(Topic ID: 150430)

IFPA - SCS eligibility should be changed

By shimoda

3 years ago

Topic Stats

  • 306 posts
  • 54 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 3 years ago by shimoda
  • Topic is favorited by 3 Pinsiders


Linked Games

No games have been linked to this topic.

    Topic Gallery

    There have been 3 images uploaded to this topic. (View topic image gallery).


    You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider ifpapinball.
    Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.

    #3 3 years ago

    The answer to this is simple:

    The local players should organize more events in their home state. This then limits the impact that the 'regional/national' events have in the state.

    If Pennsylvania which hosts 3 Circuit events including 2 Majors can still make up a top 16 that is mostly "Pennsylvania" people, there's no excuse for any state to not do the same.

    We prefer to motivate organizers to get more competitive pinball going, and the v5.0 WPPR system supports that. Allowing local players to compete in the SCS by making players play in 3 events within state does nothing to promote those local communities to grow the sport. IMO it allows them to sit back and relax and do nothing, because they don't have to worry about these regional/national events having an impact in their state.

    I'm also failing to see where all of these out of state people are impacting the Georgia State Championship? Outside of Eric Fisher, it looks like everyone else played at least 3 GA events anyway?

    #7 3 years ago
    Quoted from shimoda:

    Thanks for the response Josh. I'm not speaking just in the case of GA, but more generally. I agree with some of your sentiment but still feel that it ignores the matter of it really being a state championship - more of another tournament that could be qualified for by a significant singular win in that state. Just wanting consideration of the idea. It sounds as though it's pretty much a no-go. Just the way it reads.

    I prefer to deal with the reality of what is actually happening in the registration process, and not the what could happen type of scenarios. The reality I'm seeing is that more often than not, these SCS fields are being made up of the players you are concerned about protecting already. By more often than not, I'm not talking 51% . . . I'm talking easily 90%+.

    I understand you're trying to speak for not just Georgia, but in general, but is there a case in Georgia I'm missing?

    Ultimately the IFPA really wants more events to be started, specifically events within local communities, even more specifically events at public locations in these communities. The backbone of the points earned in these kind of events we're trying to promote is with our SCS campaign.

    p.s. your rules would instantly disqualify the Kentucky SCS from even existing as they didn't even have 3 'distinct' events in 2015

    #11 3 years ago
    Quoted from TomGWI:

    This argument comes up every year.
    What if you live on the border of 2 states? Should you be exiled if you can cross the border and play in a bunch of events?
    Does the IFPA need to start checking people's mailing address and licenses?
    If you put the work in and travel to a state and make the SCS cut then you should be able to play there. IMHO

    I often use Wisconsin as the prime example of how local communities can take over the SCS for that home state.

    The first year when Werdrick qualified based on just the MGC, there was a ton of drama around that because it accounted for such a large portion of the points earned within the state back in 2013. There were 19 events in Wisconsin that year.

    Fast forward 2 years . . . Wisconsin had 112 events on Wisconsin state soil for the 2015 season.

    THAT is how you kick the Illinois kids out

    (Werdrick was 24th for the WI SCS this year and was a non-issue in determining the top 16 field)

    #16 3 years ago
    Quoted from TaylorVA:

    I fail to understand why limiting a "state championship" to the players that live in the state is such a big deal. Seems like it would make it a lot more manageable for the IFPA.

    Yes, players that live near other states would have to play to represent their state, but that's usually how it's done in every other sporting event.

    Don't get me started on VA.

    A lot more manageable?

    Right now we track event locations through our calendar submissions. Usually those have the self policing nature of being 'correct' or else players wouldn't be showing up to the right place.

    Managing player addresses on the other hand, no thanks. I have no interest in having people prove their residency to us. It's more logistics we would have to handle, and puts certain players at a disadvantage in the SCS.

    If I'm Chris Basler and I live right over the Missouri/Illinois border, what are my options knowing that I play most of my pinball in Missouri, but I live in Illinois. The Missouri SCS is 10 minutes from my house, the Illinois SCS is 4 hours from my house.

    The answer is I play in Kentucky, because I fucking earned the right to do so based on my play

    IMO the last person who deserves to get screwed here is Chris for 'qualifying' in Oklahoma, Georgia, Kentucky, Nevada, Illinois, Missouri and Pennsylvania. If he wanted to drive 10 minutes to the Missouri SCS . . . awesome. If he wanted to drive 4 hours to the Illinois SCS . . . awesome. If we institute a rule like this then Chris actually becomes motivated to intentionally NOT qualify for Illinois, so then he would have the option to then pick another state? Or maybe with these rules he simply wouldn't be allowed to play anywhere??

    I'm more than willing to investigate the ACTUAL IMPACT of an issue (just ask Taylor). Feel free to send me a list of states where this is a real issue, and we'll take a look into the rhyme and reason for why things are happening. I prefer that much more than hypothetical conjecture of a problem.

