This thread also displays on the following board(s):
Calgary  &  Edmonton  &  Saskatoon

Topic: Canadian Points System

Author: Will Original Message Posted: Jun 3 2010 4:56PM

Because of recent discussion I decided to give this another try. As I have said on the message boards before I have put in a few hours trying to come up with something, and I feel at this point this would be a good solution to some of our problems.

I created a netfoos.com account called "tester" password "foosball" anyone can log into right now. I created players named as an example EDM1 or VAN12 etc. representing players from each of the major cities in canada. I didn't cover every player or anything but I have the locations called sask, cgy, edm, van, tor, and que.

I then created tournaments, just local ones at first. This would represent each city running one tournament, essentially instead of having your weekly DYP just change the event to count towards these points. I am not suggesting that this happens every week, but maybe 4 times a year in each city there is a canadian points week that every city runs an event. Players can attend other cities if they are close by or if they happen to be in a different town for the time it is run.

I entered 1 per location into the netfoos account and just made each cities #1 player win, with the lowest ranking player losing...

Then after having each city have one "canadian points" tournament each (again this could just be run on a weeknight if needed, simple double elim BYP) I made a tournament called "Major Tournament" that included some of the players from each location.

I randomly selected winners and they don't represent individual people in any way, nobody get offended because cgy6 lost to edm 4 or something like that it is just purely speculative.

At the end of this major I created a points list and this is what it came up with:

Tor1, Tor1 1195
Van1, Van1 1120
Tor2, Tor2 1109
Van2, Van2 1101
Edm1, Edm1 1029
Cgy1, Cgy1 1020
Que2, Que2 989
Que1, Que1 987
Sas1, Sas1 980
Tor3, Tor3 977
Edm2, Edm2 974
Sas2, Sas2 969
Cgy2, Cgy2 968
Cgy3, Cgy3 959
Van5, Van5 956
Cgy4, Cgy4 956
Van4, Van4 947
Edm4, Edm4 944
Tor6, Tor6 933
Cgy5, Cgy5 930
Edm5, Edm5 926
Van3, Van3 919
Que3, Que3 918
Que6, Que6 917
Que5, Que5 917
Edm3, Edm3 916
Que11, Que11 913
Sas5, Sas5 913
Que12, Que12 913
Sas7, Sas7 913
Que9, Que9 913
Van6, Van6 912
Sas3, Sas3 905
Edm12, Edm12 904
Sas4, Sas4 903
Que8, Que8 902
Last2, First2 900
Last5, First5 900
Last1, First1 900
Que27, Que27 900
Last3, First3 900
Last6, First6 900
Que25, Que25 900
Last4, First4 900
Edm6, Edm6 899
Que13, Que13 899
Que14, Que14 899
Que16, Que16 899
Sas6, Sas6 899
Que15, Que15 899
Van7, Van7 898
Van8, Van8 898
Tor7, Tor7 892
Tor4, Tor4 890
Cgy8, Cgy8 890
Cgy6, Cgy6 889
Edm7, Edm7 886
Tor11, Tor11 884
Tor10, Tor10 884
Tor9, Tor9 884
Tor12, Tor12 884
Cgy12, Cgy12 884
Edm8, Edm8 884
Edm13, Edm13 882
Edm11, Edm11 879
Cgy7, Cgy7 875
Tor14, Tor14 869
Cgy10, Cgy10 869
Que24, Que24 869
Que18, Que18 869
Que22, Que22 869
Que19, Que19 869
Que20, Que20 869
Sas9, Sas9 869
Sas12, Sas12 869
Edm9, Edm9 868
Sas8, Sas8 868
Cgy14, Cgy14 868
Edm16, Edm16 866
Edm15, Edm15 866
Que26, Que26 863
Que4, Que4 860
Edm10, Edm10 860
Tor8, Tor8 859
Cgy11, Cgy11 857
Que10, Que10 856
Tor15, Tor15 856
Cgy9, Cgy9 855
Van12, Van12 855
Tor5, Tor5 855
Cgy13, Cgy13 855
Tor13, Tor13 854
Van9, Van9 851
Que17, Que17 851
Sas10, Sas10 846
Edm14, Edm14 845
Van11, Van11 845
Sas13, Sas13 845
Que7, Que7 842
Tor16, Tor16 841
Van10, Van10 841
Edm18, Edm18 839
Edm19, Edm19 839
Que21, Que21 838
Sas11, Sas11 814
Edm17, Edm17 812
Edm20, Edm20 800
Que23, Que23 800



Author: Will Reply #1 Posted: Jun 3 2010 5:00PM

If I was to go through a full year of these type of events, we could count all of the "minor" events as a 16 Elo factor (changes your points mildly) and we could have any major tournaments count for a 32 Elo factor (changes your points significantly) and we could have a national tournament at the end of the year with a 64 elo factor (changes your points immensely).

if each city would run 4 minor tournaments and then whichever majors happen to be run in canada count towards points as a major, and then someone runs nationals as the final tournament it would really give us as accurate a points system as possible.

