tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post8333293781734929342..comments2024-01-19T00:21:36.058-05:00Comments on View from the Deadbox: Logan's Run: The Finish LineBaca Locohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13014510414015288907noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-67997012597117052752009-01-25T00:53:00.000-05:002009-01-25T00:53:00.000-05:00Reading comprehension, Chris, c'mon. I'm not dissi...Reading comprehension, Chris, c'mon. I'm not dissing APPA or even the ranking system (which is ok if not ideal.) I am principally opposed to the classification rules and I suggested a variety of alternatives.<BR/>And you couldn't wait until I posted tomorrow (later today, could you?)Baca Locohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13014510414015288907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-20750763977409747732009-01-25T00:15:00.000-05:002009-01-25T00:15:00.000-05:00So maybe I missed it, but did you offer any BETTER...So maybe I missed it, but did you offer any BETTER alternative than the current system?<BR/><BR/>I don't think anybody is saying what we have is perfect, or necessarily even close to it, but nobody seems to have anything better either.raehlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311405248370629057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-10000907065637188942009-01-24T16:27:00.000-05:002009-01-24T16:27:00.000-05:00Joe,Realistically there's only so much any system ...Joe,<BR/>Realistically there's only so much any system can do. The best one can hope for is competitive balance within the divisions while classifying players as fairly as possible.<BR/>Ranking is simply the method used as it serves to rank teams relative to their competition.<BR/>And of course that is not really what the PSP system is doing. It is trying to restructure the divisions in such a way that the preponderance of the ability in the future D1 is the equivalent of what is currently in D2.<BR/><BR/>Chris<BR/>And that is what I meant by altering the nature of the divisions. The current system is intentionally altering the range of ability that qualifies for that division. There is a substantive difference between a competitive division in isolation and a system that on the whole provides competitive balance AND is as widely inclusive up and down the divisions as possible in order to encourage the widest possible participation.<BR/>I don't care if you guys want to stuff semi-pro with D3 quality players--if they're all the same it's a competitive division. But doing stuff like that causes other problems.<BR/>You keep wanting to fight the battle over is the current system ok or not. That's not really my issue with it. My issue with it is that it needs to be better or different BECAUSE this, this and this are happening as a result. Not because it could be better.<BR/><BR/>I'll be posting on the new universal classification gimmick tomorrow (hopefully) and if I've failed to address any of your positions vis-a-vis classification/ranking let me know.Baca Locohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13014510414015288907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-24614832693507276872009-01-24T12:56:00.000-05:002009-01-24T12:56:00.000-05:00Baca,What do you mean by "alter the nature of the ...Baca,<BR/><BR/>What do you mean by "alter the nature of the divisions"? If you mean alter them so that players in each division are of a similar skill level, then yes, that's exactly what the classification system is designed to do. 40% of the players in one division and 40% of the players in another division does NOT yield competitive divisions, and the classification system absolutely tries to better group players by skill/talent.raehlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311405248370629057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-14439457342611452522009-01-24T02:34:00.000-05:002009-01-24T02:34:00.000-05:00I think, and I may be a bit off kilter here, but w...I think, and I may be a bit off kilter here, but we need to define a difference between classification and ranking. It seems to me that the two terms are used synonymously when they actually mean two different things.<BR/><BR/>A player's classification should be determined based on their national/regional experience. Essentially, their classification is how their class/ranking is determined now, based on events and points accumulated. An individual players ranking should be based relative to their peers, which is something that we have been unsuccessful in tracking, as we have currently no means to do so. Mostly, this is where individual on-field participation comes into play.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-81358623628025781412009-01-23T23:44:00.000-05:002009-01-23T23:44:00.000-05:00Chris,Slow start but you picked up a little steam ...Chris,<BR/>Slow start but you picked up a little steam eventually. Unfortunately I can't respond right now but I'll come back to it.<BR/>Here's a hint though--you undercut part of your own argument in the beginning and you and I both know full well part of the current classification process is intended to redistribute players in such a way as to alter the nature of the divisions. Now if you want to argue that despite that the result is or will be as you say that's fine.Baca Locohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13014510414015288907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-29023455900949707932009-01-23T23:25:00.000-05:002009-01-23T23:25:00.000-05:00Short comment:If a team stops playing because they...Short comment:<BR/><BR/>If a team stops playing because they get moved up to D1 from D2, there is only one reason: They don't want to play if they only get to play people as good as they are. So if they get moved up, and stop playing, either they were going to stop playing anyway (finances etc) or they just didn't want to play if they actually have to play in a competitive division. And we can't base classification rules around teams not wanting to actually compete.raehlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311405248370629057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-87705948762472245002009-01-23T23:23:00.000-05:002009-01-23T23:23:00.000-05:00I don't think the goal of the classification syste...I don't think the goal of the classification system is to populate the upper divisions. The goal of the classification system is twofold:<BR/><BR/>First, provide a place for players who don't know WTF they are doing on a logistical level a place to play. (I.e., before you go play big-stakes poker, you need to learn the rules and the basic flow of the game.) That's what the entry level divisions are for, and everybody should be kicked out of them fairly quickly, because no matter how bad you might suck, you still know the rules, and the entry-level division is for people who don't know the basics of the format.