Jump to content
Burk

WFB OFCC team results

Recommended Posts

Placings dont matter, have fun, drink beer....repeat.

 

Then why have them at all?  This isn't directed at Burk, but I think he brings up the cause for some complaints.  If the event is just for fun, getting together and throwing dice, then why even remotely incentivize/emphasize winning?  I think it'd be great to just do away with it for an event, and IMO that would really make it standout as different.  Whenever someone has asked this question, I'm not sure if I've ever seen someone answer it with any gravitas; maybe I missed that post, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why have them at all?  This isn't directed at Burk, but I think he brings up the cause for some complaints.  If the event is just for fun, getting together and throwing dice, then why even remotely incentivize/emphasize winning?  I think it'd be great to just do away with it for an event, and IMO that would really make it standout as different.  Whenever someone has asked this question, I'm not sure if I've ever seen someone answer it with any gravitas; maybe I missed that post, though.

I agree with you, i would like to abolish any placings....but many people like to know their scores  :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flat sportsmanship scores are pretty useless IMHO. They're too subjective to be useful, and low scores don't even give a person any idea what they're doing wrong. Were you penalized for bending rules? For lawyering too hard? For bringing a cunty list? For not letting someone take back mistakes? Were you just a dick?

 

Or, like so often happens, we're you just up against some baby who doesn't get the difference between "sportsmanship" and "letting me win."

 

 

Instead of numbers there should just be a checkbox system. Opponent was fun to play. Opponent played fair. Opponent knew his rule book well. Opponent was friendly. Opponent was a BAD opponent. Opponent was too much of a rules lawyer. Opponent was my favorite opponent of the tournament.

 

Not only would this be more fair, it would also give people feedback that would help them become more fun to play. Much better than just getting a bad sports score and having no clue why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flat sportsmanship scores are pretty useless IMHO. They're too subjective to be useful, and low scores don't even give a person any idea what they're doing wrong. Were you penalized for bending rules? For lawyering too hard? For bringing a cunty list? For not letting someone take back mistakes? Were you just a dick?

 

Or, like so often happens, we're you just up against some baby who doesn't get the difference between "sportsmanship" and "letting me win."

 

 

Instead of numbers there should just be a checkbox system. Opponent was fun to play. Opponent played fair. Opponent knew his rule book well. Opponent was friendly. Opponent was a BAD opponent. Opponent was too much of a rules lawyer. Opponent was my favorite opponent of the tournament.

 

Not only would this be more fair, it would also give people feedback that would help them become more fun to play. Much better than just getting a bad sports score and having no clue why.

this does have merit and 40k does it this way (at least they did last year, not sure about joels system this year).  it however often leads to often a more flat sports scores then you we saw this year.  Would the WFB community embrace this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flat sportsmanship scores are pretty useless IMHO. They're too subjective to be useful, and low scores don't even give a person any idea what they're doing wrong. Were you penalized for bending rules? For lawyering too hard? For bringing a cunty list? For not letting someone take back mistakes? Were you just a dick?

 

Or, like so often happens, we're you just up against some baby who doesn't get the difference between "sportsmanship" and "letting me win."

 

 

Instead of numbers there should just be a checkbox system. Opponent was fun to play. Opponent played fair. Opponent knew his rule book well. Opponent was friendly. Opponent was a BAD opponent. Opponent was too much of a rules lawyer. Opponent was my favorite opponent of the tournament.

 

Not only would this be more fair, it would also give people feedback that would help them become more fun to play. Much better than just getting a bad sports score and having no clue why.

I think a checkbox system is a great idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks!

 

And you are correct in my erroneous identification of the DC teams, but I remain in disagreement with your assessment.  I put the above lists in a spreadsheet and found, with the exception of 4 of the teams, that the teams in the top 2/3 of sports are also in the top 2/3 of battle.ofcc.jpg

EDIT: as a further observation I notice that, of the 11 teams appearing in both columns above, it is an even split between those finishing higher in their sports/battle placement as compared to the battle/sports placement (if that makes sense).  There is a difference of one (as there is an odd number (15), but CHOP! is in virtually the same place on both lists and is essentially a wash.

 

I contend this is further evidence that your assessment and assumption is incorrect.  At least in this case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Burk beat me to it.  Full disclosure has been tried and it only enables further focus on something that should be getting less focus than it already is.

I have to agree that the event seems a little ambiguous right now regarding its focus.  Something for HoG to really work on this coming year, I think!

