Jump to content


Photo

Proposal Log Discussion 8 - Scoring System


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
24 replies to this topic

#1 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,853 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 18 May 2018 - 05:53 PM

astros has proposed that TC scrap the 6-3-1 scoring system for the Champions League and replace it with 2-1-0.

 

You can see his proposal here:

 

http://forum.strateg...osal-log/page-2



#2 Fks

Fks

    Captain

  • NASF Committee
  • 825 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 18 May 2018 - 05:57 PM

I am for 2-1-0.


Proud Committee Member of the North American Stratego Federation (NASF)

#3 Major Nelson

Major Nelson

    Captain

  • Moderators
  • 880 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 18 May 2018 - 05:58 PM

I like it as it is.


Winning isn't everything, but wanting to win is.


#4 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,853 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 18 May 2018 - 06:00 PM

astors - Can you explain why the 6-3-1 system should be scrapped?



#5 Major Nelson

Major Nelson

    Captain

  • Moderators
  • 880 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 18 May 2018 - 06:01 PM

Personally, I prefer 6-3-1 because it motivates players to be more attacking.


  • Don_Homer and Unladen Swallow like this

Winning isn't everything, but wanting to win is.


#6 Unladen Swallow

Unladen Swallow

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 750 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 18 May 2018 - 06:07 PM

yes, especially in qa where draws are very common. 


  • Don_Homer likes this

#7 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • Other Tournaments Manager
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 18 May 2018 - 07:46 PM

TheProf offers a very good discussion here:

http://forum.strateg...-3-1/?hl=soccer

Hopefully, he will weigh in further in this discussion.

Unlike association football or QA, there are few draws in full 40 piece matchups. It is very difficult for a player to play for a draw from the outset. Since I do not believe that a draw is a relatively easy result to obtain, two draws should equal one win and one loss. Currently, this is not the case.

Can the TC elaborate as to why they use 2-1-0 for the PL and 6-3-1 for the CL?
69 bottles of beer on the wall, 69 bottles of beer.
Take one down and pass it around.

#8 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 18 May 2018 - 10:29 PM

Its more easy than you think to draw. Here is some evidence.http://www.kleier.ne...ble.php?eid=527. Look at the amount of draws here, at the wc stratego (2016). Stravros, the world champion played 4 draws! And he knows that it would only give him 3 points.

I am in great favour of the 631 system in all stratego variants.

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#9 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • Other Tournaments Manager
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 18 May 2018 - 10:44 PM

Its more easy than you think to draw. Here is some evidence.http://www.kleier.ne...ble.php?eid=527. Look at the amount of draws here, at the wc stratego (2016). Stravros, the world champion played 4 draws! And he knows that it would only give him 3 points.

I am in great favour of the 631 system in all stratego variants.

You cherry-picked a tournament with a high number of draws. You have 55 draws in 570 games, roughly 9.5%. This is less than half the number of draws that occur in association football, so no, draws are not that frequent in Stratego, at least not enough to justify 6-3-1.


Edited by astros, 18 May 2018 - 10:49 PM.

69 bottles of beer on the wall, 69 bottles of beer.
Take one down and pass it around.

#10 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,853 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 19 May 2018 - 11:30 AM

TheProf offers a very good discussion here:

http://forum.strateg...-3-1/?hl=soccer

Hopefully, he will weigh in further in this discussion.

Unlike association football or QA, there are few draws in full 40 piece matchups. It is very difficult for a player to play for a draw from the outset. Since I do not believe that a draw is a relatively easy result to obtain, two draws should equal one win and one loss. Currently, this is not the case.

Can the TC elaborate as to why they use 2-1-0 for the PL and 6-3-1 for the CL?


Some good reasons for 2-1-0 in that discussion (specifically why two draws should not be counted as less points than a win and a loss). Still we can see from some of the comments that the dynamic that 6-3-1 offers (a higher reward for winning a battle) is liked by some.

To answer your question - When I joined, TC were using 6-3-1 - it's not something that new members tended to question. When the Pyramid started we decided to use 2-1-0 - for variation.

#11 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • 1,671 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 19 May 2018 - 12:04 PM

From my experience in live tournaments, you usually do not want to have an even amount of draws. 2 draws lose 1 point vs.  1 win + 1 draw.

 

3 draws  (9 pts) lose vs  1 win + draw + loss (10 pts)

 

One draw with 3 points is more or less the same as 2/1/0. After that, draws become more punishing.

 

-

 

To summarize, if draws should be less punishing, 2/1/0 (or 4/2/0.. 6/3/0 etc) is the way to go. I'm personally fine with 6/3/1


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

#12 The Prof

The Prof

    Major

  • NASF Committee
  • 1,494 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 19 May 2018 - 03:57 PM

Its more easy than you think to draw. Here is some evidence.http://www.kleier.ne...ble.php?eid=527. Look at the amount of draws here, at the wc stratego (2016). Stravros, the world champion played 4 draws! And he knows that it would only give him 3 points.