    Just ask Taylor . . . who actually helped bring an issue to light that actually had an impact on the qualifying within the VA SCS. That has lead to a rules change for the 2016-17 season

    #20 3 years ago

    I swear Hilton and I did not text eachother before he posted this message

    #23 3 years ago
    Quoted from chuckwurt:

    How about make it so that if you qualify for multiple states you have to play in your home state if possible first, then if you don't make the cut there, you can play in another state in which you are eligible.

    So you qualify for the Ohio SCS and Kentucky SCS . . . tell me your preference assuming these variables:

    - You live in Florence, KY
    - You would be the 1 seed in the Ohio SCS
    - You would be the 16 seed in the Kentucky SCS
    - Ohio State Championship is in Cincinnati, OH (13 miles away)
    - Kentucky State Championship is in Bowling Green, KY (208 miles away)

    Tell me why it's fair that you should be forced to choose traveling to Bowling Green, KY in this situation.

    (especially knowing that if you just did a little worse in KY you maybe wouldn't have qualified, and then would have been able to choose Ohio - motivating you to NOT PLAY in any more KY events for fear of screwing yourself)

    IMO this gives a disadvantage to players that 'play more', and that seems ridiculous.

    #28 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    I will still say I would like to see an earlier cut off date for declaration of intended state to play. I think it would be reasonable for each member to have a slot in their IFPA profile where they denote "preferred SCS state" and that gets locked on Oct 31st of each year.

    The other wrinkle here is IFPA State Reps flat out don't know where the State Championship is located by October 1st. Most of them didn't know by January 1st lol.

    Look at my Kentucky example, and tell me how this is fair:

    - Based on those factors I 'declare' Ohio because it's 10 minutes away.

    December of that year the IFPA Ohio Rep tells me an issue came up and he has to move the State Championship to Cleveland. Something comes up in Kentucky and the State Championship moves to Louisville, or worse I'm now forced to host the Kentucky SCS at my house in Florence or it's not going to happen at all.

    Is it fair that I'm locked into Ohio, which is 262 miles away, or should I be able to help out the cause and help Kentucky so they can actually have an SCS?

    I highly recommend state reps to communicate with the players on the SCS list to 'unofficially' gauge their interest. This is exactly what I did for Illinois.

    I happen to have a father that was really interested in qualifying for the IL SCS, and our standings are made up mostly of Pinball Expo WPPR's so we have a large share of out of staters in our standings. I took it upon myself to dig and see who REALLY planned on playing in Illinois, and with that I was able to give my dad a 'to do' list during the last 10 weeks of the season of a goal to shoot for (the goal was 10 Illinois WPPR's). He ended up the #5 seed (29th in the state standings).

    #30 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    what are these changes?

    IFPA endorsed tournaments that are held within multiple states will now only be counted in the state in which finals are held.

    #31 3 years ago
    Quoted from fusion301:

    If "circuit" events did not count towards states what affect would that have on all of this.

    Probably depends on the state, but we have no interest in letting other pinball associations (PAPA in this case) somehow dictate the rules of our SCS based on external decisions they are making with choosing their list of Circuit Events based on the various factors they are evaluating.

    #35 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    How many people/states out of the whole were actually impacted by these hypotheticals you provide?

    The fact that Kentucky was on the verge of not happening right up until the end of the year had a butterfly effect on people choosing that state versus staying home. I definitely had a list of players that would have come to Illinois if Kentucky was imploding, because of the impact Kentucky had on the Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana and West Virginia standings.

    I can request that state reps get their crap together, but at some point everyone is volunteering their time to help the cause. Louisiana wasn't even going to have a State Championship at all, and then decided to do it AFTER the registration deadline was over.

    I know that in Illinois we had an issue with respect to the original host and an Illinois qualifier who isn't allowed in their house. I was prepared to host if that player qualified, and our original host was prepared to take those duties on if the player didn't.

    If we're spending time someone managing the back end of this declaration list, and then dealing with these one-off issues through some self policing nature, that's just more work that I don't personally want to handle. At some point we're not saving any time on the admin side because the registration process still has to be done anyway, and anyone wishing to change their declaration then what has to submit a reason why? We then have to go over the pros/cons of whether it's a valid reason to change or not?

    I'm all for State Reps doing this on an 'unofficial' basis (mostly because it means that I'm not doing any of the actual work). If the reason for this is to educate your player base on where they actually stand, this unofficial monitoring should be more than enough.

    I can easily pull up email addresses for any SCS standings at any point in time should you want to reach out to the top X in Wisconsin 'just to check' and see if anyone is leaning towards one state or the other, but I'm just not interested in handling any of these logistics in any sort of 'official' capacity.

    #69 3 years ago
    Quoted from Jdawg4422:

    In the top 16 in FL there are 7 people from FL, 2 people unkown, and 7 people from out of state. Thats no where near 90%+.

