attendance of a 'regular')
To qualify for this bonus you need to have attended at least 50% of the games for that time period (month or whatever)
If you have made final table more than 50% of the time you get a bonus of 100.
If you have made final table more than 60% of the time you get a bonus of 200.
If you have made final table more than 70% of the time you get a bonus of 300.
If you have made final table more than 80% of the time you get a bonus of 400.
If you have made final table more than 90% of the time you get a bonus of 500.
If you have made final table 100% of the time you get a bonus of 600.
Your milage may vary with this extra point method.
I like the system, If you win. you get money.
No need to rub it into the bad players faces.
I must disagree Zunni, as the women say size does matter.
So if 20 people show up, I only need to outlast 4 others to get pts.
If 35 show up, I now need to outlast 19 people to get pts.
This is the reason the International Poker Rankings takes size into consideration when calculating pts.
http://www.iprdata.com/ipr/aboutus.html
LOL! Good point!
At what point did we all (myself VERY included) start needing to be the super-duper-grand-master-of-[insert poker league] Instead of just focusing on the reason we're playing in the first place. (social or for the $$$$)
[I promise this has nothing to do with Bristol. GG Mario!]
The idea isn't to reward the people who can make 16th, it's to prevent the person who finishes 1st from gaining an unbalanced amount of points and thereby ending up ahead of the person who finished approx. 5th 4 or 5 times.
If a person is worried about how many points they've received for finishing 23rd out of 35 or 17 out of 20, they are not the people that this system really needs to care about. Especially if they are doing so regularly. And for a person who usually final tables these games, any puny amounts of points they get for finishing really low in one game isn't going to be enough to help them overall anyway.