Standard Tournament Scoring + X-Ball Scoring = ?

[Duke Henry]

For those who are familiar with the standard tournament point system - I have a question for you.

Do you believe there would be any chance of the standard tournament scene adopting a more X-Ball-ish scoring standard? What I mean by this refers to how games are scored.

Instead of assigning points for a final tally or otherwise seeding, you simply count the games won by teams for final standings.

You would still use the standard point system for the game itself, but once you win the game the team with more points gets the win.

It would seem to make scorekeeping much easier, without having to do all that troublesome mathematic hell.

Since you are still using the standard point system you don't have to really change how you play - since the majority of points still goes to the team hanging the flag anyway.

One potential upside and downside is the idea of the max. For some teams, they may be able to advance in the standings if they completely destroy a team, as opposed to other teams which may get 10 or so less points a game due to additional friendly losses.

For most people that I know that watch paintball tourney games, and aren't largely knowledgable about the game - they sometimes find it difficult to have a true grasp on the standings at a given time. For example, if a team is down by 21 points, many wouldn't know that if that same team loses the game, they still might win the tourney because they needed to get 22 points to advance.

By contrast, if a team needs to win a game to advance, it seems pretty obvious what they need to do.

One thing that people may have a beef with would be the compression of team standings with this new system. Teams that might all of their games closely (like 38-30 or something of that nature) would have the same standing as a team that maxes every single game.

To me, I don't see a problem with that. In major sports such as football, basketball, and/or hockey you have the same idea. All you need to do is win baby.

One problem that I could see occuring is teams may become more complacent. They may decide to sit back more and play defensive, but even then who knows? If you still have aggressive teams that like to take it to their opponents, I can't see why they would want to drastically change their strategy now.

Another pro to a mixed system would be that it may well better prepare teams for the semi/finals. In more and more events, the post-round robin structure tends to be of sudden death type games. So, if teams now have to only worry about winning a game 51-49, why do we push them for maxes in the prelims, when only winning counts in the finals anyway?

So, how do you weigh in on this?

[NuthyN]

I voted for the mixed system mainly because of my teams last tourney. The tourney was at an away field and our front man wasn't taking advangtage of the easy lanes that led right to the flag station. To make a long story short, we got flag hangs when playing the top five out of top 6 teams lost two games and beat a moderately good team but didn't get the hang. The major problem though was that we only got one flag pull all day. If we had gotten a few hangs and made it to finals we would have came in 2nd place for the tourney but ended up in like 12th because of the standard scoring system.

[demonguy8]

the reason that we cant switch to an xball 1 point format is simply because it doesnt promote being offensive the way the current system does. Games would all start running to time. For example what incentive is there for a team up 5-2 on players (assume 5man for example) to even bother pushing up the field? there isnt. This leads to some BORING play as moves arent being made and forces games to run longer.. The current system HEAVILY REWARDS movement with points awarded for being first to get the pull and HUGE points for getting that hang.

[Duke Henry]

That is a very good point demonguy, I sort of thought of that, but again you are right.

That would definately be an issue, because some would just sit on a 5-2. However, a lot of players would just move up and finish the game to save time and paint.

One way to make sure would be to only award points for flag pull, possession and hang. No points for elims or remaining players - but I doubt that would go over well.

[adam shannon]

ive never played in a tourney, but i do film them for my local field. my biggest question is why is the flag pull and hang all important?

what im getting at is a decent team that holds their own all game but looses in a final minute 1 on 1. the team that got the pull and hang gets over 100 points (or thereabout depending on the exact scoring the tourney is using), while the team that came 1 body away from winning gets only around 20 points...its like an all or nothing depending on just who pulls and hangs.

so its possible a team thats good but looses at the last second a couple times can theoreticaly get bumped out of the semis and finals by loosing a couple games by the narowest of margins...when in actuality the diffrence in how good they played was only scantly behind the teams that beat them.

what im getting at is why isnt the scoring more reflective of good play consistantly not just the final outcome. to me it just doesnt make sense that one team gets 25 points while the team that beat them can get over 100 for a narrow win.

[Duke Henry]

It's all about winning, it just sucks to lose soo close. Think about an overtime football loss, or losing in the extra time of soccer. Sure, both teams COULD have won, but I don't have a problem with a team losing because of the importance of flag hanging. It is the veritable touchdown in paintball!

It just hurts more when you are THAT close to pulling out a win. I know how you feel.