    It's actually 100%

    1 Sebastian Bobbio
    2 Jeff Palmer
    3 Atticus Palmer
    4 Joe Geneau
    5 Dan Coyle
    6 Ron Donohue
    7 Kurt van Zyl
    8 Brian Dominy
    9 Carlos Porta
    10 Kirby Rients
    11 Carl Reedy
    12 Joel Cohen
    13 Jim Beam
    14 Shannon Stafford
    15 Cody Miller
    16 Michael Lipof

    Every one of those 16 players competing for the right to be crowned the Florida State Champion is from Florida. There's literally a 0% chance the winner comes from out of state.

    I also would feel really bad implementing this rule for Grant Mortensen who is from Arkansas. Talk about getting shafted

    #71 3 years ago
    Quoted from metallik:

    So here's another question... how fuzzy can we make the state lines?
    Since NE Ohio will throw a fit if they ever have to drive to an SCS south of I70, and KY is woefully short on events, can I hold a tourney in Cincinnati and declare it as a Kentucky event? This would obviously be done at time of announcement so things are clear up front. Keep in mind >50% of KY population lives within 150 miles of Cincy...

    Our calendar requires the full address of each tournament, and then that ends up being filtered into the state in which it's located for the SCS standings.

    So there's nothing really "fuzzy" about where things are drawn up. You would literally have to just lie about the location of the tournament in order to somehow get it to count for Kentucky (and then hope that none of the players report that fact to us)

    #73 3 years ago
    Quoted from Jdawg4422:

    so state championships should have nothing to do with people that live in the state?

    This is 100% correct. You don't need to look any further then the first statement on our website explaining what the SCS is all about:

    "The IFPA is proud to present the IFPA State Championship Series. The IFPA will be tracking the WPPR performance of players by results from each state within the US. At the end of each calendar year, the top 16 players with the most WPPR points from each state will qualify for that state’s IFPA State Championship."

    #76 3 years ago
    Quoted from Jdawg4422:

    was going off info i had. if you want to get technical then texas has less than 90%+ as 2 people are playing from out of state and 2 are unknown.
    So how is that fair to the texas people who now have to play the 40th ranked person when the best person in texas is only ranked at 58th.

    Actually Mark Meserve I believe is from Austin . . . so we're at a 94% success rate for Texas . . . NEXT!

    The Bob Matthews/Jason Werdrick situations are literally '1 off' situations for very few states every year. To me that's simply not material enough to warrant a change that ends up screwing even more people over that only qualify in 1 state that isn't their home state.

    It's fair because Bob earned his Texas points . . . wait for it . . . IN TEXAS! He was the second best player IN TEXAS with respect to WPPR points earned in the state.

    What wouldn't be fair is if Bob worked all year in Texas, didn't qualify anywhere else, and then was forced to sit out the SCS.

    #79 3 years ago
    Quoted from Jdawg4422:

    so how is it state championships if you dont have to live in the state??
    In that case you should be able to qualify for all the state tourneys and play in them all. Says nothing about that in your statement. From your first statement this would be allowed.
    Maybe if you had to declare what state you are in the running for at beginning of the year. That would solve the distance problems and also solve the cherry pickers that qualify for multiple states and cherry pick the easiest tourney in their mind. You should never be able to qualify for 2 state championships.

    Fine . . . I guess I'll post the next sentence on our SCS homepage:

    "All IFPA State Championships will be held on the Saturday following Super Bowl Sunday, with the 2015-16 IFPA State Championships scheduled for February 13, 2016. With all of the IFPA State Championships being held on the same day, no player will be eligible to compete for multiple IFPA State Champion titles, however it is possible for someone to qualify for an IFPA State Championship in a state in which they do not live in."

    Declare what state at the beginning of the year, for a state championship where you don't know where the location is yet. And what about new players who don't even exist yet in the beginning of the year? If a new player wins a tournament in December and qualifies for that state, would they not be eligible because they didn't declare 11 months earlier?

    #80 3 years ago
    Quoted from pinballcorpse:

    Maybe he meant the "original" top 16 prior to declarations.

    I'm sure he did

    Ultimately the issue people have with this lack of residency rule is someone being crowned the STATE CHAMPION that doesn't like in the state.

    I wanted to make sure we're all on the same page that there is a 0% chance of that happening in Florida this year, so it's a non-issue.

    #81 3 years ago
    Quoted from Jdawg4422:

    Actually i was talking about bob from cali and steve from new york.... so we are back to less than 90%+ rate for Texas unless you have bad info out there going straight from your site.... NEXT

    Damn I missed Steve! Check-mate . . . SCS rules will be changed for 2016-17

    #82 3 years ago

    Post removed

    #84 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    I would be happy to do so but it carries no weight without official IFPA backing.

    I think this depends on the purpose of what you're trying to accomplish.

    Your argument two years ago was that players would see they are 60th in the standings, and then be motivated to not compete anymore. Versus if they knew they were actually '19th', they would be more motivated to compete.

    If you reach out to players, even in an unofficial capacity, you'll get the answers you need. I knew Bob was going to Texas a while ago, and I'm sure he wouldn't have cared to share that with the TX State Rep if they asked for anything 'unofficial', or any of the other states looking to ping Bob on where he is leaning.