The good news (IMO) is that I firmly believe we can serve people who love a high level game, people who just want to push models, and everyone in between.  It's all about matching!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why have them at all?  This isn't directed at Burk, but I think he brings up the cause for some complaints.  If the event is just for fun, getting together and throwing dice, then why even remotely incentivize/emphasize winning? 

The most indispensable reason for keeping track of results game to game is so that it can be fed into creating matchups for the subsequent rounds.  

 

Most of the rest is purely for entertainment purposes, e.g. "Veskit sucks!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well in all the one day events I've always run the checkbox System and yes it can lead to a flat sports score but it also takes all the subjectiveness out of it,

So I'm for it

If you're worried about flat sports scores then add in some bonus points for "going above and beyond." Things that you think is more "in the spirit of OFCC. E.g.:

- opponent explained their moves as (s)he made them

- opponent cheered on my army's successes as well as his/her own

- etc.

 

That way, even if the scores are flat, at least their being so indicates that the objective of "advancing the spirit of OFCC" is being met.

 

In addition, at the VERY END there should be a way to call out bad opponents, provided that you justify that decision. People who give bad games should be docked sportsmanship, but they should at least be given a reason why. This should also NOT be done right on the heels of the game, so that salty losers don't take it out on the victor. Let people cool down, and if they're still upset about the game then there's more chance the grievance is legitimate.

 

I know that I for one have been angry about games at the time, but not once id had a chance to cool off and get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will jump on the check box bandwagon. It would make it easier to identify problems that do arise. Fav. Opponent would be added points, but there is a chance of ties and we would need to figure out a tie breaker. Also with the added OFCC type boxes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG WTF I didn't WIN?!  Wait, what team was I on again?  Comp sucks!  Sports sucks!  Painting sucks!  I heard some guy got a 0 sports score!  Who came up with this scoring system?!  I want a refund!  My team got robbed!  I demand to know details!  Thank you for the free Twix!!  I <3 OFCC 4Evah.

This bears repeating. Bottom line is that the event is about playing warhammer and having fun.

 

I think some are failing to remember the point of the event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks!

 

And you are correct in my erroneous identification of the DC teams, but I remain in disagreement with your assessment.  I put the above lists in a spreadsheet and found, with the exception of 4 of the teams, that the teams in the top 2/3 of sports are also in the top 2/3 of battle.ofcc.jpg

EDIT: as a further observation I notice that, of the 11 teams appearing in both columns above, it is an even split between those finishing higher in their sports/battle placement as compared to the battle/sports placement (if that makes sense).  There is a difference of one (as there is an odd number (15), but CHOP! is in virtually the same place on both lists and is essentially a wash.

 

I contend this is further evidence that your assessment and assumption is incorrect.  At least in this case.

 

My analysis indicated that if you were in the top 10 for battle your were far more likely to be in the bottom 10 for sports. If there was not a general negative correlation between sports and battle this would not be the case. In an ideal situation we would see sports scores randomly distributed with respect to battle scores, but we can see from a quick glance from you chart that this is simply not the case. 

 

3 teams from the top half (10) of sports appear in the top  half of battle and vice versa

 

3 teams from the top five of battle do not appear in the top 15 of sports 

 

Out of the top ten  teams in battle points 7/10 finished below the top 10 of sports, and 3 of 10 finished out of the top 2/3. Assuming that 11th place won approximately 50% of their games, as they are the approximate half way line, then if you have a winning record you have a 70% chance of finishing in the bottom ten in sports. If you were one of the 5 best teams in battle points you had a 60% chance of ending up out of the top 15 in sports. 

 

Again i believe this indicates a negative correlation between battle score and sports score in general. If you won more than half your games you have a very good chance of finishing in the bottom half of sports. If you finished in the top 5 of battle you have a better than even chance of finishing in the bottom 5 of sports.  

 

This should not be the case if the teams were very close together in points and the difference was mostly the pins. The pins in theory should be randomly distributed with respect to battle points if the teams were very close in flat sports scores since this means the top teams in battle were not significantly less sportsmanlike when compared to the bottom teams. One look at the chart indicates they were not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mr. Bigglesworth

Why did you get less sport? Has anyone who won battle asked themselves this?

 

I know getting steamrolled flat sucks. My second favorite game was playing against John who left me with two models because we finished 2 PTA apart. All my games finished 2 points apart or drew. That is what ofcc list comparisons is all about close games. I rated all max sports and rated I would play the list again, but that list I hesitated the most on.

