I have been part of the SCS (now called NACS) since the start and while I understand that I have been opinionated on some of the decisions the IFPA has made, I still like to see competitive pinball succeed and grow.

Over the years I think the one thing I have always found strange is how / when players must commit to the state they plan to play in. The current system has everyone frantically submitting results for end of year tourneys, then IFPA frantically approving, and then the players commit to a state they will play in after all that. The NACS for each state occurs on Jan 19th 2019, so that is a lot to get done in a short time and you of course sadly have a few people that refuse to commit until the last possible moment and some TDs that are slow on getting those final results in.

I think this system detracts form the real competitive hunt for players to earn positions and is allows a select few players to do silly games to be a distraction from the whole thing.

My suggestion, require players to commit by Oct 31st of each year. Set up their profile so they can select any state up until Oct 31st. If they do not select a state then it will auto defualt to the state which they hold the highest position in as of Oct 31st. As of that date, lock it down and players are only allowed to swap states if for some reason they dont qualify for the state they previously selected.

The benefit of this is that going in to the final 2 months of the season, every player has a real cut line to shoot for.

Instead of an imaginary line and trying to guess whom may or may not attend a NACS each player can really hunt for points to make the line (or top 8 line in the case of a bye for super states)

This becomes even more pronounced in a state like Penn or IL when a select few tourneys which attract lots of out of state players are what account for a larger % of total points in the state. This can cause these states to go very far in the overall list each year.

Seems logical for the player base and a net positive for competitive pinball to make this sort of shift. I cant think of any other sport where the cut line for making a cap stone yearly event is so grey.

SCS/ NACS players?

thoughts?

pros/cons?

nah, lots hang out here also.

Yes, that is precisely what I am saying.

Here is your current NACS standing
https://www.ifpapinball.com/player.php?p=66

You are 1st in CO, 28th in OK, and unlikely to play anywhere but CO (or qualify in any other state at this stage of the season)
If you are forced to declare for CO intent as of Oct 31st, then that means people below you in OK have a much better idea of where the real cut line will be as they come into the final 3 event of the year in the state.

https://www.ifpapinball.com/nacs/standings.php?l=OK

https://www.ifpapinball.com/nacs/standings.php?l=OK#uptour

This seems like a net positive for both people in CO to know that slot is taken (you mathematically wont drop out of top 24 no matter what) and also helps people in a state that you are unlikely to play in know where they stand.

From a competitive pinball stance this also really helps hype the last 2 months as people work towards a cut line (either top 8 for a bye, or for top 16 or 24 to qualify).

I can't come up with any negative of forcing you to declare by Oct 31st what state you are committing to.
Is there one in your mind or are you just playing advocate for fun?

Can you link up your IFPA profile please?

I have been scanning around and it appears a very select few people even have a legit option of playing in multiple states. Would be nice to examine a profile of a real person to see the potential impacts for both you and for others.

I can understand how that would be beneficial for those looking to get a step up, find the easiest route to nationals, or now (with new higher prize pools) select the spot with the most bucks.

However, in the desire to grow the sport for the majority I see LOTS of people that a new method could benefit by having a more black/white understanding of the cut line.

I personally like the idea of playing where your state ID is, but also understand that can actually be a bad thing for the sport if you want to encourage people to travel and with many states the big tournies are near state lines so many people may play where they dont live. I now agree it is their right to select where to play... just think everyone should have to do it earlier/ by Oct 31st.

I think that is the case for most so seems silly to not have it declared by now

Of course it wont ever completely define a line. But it will surely make it a bit tighter and more within grasp. Also really fun to have the final season 2 month hype as people really duke it out for either top 8 bye or top 16/24 position.

I completely agree that the state boundaries wont work for forcing a spot to play, but would you have any issue or see any detriment in you declaring by Oct 31st that you will be playing in Kentucy?

If we use your state as a nice example.
https://www.ifpapinball.com/nacs/standings.php?l=KY

There is something like a likely 16 point difference between possible and likely cut line and a whole bunch of people that are unnecessarily left in the dark on where they may/may not be shooting for without knowing where that cut line may reside.

Kentucy (resized).JPG

LOL. I am not playing in NACS as I am hosting at my house this year.

I made sure to only donate $8 to the prize pool for the top dogs to win

what flexibility?

You have not made a single top 16 yet...

Not a whole lot of flex...

Loser (resized).JPG

back on actual topic...please elucidate on how this would be a drastic change?

you are correct. Congrats on qualifying for NY so far. You still have zero flex... It is either NY or nothing for you.

sorry, I dont find tilt forums to be very user friendly to use and cant seem to post over there the few times I have tried (just not really a good forum UI)

I am not so much saying this is a broken system but saying there is a way to make it better.

Not playing in NACS this year has allowed me a unique perspective of no bias in wanting to hunt points myself but to look at things in the light of how it COULD be better.

