![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
A buddy came up with a good idea and suggested we just use fractions like setting the base at 3.5 and using that fraction. So if your winrate was 2.19 you take your quantity # by 2.19/3.5.... or if the bb/100 was 11.3 you take the points for quantity of hands by 11.3/3.5, something like this... let me know what you think
ps: obv all the numbers are up for massive tweaking... the concept was what i wanted set up, now as long as we all work together on numbers and agree for the most part we'll have a system we can lean on for time being and then collectively rework the finer parts of it with each passing month |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Right... and I think the general system is great. We just need to tweak the numbers. I actually think the ones I suggested for the levels are decent, and I think the ones I suggested for game type aren't bad either, but we probably need to scale down the HU tables even more. Like you said, we can figure out those details later.
I don't really like the 3.5 thing though, because I don't see what it accomplishes, other than changing all the results by a multiple of 3.5 Relative to each other, they will still all be the same. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
A) I dont know how I feel about allowing negative points, esp if you're -1.15 bb/100 over 15K hands
B) There must be a max bb/100 I think... At a point it shouldn't matter if you have 14 bb/100 or 29 bb/100, there should be a cap to not make the numbers ridiculous. Maybe if you ran 29bb/100 over 15k hands that should be offered a reward, but over 1k-5k hands if you run 25 or 15 I don't know there should be that huge of a difference in points? Obv open to debate |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I should have been more clear in my post... I absolutely agree that we should cap the high end of the BB/100 scale (10 seems like plenty), and I also agree that people shouldn't be docked for negative BB/100. If we do dock them, it would be way too easy for people to cheat and filter out their losing limits, anyway. This way, if someone is running particularly bad at one limit, they won't feel the need to "play out of it" and can just move on to a different (hopefully lower) limit and start fresh.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
so you can play low limits with this thing? if so Im in.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Have you read any of the posts above yours at all? Just wondering.
And yes, you can. That's the whole point of this discussion. |
![]() |
|
|