    At some point if Bob refuses to give up that information, then he's taking this far too seriously and we can call him out on PINSIDE to let the verbal thrashing begin (in the basement of course) . . . with only Aurich around to defend him

    #85 3 years ago
    Quoted from pinballcorpse:

    Understood. Everyone on the declared Florida SCS list lives in Florida. I would be proud to have anyone on that list represent our state

    It's a shame you and Atticus are on the same side of the bracket! No Palmer Final! (That happened to Zach and I last year for IL)

    #99 3 years ago
    Quoted from GRR:

    well, when you register for ifpa, you could have people pick a state to represent....I'd still play Missouri since im 12 miles from the border, but that would fix it. make the registered player pick a state. If they move, they can change their state effective the next calendar year. or hell, leave it the way it is and deal with it. I don't think it's a huge issue, but yeah some people do pick easier routes to the national championship.

    Still not a fan.

    I register as Illinois in my profile on January 1st.

    I find out in July that we are planning on having CP Pinball host the State Championship, and find out its Milwaukee's turn to host the WI championship.

    I don't think it's fair for me to be penalized by being forced to spend money on gas and a hotel to travel to the St Louis area versus being able to choose to take an hour day trip north to Milwaukee (assuming I've earned the right to do so based on my play).

    I'd also rather give players choices to make their lives easier (logistically, financially, etc) based on whatever variables impact them, then ever telling them to "deal with it".

    Like Gene said he earned his highest SCS seed in Illinois, his home state is California, but ended up choosing Nevada. IMO whatever reason he felt to choose what he did is something he earned. If that meant him choosing to want to come to my house for deathmatch 2.0 I would have been ready!

    #100 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    1. Request players denote the state they are playing for by a specific date each year that is before the end of the season >> results in everyone having the ability to accurately gauge play and desire while the season is actually still occurring. This has the net result of MORE playing the last few months. People looking to get in and also people looking to jockey position for which bracket they play through.

    I'm telling you this can definitely be done in an unofficial capacity to much success.

    I know because I did exactly this for IL

    Seriously give it a shot next year. Just message me for email addresses and I can send them to you easily.

    #102 3 years ago
    Quoted from DefaultGen:

    If your SCS is dominated by out of staters who qualified I think another easy way to fix this is to gather up all your local players and tell them to start winning

    Seriously that's all it takes (see Wisconsin example).

    The answer to local player bases wanting to keep out of staters out isn't to find ways to someone restrict those out of state players from competing... It's to organize a shit ton of events that the out of stater would stand no chance to qualify anyway (making all this address verification, registration, declaration all moot).

    With that being one of our main goals out of the SCS (to increase local competition), I think it's a good plan, and honestly one that's already been working just fine.

    #115 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    I woudl propose that people elect an order of states and not a single state. For example, you select WI>IL>MN.
    -Qualify for WI and you play WI.
    -If you end up not making WI, but qualify for IL then play IL.
    -Miss out on both WI and IL but make MN, then you play MN.

    So now we're having people declare multiple choices with preferences, and I'm storing this information where? lol
    Logistically this just isn't something I want to manage for the ~600 finalists and ~9000 players that competed in the SCS. Dealing with everyone ONE TIME within a one week time period during the registration process is far easier for us to manage with our limited staff and resources.

    I also think Tom has a great point on why people would be declaring based off of information that isn't finalized. You can argue that 'much doesn't happen the last 2 months', and I'll agree to disagree.

    Real World Example #1

    My dad in Illinois after Expo was still on the outside looking in (right up against the end of August). By the time November 1st hits, people are still organizing new events in attempts at SCS point grabbing. I know . . . because it's what I did!

    I had told my wife as a birthday present I wanted to run a tournament at my house if I felt like my dad wasn't in a good place qualifying wise for the IL SCS. When it turned out he wasn't, I decided on November 4th to set up an event on December 5th.


    My dad finished 4th, and earned enough points to jump him into a solid IL SCS position.

    I would expect that the last 2 months of activity is as valuable as any other 2 month period on the calendar (so roughly 16.67% of tournaments played?). Let's take a look!

    18 of the 112 Wisconsin events were held in November/December (16%).
    10 of the 54 Illinois events (god you guys killed us in event totals) were held in November/December (19%)
    10 of the 33 Indiana events were held in Nov/Dec (30%)
    14 of the 61 Minnesota events were held in Nov/Dec (23%)

    There's meaningful play in these last two months, and I don't want a pre-season-end "declaration" to dictate what a player ends up doing.

    If my dad declares Illinois, does crappy at my last December tournament, is it fair that because he "declared" Illinois, it's now worthless for him to drive out to Indiana for the Main Street Amusements Pin-Golf Open as a last chance qualification for that state?