Can you run some numbers on last year on how many people:

#1 actually had a decision to make/ option of selecting multiple states?
#2 how many of those actually played outside of a state which was also the state they played the majority of their events in for that calendar year (my assumption being that regardless of geographic location, the state where you play the most is where most will also participate in SCS)?

My guess is that #1 is less than 20 and #2 is a small portion of those. In other words, I understand your idea that those people have 'earned' the right to make a choice at the end of the year, but the vast majority already know where they will be playing as of Nov 1 so why not just make it a thing?

My point is really that helping to define the cut line on Nov 1 would be for the greater good of the sport and a larger impact for more people.
I know of people that perceive they are way out of top 16 because they dont have a state rep and son that is nice enough to reach out to people and ask for him on Nov 1

I think it could be really cool to help the end of year hype!

If you dont like forcing people, what about providing the fluid option for people to "declare" a state in their profile and then the "hypothetical cut line" adjusts in real time. Lock in all "declarations" on Jan 1, but until then people can switch things around. That way if Jason Werdrick wants to swap and Play in Kansas at the last minute, he can. However, I will assume most people wont play those games and will instead just make a declaration that stays the same from the very start of the season and likely never changes.

nah, 2017 Hilton would be happy that it is a very small contribution compared to all previous years and that 2018 Hilton has put his efforts into other things for the longer term betterment of pinball

I also may have mailed a poo dollar for the ones that go to the national pool

Good idea.

I did not realize I had email addresses already. I will blast out to those people in top 30 or 40 and collate to give others a better idea.

I think there will be some incentive to reply early as I am opening up my collection for 1 day in advance of NACS to those that are committed to attend and hypothetical top 24. If they dont commit then they dont get the invite (seems like a fair requirement so if they want to wait to declare then they wont get any pre-play opportunity the week before actual NACS)

If they are not committed in advance then they dont get to warm up on the collection. Seems plenty fair to me. House has room for 24 people and that is going to be tight already. Alternative is zero warm up leading up and everyone plays blind and I would prefer to give players a shot to get familiar with games.

If people want to play games and say they are committed and then change at the last minute then they will be preventing someone else from getting that warm up opportunity.

This does nothing for a TD. This is about drawing a clearer line for those int he point hunt to know where they stand.

I think you are over estimating it after actually looking at it.

Using NY/NJ/DE, there is 1 person in the top 30 for all 3 states (Steve Bowden whom is qualified in 7 states currently)
There are 9 people currently qualified in 2 of those states.

That means only 10 out of the hypothetical 90 in that list will even have that option. I am guessing the majority of those are clear already on where they plan to play. Likely a select few that prefer to game the system and want to wait to the last minute to declare.

If instead, all 10 of them were to declare now (when they have both a clear idea of standing in each state and the likely tournaments for the remainder of the year) then the ~50 people on the possible bubble would have a much better idea of where they stand. (in reality NY is also a super state status which means you also have the bye bubble to account for).

For me, the sport is obviously made better by more clearly defining that line for the majority (50 bubble people) vs letting 2 or 3 that have "earned" the option to delay the decision.

The community will have gained 2 things:
1. The ability to clearly know their standings during the last 2 months of season play as they duke it out for points.
2. The ability to come practice on the games that will be used for NACS in advance of the actual NACS competition.

If Everyone replies yes and then changes on the 7th, all they are doing is screwing the people beyond 24 from having the opportunity to actually play on a collection in advance. Sorry but there is no room to invite 50 possible players into my house to have a day of warm up.

I will flip it and what would be the incentive for someone that has zero intent to play in WI to lie and say they are going to, only to switch that on Jan 7th?

could easily combine my idea with forcing state TDs to have venue seleciton nailed down by Early Oct so players can factor in that decision. Let's be honest, TDs should already have that decided at minimum and be working on getting games prepped for competition.

It really comes down to what B Kelly says... Don't be a dick.

You have zero intention of playing in OK and you already know it right now. Why not just declare and provide that clarity for the OK players... it seems really simple to help provide more clarity for the majority, rath then let a few play silly games. You do you though... it is what makes you 'special'.

I am completely open to opinions and discussion, but you have to admit you have a history of being devils advocate for no reason other than you like doing so.

e.g. you know where you are going to play but still want to withhold clearly stating that or confirming if the IFPA were to have a spot for you to commit.

Whay about if IFPA made an open option where each player could "commit and lock in" for a state at any point during the year. Would you do it? Or would you withhold till Jan 7th?

I guess we will have to agree to disagee then.

I see no problem with forcing a handful of people that 'could' qualify for multiple states, commit to one when the season is 80% done. this is furthered since the vast majority seem to know for sure where they will play at this stage.

I do think that in order to make that forced commitment fair, states TDs would need to of course have location locked down.

I took Josh's advice and sent out an email to the top 40 currently in the state.

25 of them have already responded in the first few days. Nice to see and helps provide more clarity to those lower in the list.

Hoping others will commit this week to close it out.