Printable View
As I said, the equation is simple, we just need a dollar value for the points that a person invests in the tournament.
If you had to guess, what is the conversion of 140 points to dollars? Looking at your redeem cost (580=$1 Carbon) that would make an opt-in cost about $.25.
So, the equation would probably be total winnings/(total opt-ins*.25)=ROI
I would probably suggest setting a minimum number of tournaments to qualify. Say 5/week or 20 tournaments to qualify for the monthly leaderboard?
This equation would be for each user.Quote:
Originally Posted by gefishy
Well, lets take a look at the Strength of Schedule equation.
Here is the NCAA definition of the Strength of Schedule Formula:
S.O.S. is broken down into these four sub-parts:
* The cumulative won/loss records of a team’s opponents, with only wins over other Division I-A teams being counted. All losses are counted. This sub part carries a weight of 66 2/3 percent.
* The cumulative won/loss records of the opponents’ opponents. This sub part carries a weight of 33 1/3 percent.
Add A+B and rank the results in ascending order from No. 1- No.117, (the current number of teams being used in the BCS calculations).
* Take that rank and divide by 25. The end result becomes the figure used in a team’s strength of schedule. For example, the team that plays the No. 1-rated schedule each week receives a value of 0.04 (1/25), the No. 25 team gets a value of 1 (25/25), and the No. 35 team gets a value of 1.40 (35/25).
Taken from Rigging the BCS and why strength of schedule is Complete B.S. Ŧ The Pole's Position
This would need to be tweaked for our needs... I'll need a minute to do that. I'm not that smart to just wing it :)
Im thinking the formula would be something like:
For our stats:
- Get the AVG % of all the players ITM %
- Take the total # of players (Not just opted in, the total #)
- What place did you finish at
Lets assume the ITM % is 30% and there are 35 players and you got 8th place
A quick idea for the formula would be:
Players * ITM% * Your Place = Your Strength (Lowest is better)
35 * 30 * 8 = 84 Strength Of Tournament
ITM% = 40% how would that change it
35 * 40 * 8 = 112 Strength of Tournament
Let say theres only 30 players in and 30% ITM
30 * 30% * 8 = 72 Strength of Tournament
So ya, if you muck up and take 25th place.. lets see
30 * 30% * 25th = 225 Strength of Tournament
sounds good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zab
Fishy check my math here
If you are saying that lower is better, this scenario doesn't work. If 40% are ITM the tournament should be stronger not weaker. You show a 40% ITM tournament with a 112 Strenght of Tournament and a 30% ITM with a 84 making that appear stronger. Maybe you meant to say that higher is better?Quote:
Originally Posted by Zab
I'm not sure why the place that you finish should affect the strength of tournament. The strength of tournament should be something that is set at the start of the tournament (when all players have entered) and then it shouldn't change. Your final placement should only affect your contribution to the Strength of Tournament for the next tournament. Am I missing something?Quote:
Originally Posted by Zab
Despite my criticism, I think this equation is the right idea. Keep the equation simple:
What if we make the strength of tournament a simple equation similar to that used to determine ITM for individual players. Lets expand the equation to include all players take (total number of tournaments ITM/total number of tournaments entered) Now you have a % of total ITM for all players. You can either express the strength of tournament like this:
Tournament ID XXXX Strength of Tournament: XX% (that ITM number) - This is probably the easiest way to do it (higher % = stronger tournament)
Or you can determine some sort of a numerical value to assign current % levels:
20-30% = strength level of 5
30-40% = strength level of 10
but I think that simply confuses things.
The best part about using total ITM to determine Strength of Tournament is that this number can also be used in an equation to determine ranks of players!
Make sense?
I was thinking it would be strength of the tournament (The field you are playing against) vs how you finish = your ratingQuote:
Originally Posted by gefishy
So ya, we're on the same page.
And yes my Math is off.. lemme see
A quick idea for the formula would be:
Players * ITM% * Your Place = Your Strength (Lowest is better)
35 * 30 * 8 = 84 Strength Of Tournament
ITM% = 40% how would that change it
35 * 40 * 8 = 112 Strength of Tournament
I could do
Players in Tourneys + ITM % + Where you placed (Backwards) so if theres 30 people in, then 1st place = 30 pts, 2nd place = 29 pts etc
OK,Quote:
Originally Posted by Zab
I think I may still be confused here. What exactly would that final Strength of Tournament number mean?
If I am reading it correctly, when you say "Strength of Tournament" you mean a number of points assigned to your finishing spot relative to the average quality-of-play of the rest of the field?
OMG my brain hurts after reading this....:( lol
Before I get to crazy with my ideas, a couple questions:
Do you have any way of easily tracking any of these statistics:
- Number of tournaments a member has opted into (removing the refunds of course)
- Number of tournaments a member finished ITM
- Rosters for tournaments already completed (and if so, how far back do they go)
- For each member, a chronological list of where they finished in every tournament they played
If you want to have it where the rankings are at "0" for everybody and then going forward are tracked, we won't even need those last 2 stats.