    Let's say he plays average at my house and decides to go to MSA's tournament in Indiana and KILLS IT. Ultimately he ends up as the 16th seed (slated to face Zach in round 1 in Illinois), and ends up as the 3 seed in Indiana. Because he "declared Illinois" on October 31st is that fair to him that he's now 'stuck' in Illinois. He would have been better off finishing 17th in Illinois, so giving him some sort of advantage for doing worse in Illinois by giving him an 'out clause' on his declaration makes no sense.

    Let's take it a step further . . .

    My dad ends up as the 7 seed for Illinois and Indiana. He finds out that Stern is hosting the IL SCS, but it's a Sternament on all of their new games. He finds out that Indiana is being hosted at MSA, and there's a nice mix of machines including 50% EM's (his preferential choice of equipment to play on). Somehow him not being allowed to play in Indiana because he 'pre-season-end declared' Illinois makes no sense to me. He hasn't had the chance to take in all the variables in making a decision that I personally feel he's earned the right to make.

    When we created the SCS, the idea was that those players that played more/qualified in more states earned an advantage over everyone else, because it was based solely on their play and not any other external factors and/or restrictions.

    The variables I see in deciding what state to play in:

    - Distance from your house to the State Championship
    - Game mix of the collection for the State Championship
    - Strength of field (for those looking for an easier path for Nationals)
    - Strength of your own seeding position
    - Personal preference of simply wanting to visit another state as part of this process
    - The opportunity to travel with a loved one (last year Lyman Sheats did this - he went to the Kentucky SCS because his girlfriend Penni ended up qualifying and he wanted to support her. There is no way Lyman would have declared Kentucky on 10/31, and would have stayed closer to home had Penni not made the cut)

    These are advantages for people that actually have the choice of multiple options, and it's that way BY DESIGN. I want my dad motivated to show up to my house, and then to absolutely drive out to Indiana the next day, to give himself the best options on January 1st. Any locked in pre-declaration ultimately leads him to not being as motivated to play and I don't like not motivating people to play EVERYWHERE as often as they can. If he's locked into Illinois there's no reason for him to go to Indiana. If he's locked into Indiana because he 'guesses' that will be a better fit for him 2 months later, then he has no motivation to show up to my tournament.

    The only people that gain by any early declaration are the people that don't really have options of multiple state choices anyway, so it's my opinion that we let the players that earned these advantages to make an educated decision based on all the data for whatever works best for their situation.

    #120 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    Well if the change were made now then I think the easiest way to track this would be to just add the dropdowns on the IFPA player profile page.


    Under location would be a box for SCS declared states (in order from 1st to 5th).

    By oct 31st this woudl get locked down.

    LOL . . . and who is the person that has to approve these player selections on the back end?

    (Yeah it's me . . . no thanks. I have a hard enough time keeping up to date with calendar submissions and tournament result submissions)

    From a logistical standpoint, it's far easier for me to deal with the SCS Registration process happening at ONE TIME. It's a killer inefficient work week for me managing all of it, sending out email lists to state reps, following up on responses to our back end registration page, etc, but I only have to deal with everybody for ONE WEEK. It's a crazy week, but it's so easy for me to be in 'that mode' for that week to get this all done.

    #121 3 years ago
    Quoted from shimoda:

    Seems like this isn't really even up for discussion but has been decided, period. Reads that way.

    It's always up for discussion, I'm just not liking the fact that people seem to be 'fine' with forcing players to give up the advantages that they've earned through their play.

    Is it bad form for someone like Lyman to choose Kentucky because his girlfriend ended up qualifying for it?

    Is it bad form for my dad to want to play on an older set of games for a State Championship if he had the choice between two different states?

    Is it bad form for my dad to want to play in Indiana as a 5 seed, versus playing in Illinois as a 16 seed against Zach?

    I'm seeing and hearing the arguments, I just don't like the fact that people like Lyman and my dad get totally boned in these situations above.

    #129 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    I will say that if competitive pinball is intended to favor those that are affluent like the examples you provide then you are right on track with the current paradigm. If you want the IFPA to level the playing field for those without the same finacial and life opprotuntities then there are ways to improve.

    It's always going to favor people that play more. That's how the world rankings work, it's how the accumulate of SCS points work.

    Leveling the playing field for those that have less opportunities at the expense of people simply changes the group that gets boned (it's NOT a net positive). Organizers and players with some limited financial and life opportunities are welcome to organize dozens of events with no entry fee at their convenience to level out the playing field. That IS a net positive IMO.

    Quoted from Whysnow:

    I will say that if competitive pinball is intended to favor those that are affluent like the examples you provide then you are right on track with the current paradigm. If you want the IFPA to level the playing field for those without the same finacial and life opprotuntities then there are ways to improve.

    You wanted examples, and my quickest examples happened to be based on a family member, and a close friend of the family. This isn't about helping "My dad and Lyman". It's about allowing anyone that would be in those situations the option they feel is best for them.

    Quoted from Whysnow:

    -Distance >> non-issue and deal with it. If you are qualified in multiple states then traveling is obviosuly not a barrier to entry

    "Deal with it" . . . I can tell you that personally with my family obligations, I'm always going to choose the SCS closest to my house. If there's a year that southern Illinois is going to host IL, you better believe you'll see me in Indiana or Wisconsin during November/December to scoop up enough points to make that cut.