I encourage you to log into the system and check it out for yourself. post any questions and hopefully I have given enough information for you to all think this has some promise. Obviously I know nothing is perfect for points but this is better than what we have now. we could simply define ranks as from one set of points to another set of points.


Author: Will Reply #2 Posted: Jun 3 2010 5:03PM

I will also point out that I started every player at 900 points in this ranking. I could start "pro masters" at 1200 and "pro" at 1000 and "Semi" at 900 and "rookie" at 800 if we wanted to, it would effect the points considerably.

If a player has 800 points and beats a player with 1300 points the 800 point player would gain about 30 points, and the 1300 player would lose those points. If two players with equal points play eachother the winner would steal about 10-12 points from the opponent. That is a short summary of how Elo works. Google it if you need more information.


Author: Barry Reply #3 Posted: Jun 3 2010 5:20PM

Will, Saskatoon and Vancouver ran systems just like this for years and they are great for ranking in your region. We just don't play enough inter-region matches for them to be accuate nationally.


Author: Will Reply #4 Posted: Jun 3 2010 5:48PM

I know that there is not often inter-region play.

Even with that considered, we do have enough majors at least in western canada that we have 2-4 players from each region.

If say region XXX has 2-4 players come to a major, and they do really well. Then they go back to the region and play against some other players and they do not do as well there, the other players will become accurately ranked as better players. I'll do an example of this...


I ran one more major tournament, but only included western canadian players. I also added in XXX5 and XXX6 and had them place in 3rd place in the new major. Van 1 and 2 won this new major and there were no players from TOR or QUE.

After this event I ran a local in the XXX region, but had XXX1 and XXX2 win, with XXX5 and XXX6 finishing in there spot.




New Points:
Van1, Van1 1216
Van2, Van2 1197
Tor1, Tor1 1195
Tor2, Tor2 1109
Cgy1, Cgy1 1075
Edm1, Edm1 1040
Cgy2, Cgy2 1023
XXX1, XXX1 1006
Que2, Que2 989
Que1, Que1 987
Edm2, Edm2 985
Sas1, Sas1 980
Van5, Van5 979
Tor3, Tor3 977
Cgy3, Cgy3 972
Sas2, Sas2 969
Cgy4, Cgy4 969
XXX2, XXX2 960
Van4, Van4 947
XXX5, XXX5 940
XXX6, XXX6 940
Edm5, Edm5 936
Van6, Van6 935
Tor6, Tor6 933
XXX3, XXX3 929
Van3, Van3 919
Que3, Que3 918
Que6, Que6 917
Que5, Que5 917
XXX4, XXX4 914
Que11, Que11 913
Sas5, Sas5 913
Que12, Que12 913
Sas7, Sas7 913
Que9, Que9 913
Edm6, Edm6 909
Sas3, Sas3 905
Cgy5, Cgy5 905
Sas4, Sas4 903
Que8, Que8 902
Cgy8, Cgy8 900
Last2, First2 900
Last5, First5 900
Last1, First1 900
Que27, Que27 900
Last3, First3 900
Last6, First6 900
Que25, Que25 900
Last4, First4 900
Que13, Que13 899
Que14, Que14 899
Que16, Que16 899
Sas6, Sas6 899
Que15, Que15 899
Van7, Van7 898
Van8, Van8 898
Tor7, Tor7 892
Tor4, Tor4 890
Edm7, Edm7 886
Cgy7, Cgy7 885
Tor11, Tor11 884
Tor10, Tor10 884
Tor9, Tor9 884
Tor12, Tor12 884
Edm8, Edm8 884
Edm4, Edm4 882
Edm12, Edm12 870
Tor14, Tor14 869
Que24, Que24 869
Que18, Que18 869
Que22, Que22 869
Que19, Que19 869
Que20, Que20 869
Sas9, Sas9 869
Sas12, Sas12 869
Edm9, Edm9 868
Sas8, Sas8 868
Cgy14, Cgy14 868
Cgy6, Cgy6 864
Que26, Que26 863
Edm13, Edm13 861
Que4, Que4 860
Edm10, Edm10 860
Tor8, Tor8 859
Que10, Que10 856
Tor15, Tor15 856
Van12, Van12 855
Tor5, Tor5 855
Cgy13, Cgy13 855
Edm3, Edm3 854
Tor13, Tor13 854
Van9, Van9 851
Que17, Que17 851
XXX7, XXX7 847
XXX8, XXX8 847
Sas10, Sas10 846
Cgy10, Cgy10 846
Van11, Van11 845
Edm11, Edm11 845
Sas13, Sas13 845
Que7, Que7 842
Tor16, Tor16 841
Van10, Van10 841
Edm18, Edm18 839
Que21, Que21 838
Cgy9, Cgy9 832
Cgy12, Cgy12 829
Edm14, Edm14 824
Sas11, Sas11 814
Edm16, Edm16 813
Edm15, Edm15 813
Edm17, Edm17 812
Cgy11, Cgy11 802
Edm19, Edm19 801
Edm20, Edm20 800
Que23, Que23 800