I heart math. Maybe that shoulda been my major... Regardless, when this is figured out we should have a pretty freakin' solid ranking system. It's a pain now, but it will make for solid data later :)Quote:
Originally Posted by JBrazon
Do you have any way of easily tracking any of these statistics:
- Number of tournaments a member has opted into (removing the refunds of course) YES we track them
- Number of tournaments a member finished ITM YES, again tracked
- Rosters for tournaments already completed (and if so, how far back do they go) YES tracked
- For each member, a chronological list of where they finished in every tournament they played A little more tricky.. not 100% sure..
If you want to have it where the rankings are at "0" for everybody and then going forward are tracked, we won't even need those last 2 stats
Yes we'd probably restart everyone at 0
Sweet. Then I say that your equation will work wonderfully. See if I got this right:
As people opt-in to the tournament, or after the tournament begins, we track the average ITM of that tournament's field:
(Total number of all-time finished ITM for all the members who are currently opted in)
/
(Total number of all-time opt-ins for all the members who are currently opted in)
This gives us most accurate Total Average ITM number.
Then when the tournament is over, we use your equation with the refined Total Average ITM number:
(Number of Players)X(Total Average ITM)X(Place Finished*)= Strength of Tournament Points*place finished would be inverted: EX 30 players means 1st is worth 30, 2nd worth 29, so on
This would give us a total score for each individual user for each tournament modified by the strength of that tournament.
Then simply create a LeaderBoard that shows 1st place having the highest score and so on. In order to qualify for the leaderboard, you have to have played in a certain number of tournaments (say 25?)
Make sense?
ya I think that works.. Total players * ITM % avg * your place inverted
I'll setup a leaderboard all time ranking system + weekly contest (Min 7 tourneys to qualify)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zab
Pff, that wasn't so hard :)
I would suggest that we run a test with this first before rolling it out. Make sure the data works before losing too many points...
Maybe create a page for it like you would if it were live but don't let anybody access it yet. Let the numbers run for a week and then check it to see if it makes sense?
I'm creating a simulation right now with 25 fake members and 5 tournaments to see what happens. I will post it up here when I am done.
Strike that, the simulation is taking too long. Not doing it anymore :)
Really donīt understand what you are talking about, lol
It is also worth considering that a persons Strength of Tournament Points total should be divided by the number of tournaments they played in. This way people don't get an unfair advantage if they play in 15 tournaments as opposed to 7. Make sense?
For overall, maybe.. but for weekly leaderboard, if they don't have at least 7 tournaments played, they won't be in the top tier if that makes sense..Quote:
Originally Posted by gefishy
Basically trying to make a rating system.. How well you stack up against others.. How far you get in tournaments etc..Quote:
Originally Posted by MIGO14
We want to know who the 'best' player is sort of thing on a weekly basis (For free points)
Yeah, you're probably right. Forget I even mentioned it :)
Though I agree that we shouldn't change the equation, maybe have a column for the number of tournaments people entered. That way if a debate arises, people can figure it out on their own :)
Ya there's not a good math formula to take into consideration # of tournaments played.
We might just list them (12 Tournaments Played)
Also, what to call this...
Maybe PokerOwned Player Rating?
Maybe call it like "PokerOwned Championship Series". Give out a weekly prize and then maybe have "seasons" where you can have an over-all champ at the end!Quote:
Originally Posted by Zab
There are established TLB equations out there already ...
1 PokerStars formula
2 Full Tilt Poker formula
3 UB Formula
Full Tilts would be..
ITM % + Entrants / Position = your rating
I think this would work and be much simpler
Couple Scenarios, both you got 6th place
30 entrants, 40% ITM = 70/6 = 11.66 Rating
30 entrants, 35% ITM = 65/6 = 10.83 Rating
25 entrants, 35% ITM = 60/6 = 10.00 Rating
Fishy you see any problems with this formula?
Thanks for the info :)Quote:
Originally Posted by bmeelneg
Let's do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zab
I just kinda quick scanned this the first time thru ... too much math ... not that I suck at math.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zab
Anyways, am I reading this right? 7 tourneys in one week to qualify. 7 tourneys * 145 point = 1015 points a week minimum.
Or are you saying 7 tourney for the all time board (not the weekly board)?
I crashed this party late lol... I have some other input if you want it
There needs to be some sort of minimum or else the numbers won't be any good. Considering there are 3 tournaments a day (soon to be four) and 7 days a week that is 21-28 tournaments. This system would be good for the regulars, but do what I do: Use the donkey betting and last longer bets to make points. If you are pretty decent at poker, you may have to do very few surveys to pull 7 a week!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmeelneg
Sounds great what u both are cooking up, looking forward to it.
math is cooking on the brain.. hard to implement so many great ideas at once.. LOL