| TWeissman
- 20 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 210
|
The original system that Vince developed only went to level 5. Then we modified it to go to 6 because it wasn't behaving as a true handicap system with the skill level discrepancies.
It makes sense to modify it again because the current system is out of whack. Of course a big part of the problem is the skill rating inflation that has happened. Tons of players are rated too high, which then means a quality legit level 6 has it too easy.
If the rating inflation isnt fixed then we definitely should add level 7. The max point spot can remain at 5 points but it makes a lot of sense to have a guy like Billy spot an extra point to some of the mid-level players who are over-rated.
This is all precisely why I created the Skills Assessment measure so there can be more objective criteria for handicapping events.
|
|
|
| ajflanagan
- 20 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 509
|
In my opinion, it makes no logical sense to consider a 7 level handicap in a game that only requires 7 points to win. Regardless of the 5 point cap, it is just a silly concept.
Regardless, if Billy were to play as a 7, then so should Danny, Ehab, Jose and you. Unless you feel as though you are all an entire skill level below him.
|
|
|
| RCastano
- 20 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 20
|
TWeissman said: The original system that Vince developed only went to level 5. Then we modified it to go to 6 because it wasn't behaving as a true handicap system with the skill level discrepancies.
It makes sense to modify it again because the current system is out of whack. Of course a big part of the problem is the skill rating inflation that has happened. Tons of players are rated too high, which then means a quality legit level 6 has it too easy.
If the rating inflation isnt fixed then we definitely should add level 7. The max point spot can remain at 5 points but it makes a lot of sense to have a guy like Billy spot an extra point to some of the mid-level players who are over-rated.
This is all precisely why I created the Skills Assessment measure so there can be more objective criteria for handicapping events.
|
I am curious to see you use the Skills assessment you created to evaluate some of the players that play in the weeklys currently, and what their classification should be. I am genuinely curious to see what the results would be. I also agree that currently there is a skill rating inflation, but I have no idea how to correct it. I do not consider myself knowledgeable enough to use your system (not that I necessarily agree it is the end all/be all) but I would be interested to see you use it to rate players.
|
|
|
|
| TWeissman
- 20 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 210
|
ajflanagan said: In my opinion, it makes no logical sense to consider a 7 level handicap in a game that only requires 7 points to win. Regardless of the 5 point cap, it is just a silly concept.
Regardless, if Billy were to play as a 7, then so should Danny, Ehab, Jose and you. Unless you feel as though you are all an entire skill level below him.
|
I never took Andrew for a status quo guy. You always seemed to be one of the more open-minded folks to me when it came to discussing progress.
Years ago, when we suggested adding a level for 6's, a lot of people said it was a silly idea. No one even questions it now. In fact, most people don't even know that life wasn't always this way :)
Currently I would say Billy is the only one that should be a 7, because of his recent results at handicapped events...4 straight wins in a row as a 6. Perhaps he is a full skill level ahead for handicapped events. There is a specific skill set for these, as opposed to non-handicapped.
Change can seem odd...but in my mind the purpose of handicapping is to level the playing field (or so the tag line says for events such as the Goalgrinder). What if Billy were to win 8 straight handicapped events? 10? 24? At what point would it not feel strange to increase his rating and have him spot an additional point?
Do we want a partial handicapping system or do we really want to go for parity?
Take care...
Tim
|
|
|
|
| TWeissman
- 20 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 210
|
I am curious to see you use the Skills assessment you created to evaluate some of the players that play in the weeklys currently, and what their classification should be. I am genuinely curious to see what the results would be. I also agree that currently there is a skill rating inflation, but I have no idea how to correct it. I do not consider myself knowledgeable enough to use your system (not that I necessarily agree it is the end all/be all) but I would be interested to see you use it to rate players. |
As soon as Travis can get around to adding it to the website, I will begin working with a couple of knowledgeable Air Hockey coders to rate the skill of players and we can see what it looks like.
Skill inflation is correctable by moving to a more objective system. We could eventually "reset" folks based on that more objective system.
Take care...
Tim
|
|
|
| airhockeyjedi
- 21 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 102
|
TWeissman said: The original system that Vince developed only went to level 5. Then we modified it to go to 6 because it wasn't behaving as a true handicap system with the skill level discrepancies.
It makes sense to modify it again because the current system is out of whack. Of course a big part of the problem is the skill rating inflation that has happened. Tons of players are rated too high, which then means a quality legit level 6 has it too easy.