Author: Will Reply #5 Posted: Jun 3 2010 5:51PM

As you can see, even though XXX1 and XXX2 didn't go to the other tournament, the points system presumes that if they win (doubles and singles) against the XXX5 and XXX6 players that they deserve to be somewhere near the top also. Remember the Elo factor here is lower than at the major, but because the XXX5 and XXX6 players did so well at the major, they brought a lot of points back to there region. Then the XXX region had more points to go around between there players, even though they didnt have any tournaments in the first round of locals and they did not attend the first major. because some of the "weaker" players from there region did really well in the new major it helped out to show how good that XXX region is.


Author: The Next One. Reply #6 Posted: Jun 3 2010 8:06PM

wtf does all this mean!!?? Vancouver is #1?!


Author: Will Reply #7 Posted: Jun 3 2010 8:47PM

Sorry, it's lots of reading! Yes Dave it means Vancouver is #1 to save you the time.


Author: University of Foos Reply #8 Posted: Jun 4 2010 1:29PM

Looks like it has got a lot of potential to me. This would aleviate alot of headaches caused by the 'who's ranked what' argument that goes along with every tournament.

There seems to be two ways of going about this:

1. Every promoter/city gets a login and every promoter/city is responsible for entering their results.

2. Somebody volunteers, and inputs the information into the system based on results submitted to them from each city.

I like the idea of someone being responsible for the sytem, so I tend to option 2.

Before any of this actually matters though, we need buy in from all of the different areas. Are players/promoters in Saskatoon, Regina, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton interested in doing this? Who will be responsible in each area?




Author: Will Reply #9 Posted: Jun 4 2010 1:40PM

I would run the Edmonton area, and if results are submitted to me I would maintain the point system in a transparent manner. If Paul(Regina) Brian(cgy) and Peter or anyone else from Vancouver is willing to run quarterly events instead of or in addition to the weekly dyp we could start this now.

Even if we only have western Canada on board it would be worth starting. Maybe we can incorporate the east too but we oils jhave something started from this upcoming tournament in Calgary.


Author: moyatielens Reply #10 Posted: Jun 4 2010 2:49PM

umm..and what about the people who don't go to locals? Not that there are a lot of us, but...


Author: Darcy Reply #11 Posted: Jun 4 2010 3:16PM

Obviously, there isn't a perfect system. However, just the fact that we're having the discussion is a good start.

I say we try Wills way for a while and see how it goes. Who knows maybe we'll really like it, maybe we won't. Sooner or later, if it works, someone will find a way to expand on it and make it more accurate. Until then, it's better to have something in place now and get an idea of what works or doesn't work than to do nothing and have no idea.


Author: Will Reply #12 Posted: Jun 4 2010 3:56PM

Moya, if you don't play locals or majors you won't have points, if you only play majors then the points system still works well. As long as some people play locals and then when you play in a major your points will come to reflect your level of play when playing against other people that have points.


Author: University of Foos Reply #13 Posted: Jun 4 2010 5:15PM

In addition to what Will said Moya, you would start with X number of points in based on current rank. If you don't play, you don't change.


Author: eradicator Reply #14 Posted: Jun 10 2010 12:07PM

I would volunteer to put in Regina's points or format the matches into a usable method. We always have a round-robin followed by a single-elimination money round. All matches are spotted. We'd probably just use that as I'm not sure how many guys would actually want to play a double elimination tournament for the purpose of points, the group is more on the casual side...


Author: dfnder Reply #15 Posted: Jun 10 2010 1:19PM


Like I said in another thread, you should talk to Eric Dunn as he had an Elo program that was on the old CTSA site that did what we are looking for. We just need to get that program, agree to enter tournaments, figure a starting point for players and the weights given to locals vs national vs international tournaments. I think that players should be slotted just above their current rank so that if the rank is artificial they will go down instead of remaining mis-ranked too long.

