Mister Tim
Жарю клойстеров
I’m owner of record for most bronzes in pp sorry
terrible ruling, a 38-38 team should be tied above a 39-45 one, I get encouraging activity but this is a stupid way to do it. win differential >>>> indiviudal winsMay 19th 2019: Fix: Entry into the playoffs is decided by the top 4 according to Points (descending) > Individual Wins (descending) >Win Percentage (descending)Dead Matches (ascending). If a tie persists, head-to-head will be evaluated, and a 3-on-3 tiebreaker will be scheduled if the head-to-head was a tie. It never went beyond Individual Wins this RoAPL, so this year's OPs will be amended to prevent confusion for next RoAPL.
Individual wins has been the second way to sort teams since RoAPL 2. The third way was changed to align more with the matches being completed philosophy. Individual Wins minus Individual Losses (win differential) already plays a big role in determining points, since a team can win 6-5, 5-4 etc. The team that finished 5th was already dissatisfied with a 6-5 result occurring in week 7.terrible ruling, a 38-38 team should be tied above a 39-45 one, I get encouraging activity but this is a stupid way to do it. win differential >>>> indiviudal wins
Here's a revolutionary idea to avoid people "not risking losses": make sure your players schedule throughout the week, that way their opponents can't fish a dead game because they'd get an act loss.I don't think teams should be rewarded for not risking losses ideally.
The point is that the failure of a team to schedule/play negatively impacts another team in another matchup. Aside from potential week 7 fixing, two teams could leave a result as 7-1 because neither side want to risk lessening their difference further.Here's a revolutionary idea to avoid people "not risking losses": make sure your players schedule throughout the week, that way their opponents can't fish a dead game because they'd get an act loss.
This has never happened in SPL history and SPL has always used BD to settle these ties, and it's also a tournament where people are much more likely to do something unsportsmanlike to win because it's a lot more competitive. You're policing for situations that don't happen and sacrificing sanity in much more common situations (two teams have different BD, but one had one or two more dead games so they fall behind. 40-40 should not beat 39-38)The point is that the failure of a team to schedule/play negatively impacts another team in another matchup. Aside from potential week 7 fixing, two teams could leave a result as 7-1 because neither side want to risk lessening their difference further.
Well 40-40 will still advance because individual wins >This has never happened in SPL history and SPL has always used BD to settle these ties, and it's also a tournament where people are much more likely to do something unsportsmanlike to win because it's a lot more competitive. You're policing for situations that don't happen and sacrificing sanity in much more common situations (two teams have different BD, but one had one or two more dead games so they fall behind. 40-40 should not beat 39-38)
...Yes? What's the point of this post? I said 40-40 should not beat 39-38, and currently it does.Well 40-40 will still advance because individual wins >
It's literally a better record. Dead games can happen for any number of reasons, especially in a tournament like this, and penalizing any dead game regardless of circumstance is way too harsh imo.I disagree. Why is the team 39-38 what good reason is there for dead games?
RoAPL is not SPL, it has lower levels of interest and shorter season generally (which could play a factor, I dunno, seems like more could be left unplayed relatively). Making rules is about what could happen anyway, not just what happens in the past. I don’t even recognise BD as the right terminology, since it sounds like RBY battles could be a factor. I guess something like IWD (Individual Win Difference) works in the context of the Team Ranking. Some people love winning. I can see some great players trying hard in tournaments that don’t have a postbit reward, especially if they know their effort will be rewarded more (easier to win), because it’s still an achievement that’s published. The players could also be trying to gain recognition.This has never happened in SPL history and SPL has always used BD to settle these ties, and it's also a tournament where people are much more likely to do something unsportsmanlike to win because it's a lot more competitive. You're policing for situations that don't happen and sacrificing sanity in much more common situations (two teams have different BD, but one had one or two more dead games so they fall behind. 40-40 should not beat 39-38)
It is currently incorrect that adjudged losses isn't accounted for before that. I will try to fix that. Otherwise, it's just a harsh way to break the tie, since I'm worried about a rare 3+way tie after week 7 being really problematic.how about answering my other post about how you're rewarding a game loss over a game not played