You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Comments
Thanks for doing this, very interesting.
I think the scoring system might need looking at for next time. It can't be right that David666 who has 2nd in UKOPS 6, a win in UKOPS 7 Side and final tabled the High Roller event is ranked below Maxally who hasn't done too much other than cashing for £221.
Agree with GaryQQQ that the scoring system perhaps need a rethink if you repeat this for the next UKOP series but fantastic effort on your part for doing this in the first place.
You and GaryQQQ are unsung heroes of the forum for sure.
I get ur point tho, but it can work both ways. You can have someone who cashes in 6 ukops and makes 2k and have someone who only cashes in 1 but wins 3k.......pretty difficult to come up with totally fair scoring system that will please everyone.
That said, having now seen how the league has developed over a number of days I accept that the scoring system could be improved. The problem is, by assigning a score relative to the % of the field beaten and limiting it to the players that finish in cash paying positions; if we assume that 15% of the field gets paid (this tends to vary between events a little) then all of the scores assigned are between 85-100. This doesn't really create enough of a difference between finishing positions to allow it to effect the overall rankings, resulting in too much weight being placed on purely making the cash and not enough on where within the cash a player finishes.
In hindsight, a better way to have assigned points would be by % of the bubble beaten, for example if 9 players get paid (bubble is 10th) points would be assigned:
1st - 100
2nd - 90
3rd - 80
......
......9th - 10
With that in mind I have re-organised the league on the above basis and the top 50 would now look like this:
Comments appreciated
One possible solution to this is to multiply the number of people who cashed below you (including yourself), with a factorial for the buy in.
you would need to designate say 3 levels of buy in, i.e. £1-£11, £12-£25, £26+ and each level is give a number, i.e. 1,2,3
So for example you finish 1st in a 200 runner £11 tourney so you get awarded 20 x 1 = 20
you finish 1st in a 100 runner £24 tourney so you get awarded 10 x 2 = 20
you finish 1st in a 60 runner £55 tourney so you get awarded 6 x 3 = 18
I havent spent enough time on it to crunch any real numbers but i think it takes into account maybe a wider range of information whilst still giving roughly an equal reward for success.
What do you think?
Yeah, you're right MAXALLY, it's unofficial so I don't have to do it at all, but I chose to because 1, I thought it would be an interesting exercise. 2, There were people on the forum that were interested in seeing it.
It's a no win situation, whatever you do someone will be unhappy with it, all I'm trying to do here is refine a process and decide what would be the best way to do something similar in the future if I'm stupid enough to volunteer myself again.
Regarding your comment about just producing a list ranked by cash value, if you look at the alternative top 50 above, that quite clearly is not what has happened here, offshoot who has cashed the most in UKOPS so far - over £13,300 is only ranked 9th, wheras vegasman who has had a very good run in the minis is above him in 8th despite cashing a smaller amount of £777.00. There are also numerous players who have cashed for more than £2000.00 that do not appear in the top 50 and a couple at least that have cashed for more than £5,000.
As I said, I'm never going to keep everyone happy!
There is NO "wholly fair" way of doing this, & I suspect this was one of the reasons that the Business decided not to run a Leaderboard, because people may end up getting offended, or upset, & if that happens, it becomes a liability, not an asset.
As long as everyone sees Simon's efforts for what they are - an imperfect solution to an impossible problem - then we'll all be just fine.
Honestly, I've juggled this in my head a thousand times, & there is no "one size fits all" solution.
The effort you have put in is appreciated............as much as it hurts me, I gotta agree with Alan, the guy has cashed in 4 of the events and is not even on the list now.
At the end of the day it's all a bit of fun though so cheers for the great thread
I'm not going to get precious about it, end of the day it's a bit of fun but useful to get feedback incase I or anybody else does something similar in the future.
You see, there is just NO WAY of balancing this fairly.
If I were MAXALLY, of course I'd be miffed if I cashed 4 times & disappeared off the sheet.
But equally, if it were revised to take account of that, other deserving folks might drop off the sheet. There is NO perfect solution to this.
I think we can all agree though, huge thanks to Simon for at least attempting to. So many people wrote to me suggesting we did a Leaderboard, but this is almost certainly why the Business shied away from it.
Are we cool, Yolanda?
YOLANDA!
Are we cool baby?
The final table should use the original system for fairness, I don't think anybody is suggesting otherwise.
Simon should be applauded for taking the time and trouble to run this league. It's easy to see flaws in the scoring system with the advantage of hindsight, nobody knew how it would pan out before the league started. Any tweaks that seem sensible to Simon can be applied next time round.
Very well played to all who have cashed and all who feature in the league.
This ^^^^
Ahem cough cough
Anyway........
Good luck everyone tonight.
Just enjoy, that's the idea.
Have no idea who it is but I am sure its not that important to them :-)