I would start the system right after this Alberta tournament and then we will be set up for the future.
With Elo it doesn't need to have a double elimination format it is match based.


Author: Will Reply #16 Posted: Jun 10 2010 2:11PM

I don't see any advantage to switching from netfoos to that system though?

Netfoos is very easy to use and Brian and I have experience using it.

Netfoos tracks player stats, which is good for the players. Winning percentage, head to head results with everyone they have ever played. Total money winnings, and much more.

Netfoos streams online for other people to use from home to track results.

Netfoos is free and accessible right now.

Netfoos calculates the points for you using Elo, and has many additional features in the points calculation.




If there is an advantage to trying to get Eric dunn's program I would be interested in checking it out, but what does it provide that netfoos doesn't, and does it provide the advantages listed above? When I emailed Eric regarding this subject he didn't specify anything and encouraged me to use the system listed above.

One thing that netfoos lacks is that it has a limit to the format's it will accept. We can't enter a round robin, which is a feature they may add in the future.


Author: Will Reply #17 Posted: Jun 10 2010 2:32PM

Just to be clear, I'm not saying this is the only way to do it and I think it's great that you are presenting an option - I would like to hear more about it, that post is just some questions I have about the program.


Author: BriL Reply #18 Posted: Jun 10 2010 5:05PM

Will and I are going to use the tournements we have to enter into Netfoos. After the tournament next weekend we will have the results from 3 Calgary tournements and Will has 2 from Edmonton I believe. Should be a good start to more of an objective system.


Author: dfnder Reply #19 Posted: Jun 10 2010 8:01PM


Do they discourage you from entering data from local tournaments at all? The only draw backs I see is that they may fold (not likely) or if they sell advertising it could be money our National Association could be making.


Author: S. Edwards Reply #20 Posted: Jun 10 2010 10:33PM

if you win the "B" side, Netfoos doesn't give you any points if you win the first match in the finals.


Author: foosghost Reply #21 Posted: Jun 10 2010 11:30PM

As I told Will. I think it's more important to have a point system that is used and backed / maintained by motivated people than using one points system over another

We can talk for months about this and we might end up with nothing

I'd say let's go ahead with and make adjustments as we find we need them

Netfoos is more polished than the system I built but the one thing my old system has over netfoos is control. We'd have full control over how our point system is run and how it works cause we'd control the code. It was written in php with a mysql backend. Richard tench helped me figure out the elo part of the system. I have the code kicking around here somewhere it would just need a home. If I remember correctly it kept track of a number of different rankings: singles and doubles and on each official table. Then a combined or overall ranking. The reporting was good. But I think the match entry could use an upgrade

So it's available if someone wants it. But netfoos works for now I would say


Author: foosghost Reply #22 Posted: Jun 10 2010 11:32PM

Oops meant to say...

I'd say let's go ahead with netfoos and make adjustments as we find we need them


Author: Chaos_Plus_Three Reply #23 Posted: Jun 12 2010 6:21PM

When you guys start entering the results of old tournaments, what kind of numbers are the players going to originally start with? Like are some people going to start with Pro Master numbers?

For the up coming tourny, if the only diffrence between Pro and Pro Master is lower entry fees, that's great for some but the lack of Pro Singles or Dubs is a bit of a burn for many Semi's that have been pushed up into the Pro group.

No mater, it should be a fabulous tourny, and good on you all for getting this rating system up, it's the best thing that's come along since snake shots.


Author: hardboiled Reply #24 Posted: Jun 14 2010 5:52PM



Hopefully, the idea is a whole lot better than rollovers were




Author: Aged Whine & Cheese Reply #25 Posted: Jun 14 2010 11:56PM

"Hopefully, the idea is a whole lot better than rollovers were"

Is this not equivalent to saying "hopefully my next bowl of ice cream will be better than having my eyes burned out with hot pokers"?

Rollovers were a truly bad idea.


Author: Chaos_Plus_Three Reply #26 Posted: Jun 15 2010 11:17PM

Rollers are great. If not for them there would be like one euro and a thousand pullshots, way more people play the game because of rollers, and they take a bit to perfect, it's not just a cheap spinaroo, the rod and the ball are totally under control.

Rating system is great ... make it happen.

I bet the pros would like prize money for the top pro placeing in open.


Author: Will Reply #27 Posted: Feb 18 2011 12:40PM

bump


Author: tony Reply #28 Posted: Feb 18 2011 5:30PM

long live the rollover critics who also shoot the rollover.


Author: Will Reply #29 Posted: Dec 14 2011 1:41PM

Bump for Mario


This thread does not accept replies because:

The last post to this thread is more than 30 days old.