 

This data is for live tournaments, where draws are more common than online games because of the time limits on games.  Perhaps the TC can give the statistics on the draw rate of TC tournament games, and also a breakdown between 6-3-1 and 2-1-0 tournaments to see if there is any difference. 

 

Personally, I prefer 6-3-1 because it motivates players to be more attacking.

 

If this is true, why should tournament play encourage a different style of play than regular ranked games?  Also, why should attacking be encouraged if it is a risk that player would think is unwise in a ranked game?

 

The fact is that 6-3-1 counts a draw as 40% win and 60% loss for both players.  If this were applied to ranked games then a draw between players close in rating would deduct rating points from EACH player (a total net negative of 5 points).  If you wouldn't support this, I really don't see how you can support 6-3-1 for tournaments.



#13 Master Mind

Master Mind

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,088 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 19 May 2018 - 04:11 PM

The fact is that 6-3-1 counts a draw as 40% win and 60% loss for both players.  If this were applied to ranked games then a draw between players close in rating would deduct rating points from EACH player (a total net negative of 5 points).  If you wouldn't support this, I really don't see how you can support 6-3-1 for tournaments.

 

In my opinion this could be a good solution to counter the current inflation levels.



#14 Major Nelson

Major Nelson

    Captain

  • Moderators
  • 880 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 19 May 2018 - 04:15 PM

If this is true, why should tournament play encourage a different style of play than regular ranked games?  Also, why should attacking be encouraged if it is a risk that player would think is unwise in a ranked game?

 

The fact is that 6-3-1 counts a draw as 40% win and 60% loss for both players.  If this were applied to ranked games then a draw between players close in rating would deduct rating points from EACH player (a total net negative of 5 points).  If you wouldn't support this, I really don't see how you can support 6-3-1 for tournaments.

I am in favour of the 6-3-1 system for the same reason I prefer the 3-1-0 system in football (soccer) instead of the 2-1-0 system that was used in the past. If a win and a defeat count more than two draws players are more motivated to attempt to win instead of settling for the draw. It makes the game more interesting and also helps reduce tie cases.


  • Don_Homer likes this

Winning isn't everything, but wanting to win is.


#15 Major Nelson

Major Nelson

    Captain

  • Moderators
  • 880 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 19 May 2018 - 04:16 PM

Also, why should we adjust tournament points according to ranked games? Maybe the system adopted for ranked matches is wrong, not the other way around.


  • Master Mind likes this

Winning isn't everything, but wanting to win is.


#16 The Prof

The Prof

    Major

  • NASF Committee
  • 1,494 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 19 May 2018 - 05:33 PM

I appreciate that you agree it makes sense to have a consistent approach for tournament games and ranked games.

 

Let me argue this a different way.  If you think having a draw penalty makes for better games, then why stop at 6-3-1?  Why not go all the way and make a draw the same as a loss?  Wouldn't that really motivate players to attack and attempt to win the game?  If you say yes, but this doesn't seem fair, then I would say that any draw penalty is not fair.  Often a draw occurs not because players aren't trying to get the win, but because they simply do not have the material to successfully do so and risking would be foolish.    



#17 Major Nelson

Major Nelson

    Captain

  • Moderators
  • 880 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 19 May 2018 - 05:45 PM

I appreciate that you agree it makes sense to have a consistent approach for tournament games and ranked games.

 

Let me argue this a different way.  If you think having a draw penalty makes for better games, then why stop at 6-3-1?  Why not go all the way and make a draw the same as a loss?  Wouldn't that really motivate players to attack and attempt to win the game?  If you say yes, but this doesn't seem fair, then I would say that any draw penalty is not fair.  Often a draw occurs not because players aren't trying to get the win, but because they simply do not have the material to successfully do so and risking would be foolish.    

Basically, the point is whether you believe a win is more important than 2 draws, or not. For me, it is. Especially in live tournaments it is very easy to draw, because of the clock.

By the way, I'm not saying we should use only one of the two systems.


Winning isn't everything, but wanting to win is.


#18 roeczak

roeczak

    Captain

  • Tournament Manager
  • 800 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 4 weeks ago

I like 2-1-0 (or 1-0.5-0) and would personally prefer it to be used for the CL. The Prof, you have made a nice work.

Draws,especially in online tournament play, do not equal defensive play. It could be someone lottoing all the miners of the opponent or simply an interesting ending where both players agree to a draw, because they would have to take very serious risks to win (which essentially amount to lotto and not good Stratego) 

Chess has a much higher draw rate than Stratego but anything besides 1-0.5-0, although there were serious attempts, never really worked. Again, the majority of draws are fighting draws there.

In addition, why should two draws count less than a win + loss ? I'll make a simple example.