    Quoted from Whysnow:

    -Game mix >> plan ahead, influence your state rep to select games earlier, PLAY BETTER. Reality is that game list is currently not published till post delcaration now so this again is a moot point

    Lobbying state reps . . .I like where this is heading. Reality is as those locations get decided, those game lists are usually 'fixed'. For example everyone knew the game list at host A for Illinois for most of the year. When we had our "drama" and we made the switch in November for me to be the host, my game list has been mostly the same for the last 10 years.

    I'd go on hitting your other points, but it's clear we're just agreeing to disagree on this one.

    Telling someone that has to declare with 65-85% of the data in house for the year that they should have PLAYED BETTER just doesn't sit well with me.

    You're dealing with people that are choosing not to play based on the lack of accurate standings, and proposing rules that would lead to other people choosing not to play based on their own variables (Player A for example declaring Illinois, but realizing he actually wants Indiana in November and intentionally skipping all remaining Illinois events as to not accidentally qualify).

    I'm not worried at the growth and interest in the SCS, even with this enormous clusterfuck of a registration process

    Last year 6600 players competed in the SCS . . . this year it was 9900
    Last year there were 994 events in the SCS in various states . . . this year was 1835

    People should play competitive pinball because it's FUN. Anyone taking the SCS too seriously that it's dictating their play isn't someone that I want to cater the rules to (this goes for the people in your example and the people in my example).

    #130 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    from what I see, you dad is the 5 seed in IL??? From what I see he did not even come sclose to the cut line in any other state???

    With a cut line of 56 in IL, if declarations had been made in Oct then you would have had a more accurate estimate of where he stood at that time.

    He's 5th because of my 'unofficial' communication with the players on the IL SCS list (sounds like the group I contacted was a lot more forthcoming with their SCS intentions then you were . . . maybe next time you should ask nicer?)

    After my 'unofficial' follow up (in November mind you), I didn't feel comfortable with where my dad was looking at that time. From my recollection he was in ~20th position after filtering out all the players that weren't playing in IL.

    That led to me creating a December event that wouldn't have existed otherwise. It just so happened to be my dad's best result of the year as well, so it made him a lock for IL after that point.

    Ultimately he ended up moving up a couple of 'free spots' based on people that avoided IL that were originally planning on staying in state (Werdrick, Twichell, Jackson, Smith - they all chose IN I believe).

    Had he bombed out at my house, there was a big tournament in Indiana literally the next day, and I would have told him to go. Werdrick and Jackson both went to that IN event because they decided in the last 2 months of the year (for the various variables listed above) that were focusing in on Indiana and wanted to PLAY BETTER in that state to give themselves the best chance at the IN SCS.

    If my dad, Werdrick and Jackson declare Illinois in October, that Indiana tournament gets 3 less participants (well 2 really since my dad actually had a good day at my place).

    EDIT: I'm using my dad as an example because that's the best 'real world' example I have. It's not about somehow trying to find ways to HELP MY DAD at the expense of everyone else out there. Anyone that thinks I'm designing IFPA rules to help out my family is crazy (besides making sure that Zach is #1 of course)

    #132 3 years ago
    Quoted from shimoda:

    I know of a player in the region easily skilled enough to qualify in any state he could afford to travel and play a few tournaments. However, this player's finances don't allow that. If this were only about skills, he could challenge just about anyone in just about any state but it isn't feasible.

    That player should find a game in town, organize a no-charge event every single week, and take it upon themselves to earn enough points to qualify. It's all out there in front of them if they want to put in the time and do the work (travel expenses = next to nothing).

    Check out these local events within the Seattle local community:

    (averages 20+ points to the winner every week for the WA SCS)

    (averages 11+ points to the winner every week for the WA SCS)

    (averages 11+ points to the winner every week for the WA SCS)

    I see something like that, and I'm MOTIVATED to do the same in my town with little resources.

    So, for 2016 with $0 I start a monthly tournament 7 miles from my house. Our first month is going on right now:


    When all is said and done I fully expect the winner to get ~20 points for the IL SCS. Over the course of the year that's ~240 IL SCS points just for the winner of this monthly event, let alone the trickle down to the other places.

    Honestly, within the local communities it rarely ends up being a money thing IMO (there are of course circumstances where this is absolutely true), but more likely than not it typically falls under the lack of time/motivation to organize something.

    Previous WPPR systems severely limited the ability for people to do something like organize an event that would award 240 points in a year, or in those Seattle examples over 1000 points in a year to the winners. They would all be limited to 25 for the year. It's WIDE OPEN now for people to create as many points as they want within their communities, and to me that's by far the best change we've made in terms of motivating those communities.

