Printable View
Macintosh Users Request: I am having trouble with many of the download and some other surveys due to my being on a mac pro laptop. For this site's improvement, I
am requesting a separate surveys tab that has only surveys and downloads etc. . . that are known to work with macs. Hope you consider!
Ahh I don't control those at all. Those are 100% up to the sites :(Quote:
Originally Posted by dergottimhimmel
The point is, I want a second leader-board that favors those who last longer than others in a way that people can look at it and legitimately take away that one user has the ability to generally play deeper into tournaments than others.
Make sense? Thoughts?
This paragraph is for the benefit of those who hate walls-of-text. If you don't care about statistical analysis or, at a basic level, using statistics like this to identify weaknesses in your play then you should definitely stop reading!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is my reasoning:
I would love to see a LeaderBoard that rewards our people's ability to outlast their competition. This would provide incentive to everybody (regardless of how large or small their bankroll is) to play good poker all the way through to the end of the tournament.
The fact of the matter is we have a lot of people at this site. More importantly, we have a lot of (at least marginally) talented poker players. If you have a large bankroll, and make it to the final table, you may not care if you stick around to win a free-roll because, frankly, if you finish 10th, you miss out on $7 and got plenty of practice which I assume is more beneficial than $7 alone especially when you consider that the final table tends to last about as long as the rest of the tournament had to that point.
People like being on top of our LeaderBoard. People like seeing that they are "better" than a lot of people. This LeaderBoard would provide a system that can more accurately (note I didn't say: perfectly) reflect a couple of a poker players most valuable skills: patience and reasonable taking/management. This would also allow people to see the relationship (good or bad) between strong late tournament play v. "making it to the money" over the long-haul. Both LeaderBoards would be in the same place!
What could they win Bob? Considering that this tournament would be mostly for the benefit of more regular members, or those who are more interested in improving their play, the prize could be points or something where each month the "winner" is crowned "*insert fancy, regal title here*" and has the ability to write a post about what they think good poker decision making looks like. Everybody else (who opts in to the leaderboard) must comment on the post with a "congratulations" followed by their opinion (good or bad) of the winner's stance or be removed from the LeaderBoard for the next month.
In order to work, I think this leaderboard would need an equation weighted to take the following things into account (tell me if I missed anything):
1) Place that a user finishes in a given tournament (obviously).
2) Number of opt-ins in a given tournament (to favor placing higher in tournaments with more people).
3) Number of tournaments the person played and were ITM (in the money) in a given month on a given poker client (Carbon) vs. the number of tournaments they opted in to.*
*would need to set a minimum of tournaments played to qualify for a given month to avoid people winning the one tournament they play and topping the leaderboard
4) other criteria??
On second thought, I may have made this more complex than it needs to be...
Interesting Fishy...
When I think about this at first, the first thought is.. It's the same as the monthly leaderboard.. Replace amount won with how long you last = same thing.
Would have to come up with a math solution that makes sense...
i like the idea, seems a bit complex as far as statistics are concerned. but if done correctly i think it could be beneficial to a lot of ppl
The question is, how is this REALLY any different from the money won in the leaderboard?Quote:
Originally Posted by dbbc_0169
See, I had actually originally written this mammoth post about my idea. The thing is that if I play in every tournament, I will win money eventually and probably a lot of it. If I play in maybe half the tournaments, that is different. Different still, what if I only play like 5 tournaments a week? The money leaderboard shows how much money you won, but not what it took to get you there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zab
Think about the Return on Investment (ROI) statistic that most poker players use. 2 players each have a $2million bankroll. 1 player had to invest $4million in buy-ins where 1 player had to invest $1million. They both have the same amount of money, but the second player is probably "better" because they have a positive ROI and the first player has a negative ROI. In our case, nobody invests anything so the ROI statistic is fairly useless. But what if we create an ROI statistic based on points used for buy-ins? Now we have something, and this is much easier to track than the crazy equation I was thinking of.
All we need is a dollar value for a given tournament buy-in (140 points = X dollars), then it is a simple ROI calculation where: TOTAL WINNINGS/TOTAL INVESTMENT (points invested) = ROI
What do you think?
Sort of like in football... Strength of Schedule.. "What it took to get there" as you pointed out.
How to create this leaderboard, what formula... how would it translate if you only played in 1 tournament compared to a guy who did 20 this week..
If we were going to track this statistic, I would also suggest a column listing the number of tournaments played in. That way, if somebody says "I have a 600% ROI!! I'm awesome!" but they only played 1 tournament... well they might have just gotten lucky.
Actually some of the ideas I am getting, is taking this even one step further..
Comparing you to the level of the play field (Again think in terms of strength of schedule).
If the field is easier (Players aren't as good) you would get less "Points or % or whatever"
If the field was harder, you would get more