sam1986335011.38kidrec257714.37DAVEYZZ176627.22tuffer166876.24BAD4U122024.07BOOTYDADDY109702.50tomcat76094427.52SAS1084904.74FIZBAN80605.20Liberachi736106.76hammer48011£31.11 + 4 League PointsFACETHEACE012£31.11
sam1986353011.38kidrec227714.37tuffer214983DAVEYZZ188627.22BAD4U122024.07BOOTYDADDY109702.50SAS10108904.74tomcat76070427.52FIZBAN68605.20Liberachi7010£36.60 + 8 League Points
yb76888.25jonnycosmi41806.75curly196336542YoungUn31620lordbobby23338MAXALLY18200ska11605dylan1208£24 + 6 League Pointsbraggars1209£19.20elleange17010£14.40
kidrec467428.74BAD4U375023.58FIZBAN259887.76DAVEYZZ173627.22SAS10122260.10tuffer65772.60tomcat76007£146.40 + 20 League Pointssam198608£109.80 + 16 League PointsBOOTYDADDY09£73.20 + 12 League Points
TAKE ON TIKAY Perhaps you should of waited for 62o yb 76888.25 jonnycosmi 41806.75 curly1963 36542 YoungUn 31620 lordbobby 23338 MAXALLY 18200 ska 11605 dylan12 0 8 £24 + 6 League Points braggars12 0 9 £19.20 elleange17 0 10 £14.40 Posted by hawk7112
Perhaps I should have shoved in behind
My A9 v yb with A2 - x22 flop gg
Nice game and glad to just cash tbh, really enjoyed the chat etc
I know this is a bit of a fun comp but if it is the best average performance then why is no account taken of the number of entrants in each tournament? The average is taken from the top when surely it should be taken from the bottom ....... or am I having a senior moment again?
How can 10th of 40 be a better score than 11th of 300?
I know this is a bit of a fun comp but if it is the best average performance then why is no account taken of the number of entrants in each tournament? The average is taken from the top when surely it should be taken from the bottom ....... or am I having a senior moment again? How can 10th of 40 be a better score than 11th of 300? Posted by elsadog
It's only a bit of fun - I think the scoring system is excellent ;-)
yb2400001£134.40 + 30 League PointsYoungUn02£81.60 + 26 League Pointslordbobby03£57.60 + 22 League Pointsjonnycosmi04£48 + 18 League Pointscurly196305£38.40 + 14 League Pointsska06£33.60 + 10 League PointsMAXALLY07£28.80 + 8 League Pointsdylan1208£24 + 6 League Pointsbraggars1209£19.20elleange17010£14.40
You have a very valid point elsadog, but as I have fairly narrowly missed the cash in 3 of 4 mtt's (not the ME) that I've played tonight, I shall bask in some form or glory - pssst Vince - don't change the scoring system ;-)
I know this is a bit of a fun comp but if it is the best average performance then why is no account taken of the number of entrants in each tournament? The average is taken from the top when surely it should be taken from the bottom ....... or am I having a senior moment again? How can 10th of 40 be a better score than 11th of 300? Posted by elsadog
It's done that way because that's how I decided to do it.
Each method has its merits and drawbacks, one favours those who do well in the smaller field events, the other favours those who do well in the larger field event. In this case, if we used your method, anyone doing well in the Main Event would automatically feature at the top of the table (assuming they competed in either of the other two tournaments) because there is such a discrepancy between the numbers in the Main Event and the other two events.
A fairer method might be to award points based on the % of the field that a player beats but that would not be as "transparent" and we decided some time ago that it would not be suitable for an event like this which is just "a bit of fun".
In Response to Re: Wednesday Triple Chance on Sky Poker? : It's done that way because that's how I decided to do it. Each method has its merits and drawbacks, one favours those who do well in the smaller field events, the other favours those who do well in the larger field event. In this case, if we used your method, anyone doing well in the Main Event would automatically feature at the top of the table (assuming they competed in either of the other two tournaments) because there is such a discrepancy between the numbers in the Main Event and the other two events. A fairer method might be to award points based on the % of the field that a player beats but that would not be as "transparent" and we decided some time ago that it would not be suitable for an event like this which is just "a bit of fun". Posted by MereNovice
You have a very valid point elsadog, but as I have fairly narrowly missed the cash in 3 of 4 mtt's (not the ME) that I've played tonight, I shall bask in some form or glory - pssst Vince - don't change the scoring system ;-) Posted by darich
In Response to Re: Wednesday Triple Chance on Sky Poker? : Heaven forbid I should question it then. Posted by elsadog
I've clearly explained the reasoning if you care to read the rest of my post.
To give an example, if we used your "number of players" beaten method, someone who finished 100th in the Main Event and last in both of the other two events would score about 75 points whereas someone who won both the other events would only score about 70 points. I don't think even you would think that is a better system.
Comments
My A9 v yb with A2 - x22 flop gg
Nice game and glad to just cash tbh, really enjoyed the chat etc
How can 10th of 40 be a better score than 11th of 300?
Each method has its merits and drawbacks, one favours those who do well in the smaller field events, the other favours those who do well in the larger field event. In this case, if we used your method, anyone doing well in the Main Event would automatically feature at the top of the table (assuming they competed in either of the other two tournaments) because there is such a discrepancy between the numbers in the Main Event and the other two events.
A fairer method might be to award points based on the % of the field that a player beats but that would not be as "transparent" and we decided some time ago that it would not be suitable for an event like this which is just "a bit of fun".
Heaven forbid I should question it then.
To give an example, if we used your "number of players" beaten method, someone who finished 100th in the Main Event and last in both of the other two events would score about 75 points whereas someone who won both the other events would only score about 70 points. I don't think even you would think that is a better system.