    #135 3 years ago
    Quoted from sleethering:

    To reach the top of the world rankings and maintain your position requires having some extra money to toss around, I agree with you there. However, it really doesn't cost much at all to organize and play regular events at a local location to build up SCS points throughout the year. We run a free weekly between league seasons and it's not a ton of points each week, but they definitely add up!

    Those points don't count because you guys refuse to travel to Cincy

    Great example of what local communities can do to squash the impact that the one-time regional/national events have on the SCS standings.

    Guys . . . guys . . . really . . . guys (in my best Kaneda podcasting voice) . . . the answer to all your problems lies in running as many free tournaments within your local communities as you can. Get those players out competing as often as you can, and the out-of-staters simply don't stand a chance. This declaration stuff wouldn't matter because everyone in the top 30 will all be local people that only play in that state anyway.

    If that's not the case (like Illinois right now for example), don't blame the system, blame the players for not organizing enough stuff. I blame myself for IL and am doing my part by starting our Level 257 Super League for 2016. By the time Expo comes around I plan on the impact of those results to be far less than it has been in previous years.

    #136 3 years ago
    Quoted from pinlynx:

    14 of the top 25 players "in" GA, earned SCS points only from events held at SFGE.

    Between leagues, charity tournaments, and normal tournaments, the Atlanta scene alone held at least 28 other events during 2015. All of those events are dwarfed by Pinvasion.

    My, probably too simple, solution. To qualify for the SCS, a player must play in at least 2 (maybe even 3) events separated by at least 7 days. This protects burgeoning scenes from being cherry picked by circuit players, doesn't punish regional players who cross borders, and even encourages circuit players to come to a state more than once (hopefully encouraging regional growth as well because big players attract more participants).

    My $.02 of reality as the SCS organizer and supreme leader

    15 out of the 16 players in the field for the Georgia State Championship would have passed your 'test', with only Eric Fisher earning his GA SCS points from Pinvasion.

    So tell me how instituting this rule changes anything for the tournament that's happening on Feb 13th?

    Which circuit players cherry picked Georgia? (the answer is 'player' singular - it was Eric)

    I'm not seeing any other impact on the GA SCS. Once you guys go from 28 events to 100+ events in the state, Pinvasion will mean even less and Eric won't even have the opportunity to cherry pick Georgia.

    To be fair to Eric, he didn't actually get to cherry pick anything - he wasn't in the top 16 for any state and had to rely on other players to make their declarations before he even had a chance to bubble up anywhere.

    When I emailed him about Illinois (he was 58th), his response was, "I just want to play ANYWHERE I can make it in".

    #145 3 years ago
    Quoted from Jdawg4422:

    WTF? So you get special considerations because you are running it people will answer you and you get that info for your records but others cant do the same thing because they dont have the influence you do? Has nothing to do with asking nicer it has to do with how much influence you have.

    If a State Rep is getting some push back from players playing a "nanny nanny boo boo, i'm not telling" kind of game, email me and I'll assist. I'll make sure my influence is used in a positive way to help.

    Quoted from Jdawg4422:

    Also the whole you just need to hold more events actually has a very bad impact on state championships. Like in WI you say they just made many more events to lock the out of staters out. Well you are no longer getting the top 16 in the state anymore, you are getting the people who have more free time to drive around to all the events all over the state. The top 5 will more than likely still be there but after that it is just who has more free time to attend a pinball tourney every week.

    We're just not on the same page at all then, because this is PRECISELY why I created the SCS. Our World Ranking system comes with limitations on how many events actually count towards your standing. The SCS was designed with the purpose of allowing players to play as often as they want, with the motivation that the more they play the more points they will accumulate.

    The SCS is not about making an accurate ranking of who is the best player in the state. It's about motivating communities to organize more events for their player base, with the hope that SCS point accumulation can entice players to show up. If it takes Dave Bell 52 events to qualify for the AZ SCS (and yes he played in that many), more power to him to do that while others sit on the sidelines. It means that the local events get supported with more attendance, which is especially important for public location events.

    I think at this point it might be easier to change the SCS name to:

    "Championship of events held within the state based on players who aren't actually the best players in the state but those with the most free time".

    I rename it the . . . COEHWTSBOPWAATBPITSBTWTMFT! That actually almost rolls off the tongue just as nicely

    #146 3 years ago
    Quoted from TheLaw:

    This is actually a good look at pinball players and how they shake out in real life.

    99.8% don't really care, and the other .2% just pissing and moaning endlessly aboot the same shit over and over.

    It is up .1% over last year

    #151 3 years ago

    Hey Ohio! See what Wisconsin is doing and take some notes!

    #161 3 years ago
    Quoted from shimoda:

    I'm game to this, but finding the basic info of setting up a tourney such as you mention seems a bit more headache inducing than I expected. Since IFPA is all about spreading pinball, what are the simplest places to find information about setting up a tournament. When I looked for this, under Tournaments (on ifpapinball.com) there is no info about setting up a tournament (steps, who to contact, etc.). Under Resources is a link for Directors but it just takes you to the PAPA page with a list of basics about what it takes to do this, again not a step by step layout.

