Getting more sponsorships is the one thing we're doing most behind the scenes. One does not simply "get more sponsorships". We're able to get some industry support to cover our operating expenses, but haven't been able to land anything substantial to be able to support the player base through money raised.

There's a portion of the nation that's going to be okay with this through the other options. Rather than not accepting those people that are cool with this plan, we would prefer to see those TD's that aren't in agreement choose the option of this path if that's the only way it would interest them.

I have no interest in having a perpetual GoFundMe campaign to try and support these State and National prize pools.

Yes, most of the TD's I've talked to are simply taking it out of the pot of that event.

For players that never place at the top literally nothing changes.

For those that win the most often, they end up 'paying out' the most to these State/National pools . . . but they are also most likely to be given an opportunity at earning that money back at State/Nationals.

So whats going to be happening on the North side of the border? Are we looking at doing Provincials separately now? Are we paying $1 CAD or USD?

IMG_2589 (resized).JPG

So the arguments are this:

1. This just sends money to the top players from the pockets of the less-skilled.
2. This will cause some of the skilled players to stop playing competitively and have less skilled players move up to the top ranks.

Predicting the future is difficult and not all players or TD's will react to any change in the same way. IFPA has already said if this doesn't cause the changes that they want, they can switch back. It's an experiment.

It's $1 CAD.

The amount pulled for Nationals will be based on USD, with the remainder going to the provincial championships. Depending on the exchange rate it means Canada will be funding >25% towards Nationals ... unless the exchange rate flips.

Still have not heard the accounting for how it makes sense for more prolific states with larger player base to fund a large portion of national prize pool but only send one person?

I have to assume CA for example will be providing a much larger prize pool than utah does.

Nope. Nope. NEEEEEEWP. I can't believe this is actually legit...so much so I didn't even think for 5 minutes there was any way it would be.

There's no way in hell that I'm paying an extra buck every week I go to league or to a tournament just to have the TD have to find a way to send you guys money.

You want to do something like this, make it a flat annual fee for anyone that wishes to participate in IFPA rankings, you tards. Don't force us, and yourselves into a RIDICULOUSLY HUGE amount of administrative BULLSH... and waste the time of our TDs that have already given up their time and in some cases their chance to participate anyways, by having to make them go make payments 20+ times a year in addition to all the other hoops they have to jump through in regards to TGP and all that garbage the last 2-3 years? Dumb, dumb, dumb.

I'll be happy to not be participating in tournaments AGAIN this year, it seems. Between missing the biggest event of the year for my state last year thanks to Nationals being plopped the same weekend as TPF, I couldn't qualify for state 2016, now I'm not going to qualify for 2017 because of idiotic irrational decisions that will only actually benefit the top 16 players in any given state, and just be a huge f'ing hassle for everyone else? To hell with THAT. I'm an awesome player, and have fun, with or without the IFPA, and I don't need to chase numbers for that to still be true. I'll play when it's fun, and if that doesn't include IFPA rankings... oh bloody well. Just means I'll be able to play in B-div @ TPF next year.

Everyone has been getting something for nothing for so long they are complacent. Even still, I don't see the big deal? It all makes perfect sense and I have no problem with the cream rising to the top players just like every other sport in existence. To me the Eric Stone deserved $10,000 plus an NIB for winning the Nationals. You want this to be a worldwide sport? Deal with it. Hopefully this will also reduce the pressure for local leagues to have IFPA points and maybe some return these local events to simply "for fun" as they should be. I liked tournament play much better when only the big tournaments at shows had actual points.

I think this captures some good points. There are definitely a lot of what I would call marginal tournaments designed to provide points to a specific player or two while stuffing the field with relatives and non players. There are also a lot of tournaments at local events that are unnecessarily grueling just to get 100% of the possible points.

Why is it the pinball community scoffs at anyone making money. Seems like so many feel everything should be free.

This is the next step in raising the competition levels and allowing the general public to take the competition more seriously.

I'd be more motivated to become a better player now that incentives are on the line.

Millions watch the dota finals in person because millions of dollars are on the line. It's way less exciting than playing for couple hundred bucks.

Yea, I don't mind the desire to build prize pools, but never liked the organization by state. If I hold a tournament, at least 1/3 of the players would be from KY, who would pay into an Ohio pool that neither them nor most of the local Ohio people care about.