 

If I took on a list that tabled me on turn three you bet you would get marked down. List committee be damned, you brought a list that went against the spirit of ofcc. I have never been tabled by bad dice, I have lost games by bad dice, dice be damned, you probably brought a broketastic list. I ask those who teams did well, how many tablings took place if the answer is more than 1 the list is the problem not the player or the sportsmanship. Some one made a conscious decision to bring that list.

 

Captains try to mitigate this by match ups but if you steamrolled more than 2 folks it is likely even captain couldn't have prevented it and therefore the issue falls in the list. We are responsible for our lists just like we are for our behavior. I don't think lower scoring sports team does not mean the folks are not fun to play.

 

I say thank you and keep this system it is another way to police against win at all cost like the lrc, which is why I like to go to ofcc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot base a statistical analysis on assumption. I think we all know that. Most of your theory is based on suppositions and assumptions, never a strong foundation for valid arguments.

 

That not withstanding you are incorrect in this case. Granted I can only speak for my team, but we finished 7th in Battle with a team record of 11-9. Barely over .500 and still a top 1/3 position. We also received a number of pins - over a third of our total opponents graced us with their pins (if not their votes :roll:). My speculation would be that there are both similar and differing records and positioning situations.

 

Burk has already stated that the sports scores were close and pins were the difference. This year seemed to me to be pretty close in overall team battle scores as well. It didn't seem to me that any one team ran away with it his year, which I personally find great. Assuming my supposition is correct. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My analysis indicated that if you were in the top 10 for battle your were far more likely to be in the bottom 10 for sports. If there was not a general negative correlation between sports and battle this would not be the case. In an ideal situation we would see sports scores randomly distributed with respect to battle scores, but we can see from a quick glance from you chart that this is simply not the case. 

 

3 teams from the top half (10) of sports appear in the top  half of battle and vice versa

 

3 teams from the top five of battle do not appear in the top 15 of sports 

 

Out of the top ten  teams in battle points 7/10 finished below the top 10 of sports, and 3 of 10 finished out of the top 2/3. Assuming that 11th place won approximately 50% of their games, as they are the approximate half way line, then if you have a winning record you have a 70% chance of finishing in the bottom ten in sports. If you were one of the 5 best teams in battle points you had a 60% chance of ending up out of the top 15 in sports. 

 

Again i believe this indicates a negative correlation between battle score and sports score in general. If you won more than half your games you have a very good chance of finishing in the bottom half of sports. If you finished in the top 5 of battle you have a better than even chance of finishing in the bottom 5 of sports.  

 

This should not be the case if the teams were very close together in points and the difference was mostly the pins. The pins in theory should be randomly distributed with respect to battle points if the teams were very close in flat sports scores since this means the top teams in battle were not significantly less sportsmanlike when compared to the bottom teams. One look at the chart indicates they were not. 

again, no.  the difference between top sports and low sports was fav opp pins.  if you took those out, the distribution would be like 20 pts difference.  that is 1 point per game.  not a disparate difference when you consider the total games.  Again, it is fav opp pins.  some teams cleaned up with these.  If you got 5 fav opp pins, it is like having another player with with perfect sports scores on your team.  

 

what this does show us is that if you beat the snot out of your opponent then you probably were not his favorite game, not that you were docked in sports.  And frankly I am fine with this as it encourages you to make the game close.....Hell I know I will often do x or not do y if I am hammering my opponent.....why?  so we both have fun.

 

also, big assumption is that pins are randomly distributed.  This is not the case.  the top 4 teams in sports got 25 of 82 possible pins....... Bottom 4 only got 8.  again. fav opp pins.

 

Did I mention it was fav opp pins?  I must keep forgetting to say that........ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I repeat I am not releasing scores, but I would expect you would take my word for it as I have spent numerous hours in that spreadsheet and it is about fav opp pins...just like painting was about the fav army votes.  

 

I will say that I am thinking about capping the bonus points on these, but again, it comes down to each year assessing and making a tweek for next year....it will never be perfect, but each year we get a little closer to a great system.

 

and no I am not releasing scores  :laugh:

 

 

BTW, Did I mention scores will not be released.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I repeat I am not releasing scores, but I would expect you would take my word for it as I have spent numerous hours in that spreadsheet and it is about fav opp pins...just like painting was about the fav army votes.  

 

I will say that I am thinking about capping the bonus points on these, but again, it comes down to each year assessing and making a tweek for next year....it will never be perfect, but each year we get a little closer to a great system.

 

and no I am not releasing scores  :laugh:

 

 

BTW, Did I mention scores will not be released.

Isn't the purpose of sportsmanship scores to promote sportsmanship? How is this goal advanced by not telling anybody how they were rated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×