The Best Possible Scoring System at Tournaments

[Vanguard]

But, as I said, with only one condition. Two draws with the extra points couldn't be better than one win

In that case, are we not talking about Tie Breakers rather than Bonus Points?

[dreamscreator]

But, as I said, with only one condition. Two draws with the extra points couldn't be better than one win

In that case, are we not talking about Tie Breakers rather than Bonus Points?

I enjoy play in different system score but if I need to choose I prefer Bonus Points. In case tie strength schedule as first, and if even is still tie, then net TD/CAS.

[sann0638]

Sevens tournament at my house on Friday: 137 points for a win, 51 for a draw, 17 per touchdown and 9 per casualty.

[mepmuff]

13^Games won * 11^Games drawn * 7^Net TD * 5^Net Cas * 3^Td scored * 2^Cas made

That, or 2-1-0 with SOS.

[sann0638]

Does Score do powers?

[rolo]

I don't think there's one perfect system. There are pros and cons.

Having wins worth more than two ties is a strong incentive to take risks to win. That can lead to exciting games, but it also means players can "fall out of contention" earlier while tying games.
Having wins worth as much as two ties keeps the tournament closer and increases the chance that many players are "in contention" even in the late rounds, leading to more exciting tournaments but also rewarding more cautious play (that is, it's less worth taking risks to try to win if it increases your chances of losing).
I've never been to a tournament where a tie was worth more than half a win. I can only imagine that this severely punishes taking risks to win games.

I personally like tournaments where there's a small reward for "keeping it close", losing by only one TD. IE, a 4/2/1/0 system. This means that individual games continue to be meaningful even if one team is clearly winning. It also keeps teams "in the game" longer (in some tournaments, losing one game means you're already as good as eliminated).

I've been to many tournaments with a penalty for conceding games, but I've never seen anyone actually do so.

Giving bonus points for TDs and/or CAS keeps games interesting even after they're already decided. But this also rewards running up the score, which can be frustrating for the players on the receiving end. It also means that some team can get lucky, win like 8-0 against a helpless or unlucky opponent, and build up an insurmountable lead in the standings before the final round.

In the end, different tournaments should be different. If your players don't like your ruleset, they will absolutely let you know.
Also there's no pleasing everyone, so go with whatever scoring system you think makes for the most entertaining tournament.

[dreamscreator]

I have been doing number and I think that the best competitive score system is 7-3-0.

In case of tie "TD net + CAS net", and if it is still a tie strength of opponent. Or in the other way, first strength of opponent and after that "TD net + CAS net".

With the 7-3-0 system the maximum WinRatio always will finish on top, and in case the same WinRatio the player with more wins will finish on top.

4 rounds
4-0-0 (100) 28 points
3-1-0 (87,5) 24 points
3-0-1 (75) 21 points
2-2-0 (75) 20 points
2-1-1 (62,5) 17 points
1-3-0 (62,5) 16 points
2-0-2 (50) 14 points
1-2-1 (50) 13 points
0-4-0 (50) 12 points
1-1-2 (37,5) 10 points
0-3-1 (37,5) 9 points
1-0-3 (25) 7 points
0-2-2 (25) 6 points
0-1-3 (12,5) 3 points
0-0-4 (0) 0 points


6 rounds
6-0-0 (100) 42 points
5-1-0 (91.67) 38 points
5-0-1 (83.33) 35 points
4-2-0 (83.33) 34 points
4-1-1 (75) 31 points
3-3-0 (75) 30 points
4-0-2 (66.67) 28 points
3-2-1 (66.67) 27 points
2-4-0 (66.67) 25 points
3-1-2 (58.33) 24 points
2-3-1 (58.33) 23 points
1-5-0 (58.33) 22 points
3-0-3 (50) 21 points
2-2-2 (50) 20 points
1-4-1 (50) 19 points
0-6-0 (50) 18 points
2-1-3 (41.67) 17 points
1-3-2 (41.67) 16 points
0-5-1 (41.67) 15 points
2-0-4 (33.33) 14 points
1-2-3 (33.33) 13 points
0-4-2 (33.33) 12 points
1-1-4 (25) 10 points
0-3-3 (25) 9 points
1-0-5 (16.67) 7 points
0-2-4 (16.67) 6 points
0-1-5 (8.33) 3 points
0-0-6 (0) 0 points

[viyullas]

A new system is being discussed at the spanish forum. If anyone want to know more you just hace to visit:
http://www.bloodbowlforo.org/phpBB3/vie ... 26&t=17278

[Purplegoo]

The Spanish are an interesting example, actually. You guys seem to have a nationally agreed scoring system that most of the tournaments I see submitted use: 13/11/8/5/3 (win by 2+, win by 1, draw, loss by 1, loss by 2+, respectively). Interesting that you may change it up.

The sanction document advice on this states that It is strongly suggested that organizers use game results (win/loss/draw) to determine the tournament's winner(s), and reserve other statistics (touchdowns, casualties, clean sheets) for tiebreakers. I know I'm biased, but I think that's good advice, and I point TOs at this if things have gotten a little wild. Start there.

Personally (as a punter), I don't care for valuing a 2-0 win more than a 1-0 (or the 'take AG4' system, as no-one is calling it), or a win / loss more highly than two draws. The best Blood Bowl scoring system (in my experience) is simply 2/1/0 then tiebreakers (SoS being the best of a bad bunch). However, if people want to add a little variation on the theme, it's no great shame, so long as you don't end up in a place where a win is 5 points and you get a point for every CAS, or something. The guy that finishes 5/1/0 should always finish above the guy that finishes 5/0/1 or 4/1/1 but beat Ogres 9-0, 9-0 on CAS. So long as you cover that and there isn't an awkward moment come awards, all good.

[dreamscreator]

Thinking about the system I have been working in a new system of 140-60-0 that leave you space to give up to 3 extra points per game. The system follow the WR and in case of same WR the team with more victories will be on top.

If you want to see more details follow the link http://talkfantasyfootball.org/viewtopi ... 34&t=44804

[Joemanji]

It's really not, buddy. 2-1-0 SOS FTW.

Yep, this is the correct answer.

Consider the people who attend a tournament as being from one of two groups*. Usually they self-declare very loudly. Competitive types and 'people who just play for fun'.

The quoted is the best possible system for the competitive people who care about the right person winning. In that whilst it isn't perfect, it has the highest chance of the person with the best results winning.

Those that 'just want to have fun' we should remember, "just want to have fun" and so by definition don't care who wins. Therefore their opinions and wishes should not influence the scoring system that only exists to determine the eventual winner.

*Of course this does not reflect reality. There are a couple of further groups. Those who realise they are not good enough to win under a sensible system, so pretend to only be playing for fun whilst calling for wacky bonus points so they have a chance to 'steal' a tournament win. And those that just don't understand maths (this seems to be a surprisingly large subset of what is after all a nerd community).