Originally posted by adam shannon
ive never played in a tourney, but i do film them for my local field. my biggest question is why is the flag pull and hang all important?

what im getting at is a decent team that holds their own all game but looses in a final minute 1 on 1. the team that got the pull and hang gets over 100 points (or thereabout depending on the exact scoring the tourney is using), while the team that came 1 body away from winning gets only around 20 points...its like an all or nothing depending on just who pulls and hangs.

so its possible a team thats good but looses at the last second a couple times can theoreticaly get bumped out of the semis and finals by loosing a couple games by the narowest of margins...when in actuality the diffrence in how good they played was only scantly behind the teams that beat them.

what im getting at is why isnt the scoring more reflective of good play consistantly not just the final outcome. to me it just doesnt make sense that one team gets 25 points while the team that beat them can get over 100 for a narrow win.

[NuthyN]

I have never played in the NPPL or PSP but at the tourneys that I have attended, there have always been time limits. It is the time limits that promotes most of the moves. If the system were set up to only give points to the team that gets the flag hang and there is a slightly shorter time limit on each game, there will still be the aggressive moves especially because if the team stalemates the loss of that one point would set them back quite a bit.

[demonguy8]

Good point NuthyN... In fact it kinda makes me realize my first reply contradicted itself... My first reply was based off the assumption that if the team was up 5-2 at end of game theyd get the point, which would have been all well and good except thats not how Xball does it. In fact you are correct and X-ball format rewards only the flag hangs so even with the time limit your would still be rewarding the team that is taking the field. (youd think Id know this by now with 5 chances to play Xball wihtin a 2year period :rolleyes:).

That all being said I still dont think it would be the best Idea for 3 reasons

1. #of teams. all or nothing scoring isnt as friendly for big tournaments (say above 16 teams) simply because of ties.
Many teams will win the same amount of games, resulting in ties which create a problem with who advances and who doesnt.

2. Favors teams with byes (spelling?).. They dont have to play but they still get the FULL points for winning? Teams without byes probably wouldnt like that very much. (current systems uses average of pnts (which has its own flaws, admitably) or gives less than full pnts to a team (ie like 75 or 50)

3. The current system encourages MORE aggressive behavior since it gives points for being upfield FIRST and getting the PULL. The 1 pnt format will encourage some aggressive play but can allow a team to sit back from the start and wait for the other team to make the push upfield WITHOUT SACRIFICING 1/5th of their game pnts for not getting a pull.

[raehl]

X Ball scoring for normal tournaments is bad, mainly because of ties. You'll get a LOT more ties.

To hit on what demonguy was getting at - I'd argue that the current scoring system, while it does favor movement more than a simple win/loss scoring system would, still doesn't favor movement very much.

We hit this in a thread over on p8ntballer recently (currently?). Since wins almost always involve eliminating all of your opponents, let the "win" points come from eliminations. Then let hang and pull points be based on game time when the flag is pulled/hung.

For 5-man, say up to 6 points per elimination, 1 point per live player, 20 points for the pull and 40 for the hang.

Flag pull is 20 points up to 60 seconds into the game; and then loses 1 point of value every 6 seconds after that, so it becomes worthless after 3:00 has elapsed. Let the flag hang be worth 50 points up to 3:00 seconds, and then lose one point every 3 seconds after that.

In order to max, you have to pull withing 60 seconds and hang within 3:00. Or better said, close games will have close scores (and a game which ends with one second left will have a score similar to if the flag carrier had been one second late) and blow-out games will have blow-out scores.

- Chris

[demonguy8]

The field layout also makes a HUGE impact in how fast games are played... The easiest way to keep the game moving is to make some SWEET 50 bunkers.. and some decent cover up to them...

The other thing that FORCES TEAMS to go fast or slow is flag placement. If the flag can be grabbed from the center 50 or from a quick move between 50 bunkers, then the game will be MUCH more agressive than if its just chillen in an open field..

The flipside is that in non-BYOP tournies (ie where the person hosting can make big $$$ off of paint sales) the bunkers tend to be HUGE back bunkers, with tiny ones up by the 50s and a flag sitting a good 20 feet from ANYTHING. They make them like this so that Joe Paintballer will have to dump as much paint as he can shoot to be able to take the field (and thus the host gets 2x the money). I was at a 3 man like this 2 weeks ago. there where 5 standups on each side and EVERY one of em was the backrow of bunkers. It ended up being pretty rediculous... (especially when your personal style of play is much more aggressive and less technical..)