If the rating inflation isnt fixed then we definitely should add level 7. The max point spot can remain at 5 points but it makes a lot of sense to have a guy like Billy spot an extra point to some of the mid-level players who are over-rated.
This is all precisely why I created the Skills Assessment measure so there can be more objective criteria for handicapping events. |
Actually, I never incorporated rating players with numbers, instead classification terms were used. The terms used starting with unclassified, beginner, novice, amateur, expert, professional, and ultra-pro/master. Maximum point spot was 5 points. If you equate these classification terms to numbers, you would have 1 through 6, exactly what Houston is using now.
Vince Schappell
2007-2009 USAA Treasurer
USAA Member since 1980
|
|
|
|
| TWeissman
- 21 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 210
|
Yes Vince but when I started playing in your tournaments there were 5 categories. Unclassified was added at some point down the line.
I remember the very first event I played as a Beginner.
|
|
|
| Petesimple
- 21 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 319
|
My two cents,
I like that Tim wants to throw his knowledge into the sorting hat (go team Hufflepuff). It's up to the weekly people to decide on how people are rated and currently it can be arbitrary as I have seen aberations of how people are rated in weeklies. If Tim wants to put pen to paper then great let's see how it works out. I am only a sub hoster so I always ask Andrew, Brian, or Syed about ranking. So in this case it's up to them if they want to adopt Tim's system for the weeklies. If it's a tougher system great, it gives us all a goal to get to something new. That being said it can't hurt to keep both systems until Tim's system proves itself. Heck this is science, new ideas are great!
:)
~Pete
www.petesimple.com
|
|
|
| brain
- 21 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 578
|
Great positive post Pete. However, I guess you don't understand how this community works. You see the way it works, somebody tries something and then everybody else tells him that his idea is bad and theirs is better. Nobody ever actually tries the other ideas. The goal isn't to actually find a superior method. The intent is to make sure we disparage those who volunteer their time, talent, and treasure and that only a few really important people ever get credit.
Moreover, we never want to offer a fair analysis or offer objective praise and criticism of a working system. To do that would demonstrate critical thinking skills and introduce reason, balance, and objectivity and suggest that our environment bases its philosophy on the risk/reward concept of activity over words and praise of achievement versus perpetual self promotion. And it is IMEPRITIVE that airhockey remain a collective based on emotion, posturing, downplaying, self-centeredness, and assertion of the "academics". We must never give the actual "producers" any positive feedback lest they become encouraged and work even harder leading to growth and a larger base of players. We must endeavor to strike those whose efforts would diminish the power available in this small pond so we may all be big fish and never risk being lost in an ocean of airhockey players and become less relevant and have to work harder to maintain our power. That would just be terrible. 
|
|
|
|
| TWeissman
- 21 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 210
|
Brian,
I am sorry if you feel attacked by my suggestion that we improve the handicap system. This is something I have suggested for years, and I recently "produced" a first step toward making it better. Rather than being the guy who criticizes without offering a solution, I offered a solution - a first step! I would appreciate you not pigeon-holing me when the facts are to the contrary.
I have given plenty of praise to the Houston area organizers, publicly and privately. I publicly called the last Worlds in Houston the best run event in the history of the sport! I made no disparaging remarks about you or the efforts of those who give their time to help the sport. If I did, I would like to know specifically what they were so I can review them and potentially correct it.
To be honest, it seems like anytime anyone says anything even remotely critical about something you have a part to play in, they get reamed on the forums. Pretty much what I see you post are sarcastic passive-aggressive accusatory lectures which appear to be attempts to shut people down, rather than engage in a reasonable dialogue. If you truly value logic and reason, then please move away from these overtly emotional knee-jerk responses and let's actively work to make the sport better.
Take care...
Tim
|
|
|
|
| airhockeyjedi
- 21 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 102
|
TWeissman said: Yes Vince but when I started playing in your tournaments there were 5 categories. Unclassified was added at some point down the line.
I remember the very first event I played as a Beginner.
|
Good point. When I arrive in Houston in 1980, the terms beginner, amateur, expert, professional and master were the only classifications. I first added novice, then unclassified and finally ultra-pro. Not sure who started using numbers instead of classification names.