My bad, apparently I have the rest of THIS year to actually play pinball with my friends, then I can be done if they choose to proceed with this garbage. I still think the annual fee for any player that wants to be ranked is MUCH simpler and a lot less of a clusterf--k of an idea...

This is the simple stress-free way to handle it. Costs "lesser" players nothing more and the top players (who are getting oh so rich from tournament money) get a little less prize pool. If there is no money in your tournaments, then no WPPR's .

Keep in mind that the IFPA has been giving us a system that makes pinball more fun and is helping pinball thrive on location. Try this adjustment and see how it goes. Do what's easiest for yourselves.

It is kind of weird that for about the cost of one play on a new Stern game (per player) , there would be such a backlash. The "principal" of the thing might be looked at from IFPA's side. The part where they give us (and have given us) cool fun rankings and the events to go to like States and Nationals. The guys running it just happen to be great pinball players.

Taking a less aggressive approach in your criticisms would be the way to go. The only thing sinister here is the April Fools part. Although , how does Josh afford to keep flying back and forth to Pitts. #AuditTheIFPA

"Opt In" is not mentioned in the IFPA announcement and seems to leave room for (I hate to say it) potential shenanigans. example - someone asks to opt in after finishing better than expected, or opt out if finishing worse, but I assume this should be locked before starting. When I participate in a tournament I know how many played and how I finished, and can confirm what is posted to the IFPA.

Maybe indicating who is opting in at the start, like a check mark next to the names of those opting in, shown with the tournament match info?

I am just starting down the road of enjoying tournament play, investing time to learn to the rules of pins, watching my rankings climb, and even considering running/hosting the first tournaments in my area some day. I don't have any reason to not trust TDs, but would not want to leave any room for misunderstanding.

Not wild about the concept but I'll give it a shot.

I do like $5 a month.
Pay it and your scores get recorded, don't pay then your scores aren't recorded.
Then tournament can do 100% payouts instead of opt in or out. Which sounds like a logical nightmare.
Example (with easy numbers) weekly tournament has 20 players, 10 opt in, 10 opt out, $5 buy in.
Instead of $100 prize pot it's now $90 and $10 goes to State and National prize pool if I understand this?

Josh, do I understand correctly?

People get to decide whether to "opt in" or "opt out" AFTER the results are in? Is that the intent? Seems bizarre. Should definitely lock in a decision before the event starts.

Or, better still, everyone is opted in, regardless.

No, there is no opt in after the fact. You pay your 100 pennies before you play.

Or is prize pot still $100 and 10 ppl pay $5 and 10 ppl pay $6?

A Tournament Director plans an IFPA eligible event atleast 30 days in advance. If 20 folks participate the Tournament Director submits the results and paypals $20.

If you don't want to do this, the event won't be IFPA eligible and will not award WPPRs.

I'm not sure whats so hard to understand.

It's good to see someone so cheery despite all the opposition and accusations. I like Josh more for his swearing, but this is cool to see. persist (resized).jpg

Can't imagine this is being done for nefarious purposes. A dollar if you want to be ranked = fine. I suspect you'll see many fewer people with WPPR points (instead of people getting them by default). Most top players will likely pay the $1, and a few ambitious (possibly delusional) folks will also pay. Who does that hurt? The benefit might be better payouts for Nationals.

I can't believe anyone would imply that Josh was trying to do a "cash grab" here.

The part where the USA and Canada are made to bend over backwards to support the fortunes of a very very few select players (myself likely included in most years, so it's not like this change wouldn't likely benefit me..I just refuse to support it on the fact that it will make TD'ing even MORE complicated and personally, I don't feel like except in a few very large states, people should have to be paid to WANT to go to state. Oh, you're driving an hour to get there? Boo-hoo. Try Cali, or TX, where you could be driving 4+....or FLYING in Cali! ) while the rest of the world keeps earning points for free and without administrative hassle?

Really....what's the motivation for me to not attend tournaments and like stated above, cherry pick whether or not I want to be included in the rankings and just opt-out and tank the points value for ones I'm only going to get .26 points in anyways? We all know that at least as far as TX and other competitive states go, qualifiers for SCS are built on WINS and 2nd place finishes, not on accruing 20 or 30 7th places. If I can 'strategically opt-out' and tank other people's points when I'm hardly going to get any...where's the downside for me in that? Aside from looking like a dick, which pretty much everyone already thinks or assumes anyways... just more of the same.