<BR/><BR/>Then, once you're past knowing the basics, the goal becomes making teams in each division competitive with one another. Competitive doesn't mean the best team is good. Competitive means that the best team and the worst team can have a match that is a contest. Clearly, last season, D1 absolutely failed at being competitive. And to an extent, D2 did as well.<BR/><BR/>But no matter how you slice it, some players are better than others. So what did we do with PSP teams this year?<BR/><BR/>The group of teams who were winning D1 by a large margin became Semi-Pro. The group of teams who were winning D2 got combined with the bottom of D1 to form the new D1. The remainder of D2 and the top of D3 get to be the new D2, and the teams that just plain do not perform are the new D3, with a NEW Intro division to cover the need for a place where teams can get acclimated to the logistics of playing.<BR/><BR/><BR/>So, here is the question: Are the players in each division of a similar skill level? And the answer is, YES, ABSOLUTELY. I can not think of any better way to get people of similar skill levels in the same division.<BR/><BR/>Are the best 10% of national-level XBall players classified Pro? Yes. Next 15% in Semi-Pro? Yes. Next 20% in D1? Yes. Next 25% in D2? Yes. Next 30% in D3? Yes. Are those divisions thus similarly skilled players who will form competitive teams? Yes.<BR/><BR/>And that's all we can ask of the classification system - put players of a similar skill level in the same class. Teams not attending, or players not having a place to play, are NOT CLASSIFICATION PROBLEMS! And the solution to something that is not a classification problem is NOT to say "Oh, you can't find a D1 team to play on? Well, shoot, let's just put 45% of players in D2."<BR/><BR/>Does moving people up cause some players to stop playing? Maybe. But not moving them up is worse.<BR/><BR/>By the way, 50% of players staying to play D1 is *GOOD*. Well, the leaving isn't good, but the attrition rate isn't bad, as 50% of national-level paintball players leave every season anyway, whether you move them up or not. You're just not paying attention to the ones who don't get moved up and still leave.raehlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311405248370629057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-46009485302476063832009-01-23T18:39:00.000-05:002009-01-23T18:39:00.000-05:00yes, that's why i posted it here -- the parallels ...yes, that's why i posted it here -- the parallels are striking!<BR/><BR/>:o<BR/>LoL!J-Birdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06416239725595871329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-58698262011612695172009-01-23T16:15:00.000-05:002009-01-23T16:15:00.000-05:00LawrenceIf you didn't see them at the time you mig...Lawrence<BR/>If you didn't see them at the time you might want to take a look at the 'Brave New Paintball World' posts end of August, first part of September.<BR/>Saw this recently and privately offered an opinion. Now that I see the context I'll have more over the weekend--though maybe not till Sunday what with practice and the Affliction show Satruday night. :-)Baca Locohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13014510414015288907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-24924918411371215592009-01-23T15:05:00.000-05:002009-01-23T15:05:00.000-05:00http://www.paintball-players.org/UniversalClassifi...http://www.paintball-players.org/UniversalClassificationProgramDRAFT.pdf<BR/><BR/>how interesting...check the GOALS section.J-Birdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06416239725595871329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-14084073588076435572009-01-23T15:03:00.000-05:002009-01-23T15:03:00.000-05:00Hey JoeIt's an interesting idea but you're also co...Hey Joe<BR/>It's an interesting idea but you're also correct in thinking it's not a realistic option. Even in last year's NXL they didn't always do a very good job and even with the data they accumulated they didn't examine it in the detail you suggest might be helpful.<BR/>In the players' interest I'd be satisfied with using the classification system to only move up the best teams and if you added some flexibility to the classification system so players could move down as well as up I think it would address most of the problems.<BR/>In the league's interest I would like to see positive moves made to help create and support healthy divisions up and down the ladder. And something I didn't address is how, outside of classification and ranking, the league looks at the thin upper divisions because I think it's going to take a lot more than trying to turn D1 into the new D2.<BR/><BR/>D.Mash<BR/>Fierce Army did almost exactly that only playing (and winning) the final event. So, yes that sort of thing could happen and it's conceivable it was a huge fluke--but probably not. And it's a lot better to my way of thinking than moving up teams that never finished in the top 4 but played all or most of the events. I don't care how many you play if you demonstrate D2 level ability then you ought to stay D2 and there is nothing wrong with that. My only reservation is that different events have different pools of teams competing and are consequently not identical and frequently not close to identical. But I don't see a way around that and I tried a number of ways to adjust for differing pool size.Baca Locohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13014510414015288907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-21579859116478694932009-01-23T13:52:00.001-05:002009-01-23T13:52:00.001-05:00Ha So true! I'd suggest that whole win an event yo...Ha So true! I'd suggest that whole win an event you get to bump divisions but the only problem with that might be some teams will play the first event and the one team that happens to win. then doesn't play the rest of the events. That's probably the only problem see with that .. even though I think that whole idea you mentioned about the bumping up and stuff is a great idea.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3804718502406028481.post-89521583607849769042009-01-23T13:52:00.000-05:002009-01-23T13:52:00.000-05:00So, if there were an actual way to track player pe...So, if there were an actual way to track player performance on field (strictly speaking non-5 man format here), such as the basic stat tracking done by the NXL, do you think that could in some way be used to also determine the classification of a player? <BR/><BR/>For example, a player that has played 5 events as D3, but is always on the field when their team loses a point, serves penalty times, and frequently gets eliminated (>75% of the points they've played), would stay ranked D3 despite the fact that other players, or even his team , has been bumped up to D2.<BR/><BR/>This may be impractical currently as the league would have to employ statisticians at each field, but should a way be determined to track such info, would it alleviate some of your concerns?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com