Vince Schappell
2007-2009 USAA Treasurer
USAA Member since 1980
|
|
|
| airhockeymarc
- 22 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 129
|
TWeissman said: Brian,
I am sorry if you feel attacked by my suggestion that we improve the handicap system. This is something I have suggested for years, and I recently "produced" a first step toward making it better. Rather than being the guy who criticizes without offering a solution, I offered a solution - a first step! I would appreciate you not pigeon-holing me when the facts are to the contrary.
I have given plenty of praise to the Houston area organizers, publicly and privately. I publicly called the last Worlds in Houston the best run event in the history of the sport! I made no disparaging remarks about you or the efforts of those who give their time to help the sport. If I did, I would like to know specifically what they were so I can review them and potentially correct it.
To be honest, it seems like anytime anyone says anything even remotely critical about something you have a part to play in, they get reamed on the forums. Pretty much what I see you post are sarcastic passive-aggressive accusatory lectures which appear to be attempts to shut people down, rather than engage in a reasonable dialogue. If you truly value logic and reason, then please move away from these overtly emotional knee-jerk responses and let's actively work to make the sport better.
Take care...
Tim |
Sir.
All i want to say is "it's the pot calling the kettle black"
Will do
Marc
|
|
|
| Mike C
- 23 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 459
|
And going back to something I've been guilty of........
Congratulations again to Billy for winning last weeks - weekly.
Way to go Colin on focusing and playing well...it's amazing how well you played when you are focused on air hockey and not hanging out with your buds. I do enjoy that you like to hang out with your buds though, they just weren't there on Friday!
Jacob, great playing and overcoming Dionisio playing as a 3 (should have been 4) and Austin Baldwin playing as a 0. (Austin plays like a 1 to almost 2 and once he gets his extremely hard shots on target will probably be a 2 in the not so distant future).
|
|
|
|
| airhockeymarc
- 26 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 129
|
Players
I will be running tonight's Houston weekies, We will start between 8:30/8:45pm.
Marc
|
|
|
|
| airhockeymarc
- 27 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 129
|
We had 8 players in last night weekies.
Congrats to Dionisio Diaz on winning the weekly, and to Frank Perez on a great final.
Marc
|
|
|
|
| TWeissman
- 05 May 2013
Total Posts: 210
|
I miss SRO. We had it pretty damn good over there.
Not only was it a great location for the World's but the weeklies were almost always highly attended.
|
|
|
| Tory
- 06 May 2013
Total Posts: 4
|
| I have an idea for the ranking/handicap system. However this stuff isn't my forte so I don't know if it'll actually make things worse. How about implementing temporary handicap adjustment points? Say someone wins two weeks in a row. Leave their ranking the way it is, but give them an additional handycap point until their streak is over. If they win two more weeks give them another point. Ajust as necessary. You can also make the points stay for a while. Like maybe a month or so. It could even work the other way. Remember when I played as a zero because my arm was broken? However that may be a can of worms. Anyway, the goal is balance. But it seems like you guys are trying to balance with the scale. You don't balance with the scale. You add weights. It doesn't fix rank inflation but over time it may slow down and help it. Tho, It'll definitely stop domination. It kind of feels like punishing someone for winning but isn't that what a handicap is?
|
|
|
|
- 11 May 2013
Total Posts: 658
|
| Congratulations Chris Gibson in winning the weekly! And of course to Jacob for making the finals, and Mr. Rivera for taking 3rd.
|
|
|
| carolina phil
- 11 May 2013
Total Posts: 1084
|
Nice win, Chris!
Phil
|
|
|
|
| Petesimple
- 25 May 2013
Total Posts: 319
|
Congrats Brian on an excellent win last night!
www.petesimple.com
|
|
|
|
| brain
- 03 Jun 2013
Total Posts: 578
|
The Houston weekly participation has tapered off much more quickly than expected. At ptesent, interest has died down to below acceptible margins, so effective immediately and until further notice, weekly tournaments in Houston at Speedy's are no longer being managed by UNAP / WCAH. Anybody who wishes to organize and run a weekly at Speedy's or anywhere else is more than welcome to do so.
Meanwhile, we will run a league this summer. More info on that in a separate thread.
|
|
|
|
| airhockeymarc
- 07 Jun 2013
Total Posts: 129
|
Sorry to all the players!
The website went down for our May 31st weekly, the score that are above the header where from that weekly.
Congrats to Justin Flores, on winning the weekly in the second set.
Marc
|
First |
1 | 2 | 3 |
Last
Forums Home / Tournaments and Challenges / 2013 Houston Weeklies
|