Let's say i am in a group with Nortrom, Hielco and 3 other players A, which is about at my level and B,C which are lower than my level. Let's also say that i play my really best and draw both Nortrom and Hielco, but lose to player B and win player C. Meanwhile player A wins B,C and loses to the top two dogs.

Now, in the game against player A he has draw odds (meaning a draw equals a win for him) , despite me having played significantly better at this tournament (a 'rating performance' metric would support this).
For what am I punished? For drawing two of the best players in history, maybe I was a bit unlucky or maybe they were just undefeatable in this particular game. 

Major Nelson, I will be rooting for you hard at next WC, put please do not go in there with this mentality. You must fight for every point. The game in which I fought the hardest in the recent Greek Ch's was the draw vs. OVERLORD. And no, neither of us played defensively in that game. I take pride in being the only one to have stopped the eventual champion from a perfect run, and be assured, I fought really hard for that.

You should give draws their value; they are half a win, nothing more, nothing less.
As for you who still don't like draws even after all I wrote, there is a solution : a tiebreak score (also used in chess) which says: greatest number of victories. We can use it along with M-Buch, Buch and direct result.

If the majority of the community agrees, we can implement 2-1-0 slowly but surely also in live tournaments, or maybe start from the next WCO. i think there really needs to be a poll for that .

 


If you enjoy stratego you might want to subscribe to Roeczak. Member of Stratego Captains Club. Actively trying to promote the game and would like to help in any activity towards that goal. Highest Rating : 898 (Platinum Marshal)

#19 Major Nelson

Major Nelson

    Captain

  • Moderators
  • 880 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 4 weeks ago

I like 2-1-0 (or 1-0.5-0) and would personally prefer it to be used for the CL. The Prof, you have made a nice work.

Draws,especially in online tournament play, do not equal defensive play. It could be someone lottoing all the miners of the opponent or simply an interesting ending where both players agree to a draw, because they would have to take very serious risks to win (which essentially amount to lotto and not good Stratego) 

Chess has a much higher draw rate than Stratego but anything besides 1-0.5-0, although there were serious attempts, never really worked. Again, the majority of draws are fighting draws there.

In addition, why should two draws count less than a win + loss ? I'll make a simple example.

Let's say i am in a group with Nortrom, Hielco and 3 other players A, which is about at my level and B,C which are lower than my level. Let's also say that i play my really best and draw both Nortrom and Hielco, but lose to player B and win player C. Meanwhile player A wins B,C and loses to the top two dogs.

Now, in the game against player A he has draw odds (meaning a draw equals a win for him) , despite me having played significantly better at this tournament (a 'rating performance' metric would support this).
For what am I punished? For drawing two of the best players in history, maybe I was a bit unlucky or maybe they were just undefeatable in this particular game. 

Major Nelson, I will be rooting for you hard at next WC, put please do not go in there with this mentality. You must fight for every point. The game in which I fought the hardest in the recent Greek Ch's was the draw vs. OVERLORD. And no, neither of us played defensively in that game. I take pride in being the only one to have stopped the eventual champion from a perfect run, and be assured, I fought really hard for that.

You should give draws their value; they are half a win, nothing more, nothing less.
As for you who still don't like draws even after all I wrote, there is a solution : a tiebreak score (also used in chess) which says: greatest number of victories. We can use it along with M-Buch, Buch and direct result.

If the majority of the community agrees, we can implement 2-1-0 slowly but surely also in live tournaments, or maybe start from the next WCO. i think there really needs to be a poll for that .

 

The WCO is the online version of the WC. As long as 6-3-1 doesn't change for live play, neither should it for online.

What do you prefer for football, 3-1-0 or 2-1-0? :)


Winning isn't everything, but wanting to win is.


#20 roeczak

roeczak

    Captain

  • Tournament Manager
  • 800 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 4 weeks ago

Stratego is not football.

Although the team i support in Europe (until PANATHINAIKOS gets well) was greatly hurt by 3-1-0 this year :(  I still strongly support it.

In football, the game is starting as a draw and either team must do something very drastic and rare to change that (a goal, which happens on average only about 2.5 times per game)

In stratego even the mere capture of a major, which could be something as random as having a font row col directly opposite of a major, gives a big lead. Even a serge capture is a lead (if everything gets traded you win) . I think chess is a much better comparison than football and i think you would agree with me .

The WCO does not use the clock rule used for live tournaments, therefore I think if the majority agrees it should be changed to 2-1-0, in spite of what is being used live. 

As for live, I don't think switching to 2-1-0 is currently a good idea, but it could be if we make some altering in the clock formation (I have thought about some alternatives but nothing fully satisfactory yet, anyone who is willing to propose something about clock in live tnmt's please step up)

Anyway, I think only a poll could settle this, and either go forward with the change or silence me forever (well, not really  :D )


If you enjoy stratego you might want to subscribe to Roeczak. Member of Stratego Captains Club. Actively trying to promote the game and would like to help in any activity towards that goal. Highest Rating : 898 (Platinum Marshal)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users