People arn't really playing to win money anyway, so why bother with payouts.

There is a cost of travel when a participant goes to States or Nationals. North Carolina would of went from the normal prize pool of $220 to $981.11 . I could of been able to give all 16 atleast $40, which could of atleast covered gas.

Unless you're the TD, in which case if you won the event or otherwise finished high you could "opt in" everybody out of you own pocket after the fact and then pocket the extra WPPRs for yourself.

the idea of quitting doing something i love over one dollar is preposterous to me. I really can't relate to people who place so little value on their own interests.

For the record, I absolutely do not suspect nefarious purposes. I commend Josh on his efforts to promote competitive pinball and for putting up with flak. I'm just not a big fan of the whole SCS thing. IMHO using state borders to organize pinball tournaments just doesn't work well in many situations.

Lets say I competed in 40 events last year. I would of had to pay $40 or if the TD pulled the money from the prize pool which is what I plan to do it would be a little less money to the winners of those tournaments anyway.

The motivation is to get in top 16 for a state where the prize pools just got a significant bump. Like i said in previous post, North Carolina goes from $220 to $981.11 and Texas goes from $220 to $1,687.91 (based on 2016 events). Even if you lose in first round at Texas, you could get some funds to cover gas/hotel and food. Obviously each state will have a different prize pool and each state rep can divide it up differently.

I misunderstood then
So you can't play in a ifpa tournament without paying into the state finals pool.
Interesting...

Mods, please run an IP check on the person posting as "whysnow". Over half of his posts in this thread make some sense. There may be an imposter logging in as him trying to skew his good reputation.

d514234bf9e8dfcd670315266964cf04f78e717c (1) (resized).png

Sounds risky to me. Though I guess some people don't care about their own reputations.

Can you comprehend compromising your standards and personal ethics for a dollar? Because I kind of feel like this is what IFPA is asking of people with this change?

You have ANY idea how badly I wanted to do a GoFundMe for my trip to Nationals? I'm still paying for that. I didn't ask anyone else for money because...SHOCKER....it wasn't ANYONE ELSE'S RESPONSIBILITY. I felt guilty even wanting to ask others to chip in, especially given that I didn't actually win 1st place in state and Colin gave up his position to run TPF tourneys? Hell no. That wouldn't have been right to do in any shape or form, so I didn't. I'd rather pay the long term cost myself than compromise myself in that manner, thanks. What IFPA is proposing doesn't even give me that choice. It's a "take your ball and go home" approach where they're browbeating people into paying more money in, small amounts at a time yes, but huge in aggregate. What they're not realizing is that they aren't the only ones that can play that game, and not all tournaments or leagues HAVE fees or a 'prize pool' to steal the money from.

I just read a conflicting thread on Tilt.forums
This is not how they're doing it.

The opt in vs opt out option seems complicated, especially when it comes to explaining it to novice tourney players.

I can't believe the level of whining I've seen about such a small amount of money per event. This clearly divides those who wish these events to be actual competitions and those who wish it to always be casual. This is why we as pinball players can't even get the same respect as dart players.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDC_World_Darts_Championship

One dart world championship will have a prize pool of around $2,000,000.

Then there is pool, bowling, golf. If I were ranked in the top 100 in the world in any of those sport/activities I'd be set for life. And yet here we are whining that 'only' 16 in each eligible state will cash. With 40 states and D.C. that's 664 players winning money. How can this possibly be a bad thing for competitive pinball?

As for 25% going to Nationals, isn't that good on us? Might we not see the larger picture and see that we might get more attention by possible sponsors and maybe in the long run we won't have to self fund 100% of the purses?

Putt Putt World Championships award more money that pinball. That's right, mini golf gets more cash than we all do.

How about we decide that we want to be a bit more highly regarded than other sports like wife carrying, bog snorkeling, camel wrestling, and shin kicking...

What it appears this boils down to:

.

.

I don't see a negative with those two things. The top players will likely be paying their $1 every tournament, along with some ambitious (or delusional) amateurs. A big chunk of people will fall out of the rankings because they either don't care or are realistic about their chances to compete. That doesn't change much in terms of the competition; however the amateurs would actually stand a better chance of qualifying.

The change probably also means more work for tournament directors (knowing who paid the $1 per tournament/collecting and submitting the extra cash to IFPA)

But then there's this irresistible resistance to change, or desire to find a villain here that is very disappointing to see.

I understand the reason for the change. Not all states competed in the nationals this year, which was disappointing. Many spots didn't pay a dime... which is too bad, because it was a large expense for several players. A viable national championship should be worth a buck a tournament to those who compete at the highest levels anyway, and maybe even to some amateurs.

I think we are way too quick to forget that without the IFPA, we would have about 1/10 the amount of available tournaments we have right now. Maybe far less than that.

No one is beyond reproach...

The simplest way to do this is for the TDs themselves to decide whether or not to make the event IFPA WPPR qualified. If they want it to be WPPR qualified, everyone entering the event will be ranked and the $1 will be sent per player. This $1 would obviously be rolled into the entry fee. One would hope the TD would explain this before hand so the hand-wringers worried about the event payout dollars and cents could choose to opt out of the event. This evens the playing field and simplifies things for the players. No worries about just submitting $1 for players finishing 4, 8, 17, and 25 (for example).

If enough people decide to opt out of those tournaments, you have your answer as to whether it is a viable system.

Looks like its up to TD, atleast for now.

I agree with you 100% and this is how i will deal with it and how i think IFPA will need to deal with it.

That sounds like communist talk to me comrade, the beehive state would like to thank every one for their CONtributions however

Does this kill IFPA selfie leagues? I enjoyed participating in these so much that I would drive 3 hours to take part. I even got many friends and relatives to participate with the promise that they would be a world ranked pinball player.

I was actually just gearing up to try to make the state tourney this year but interest has immediately plummetted to zero. It may only be a dollar but I assume it's going to reduce the number of IFPA tourneys in my area.

If anyone out there has and can share the current algorithms for how IFPA calculates and awards points, it would be appreciated.

We are looking into setting up a system that works for all the WI players/TDs and it would be nice to just see the current math behind the ratings and degradation based on strength of player and # of players for an event rather than attempting to reverse engineer it form scratch.

For example, the obvious base value based on number of player is easy.
The TGP is easy.

The more difficult to calculate is the addition to the base based on strength of player and the calculation of player strength.
The also more difficult is understanding the curve of point value and how it changes based on # of players in an event.

FYI, this will mark the end of the MGC being able to award IFPA points, and is technically illegal under state laws. There is *no way* to make a tournament legal in Wisconsin with money involved, no matter who pays it, and no matter when it is paid out.

I don't know if other states have rules like ours, but participating in this in Wisconsin is technically breaking the law.

This is the driving factor behind the MGC tournament being completely free and handing out no actual prizes. Other people in the state, you may want to speak with me before agreeing to collect this to understand the legal ramifications. I won't technically be free for a week with the show coming up, but afterwards I can tell you that this is illegal. For everyone's purposes, as those who know me know I was threatened with jail time for running our tournament (yes, for real), you will probably not want to participate in this.

This isn't county, it's statewide. So far, Brookfield is the only one to enforce against a pinball tournament, but I know that other municipalities enforce for other reasons.

Hold the state finals in Illinois.

Problem solved.

rd

No, collecting the fee and awarding the top player a slot there is also illegal.

Josh, if you'd like, give me like 10 days and give me a call. Honestly, if you are completely set on doing this, Wisconsin should be exempted due to the fact it's illegal here. I can give you the complete background of it - it doesn't really bother me one way or another as I never have time to actually play in tournaments nowadays - but it will create a huge headache here.

This raises a good point.. everyone who runs a tournament will have to check their state/county/township/city laws to be sure everything is legal. Small tournaments where everyone throws in a pot and the pot is awarded at end of day are easy to pull off 'under the radar', but once you start making official sponsorship payments to an outside organization, there's now a money trail and things could get messy for the people holding the competition.

If the IFPA has no database of local laws (I assume it does not), perhaps one should be created and once anyone obtains information for a particular area, that information could be added to the database to save other people time looking it up. Local laws can be a complete PITA to learn and deal with.

thanks for chiming in Dan.