    If I am missing a more direct link, please advise. However, if the goal is to spread pinball, then it would be great to see a simple, step by step process for people new to directing tournaments to find/read/follow. I'm not looking for a hand-hold, but have enough experience in education to know that you increase involvement in new things by making the barrier to entry as low as possible while maintaining standards. Would love to see a simple how-to for starting a tourney including how to get the dates to IFPA.

    As for myself, I'll look around and do the research as I know a couple guys regionally that have taken this on. I'm also not ribbing on IFPA, however, if the best (or at least most consistent) response to the issue I've received from the IFPA (via you Josh) is to start more local tourneys, then I would love to see that kind of information prominently displayed and easy enough to follow for anyone with common sense.

    Still think some sort of a cutoff, or even two event minimum would be nice but that just seems to be beyond consideration. In lieu of that, I'll start a tournament as soon as I can figure it all out.

    I should say that despite still disagreeing with you on at least a few points (and agreeing on some as well) I do appreciate IFPA/Josh participating in this discussion.

    The Director's Guide on the PAPA site that we link to is a great resource. As for a step-by-step layout, it's hard to put up something that works for all situations, but I'm more than happy to work specifically with you on developing a format I think would work.

    So many variables are up in the air when narrowing down a format that can work for you and your player base:

    - Public location or private location?
    - If public, how is your relationship with the operator/location owner?
    - How many machines are physically available?
    - How long would you like the tournament to last?
    - What kind of commitment level of participation do you want from players?
    - Do you have access to the keys to be able to get into the machines for these events?
    - How many players do you expect to have show up?
    - How often do you want to run events? (One time thing, monthly, weekly, etc)

    Those questions are right off the top of my head, and depending on those answers, my recommendations for what to do vary GREATLY.

    The biggest advice even after you get started is to work with your player base to see what THEY want. I know over the years I've morphed formats from something into something else based on the feedback I've gotten from the players participating, and it's worked quite well.

    PM me and we can definitely work through these variables for your situation and get you set up with a format that I think would be successful.

    #176 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    I just wish i could get some media traction with the local news...

    Zach's trying!

    So far we've actually heard back from at least one media outlet for EVERY state in the SCS this year. We'll see how many of these turn into stories but it looks like commitments from South Carolina and Oregon are already scheduled with respect to some media exposure.

    #180 3 years ago
    Quoted from desertT1:

    Any bites for AZ? Need to know how presentable I need to be in FEB.

    2 bites so far . . .

    Looks like Zach talked with the Phoenix branch of meredith.com, and also Channel 3? (Not sure what affiliate that is).

    We'll see if these things go anywhere. Typically we're good for about a 10% hit rate from those initial interested parties. I remember last year Pearson actually getting on air with Channel 5 maybe?

    I deal with the WPPR Pinside bitching, and Zach does all the PR. I still think I have the easier job

    #186 3 years ago

    DO IT JOE!

    #191 3 years ago
    Quoted from GravitaR:

    Laughing as they are doing quite fine in stepping it up in 2015, 2016 I bet they double the amount of tourneys.

    I was more referring to the rotating location for the State Championship thing

    #200 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    agreed, but mostly because running events is really fun! (lots of work but still fun).

    Best thing about running more events is you get to meet more people, make more friends, and build the commraderire (how ever you spell that word, lol)

    THIS is what it's all about.

    If we can get communities fighting for SCS points in their state by one-upping eachother and running more . . and more . . .and more . . and more tournaments, the ultimate benefit is exactly what Hilton says here.

    This is what makes competitive pinball so awesome. Even at the highest level of competition I mostly look forward to getting a chance to meet new people and reconnect with the friends I've made over the past 20+ years of competing. It's been fun to be go from a 13 year old forming relationships with these guys in their mid 20's, to now being in my mid 30's and still having these friendships with these same guys now in their upper 40's.

    #224 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    side note >> Josh, when can we expect 2016 results to start popping up?

    When Shepherd stops traveling for work

    Every time he's about to go home, his job sends him on an urgent mission to Tampa, or Toronto, or somewhere that isn't home.

    #226 3 years ago
    Quoted from triadwatch:

    One other aspect I would like to see changed is letting the top 4 get a chance to play in the national championship from each state. Last year and the first year , the two top players were not able to go to Vegas from N.C. and our third seeded player who is a real good player would have gone to play in the national championship if it would have been a option.

    Our 'compromise' with this is letting the runner-up attend, because our original intention was to only let the State Champion attend to represent their state. I still feel a little weird about someone being the "National" Champ but not actually being the "State Champ", but bending on this rule has allowed more state representation so there's a balance there that is worth the compromise.

    If the "real good player" from NC wanted to play at Nationals, they should have played better that SCS day to at least make the final of that state.

    By design we want the player to earn the right to play in Nationals. Here in Illinois, Zach and I will always be at Nationals since we're running it, but I prefer the pressure of knowing that myself and Zach have to perform well enough on February 13th to earn that Nationals berth by making our championship match. If we don't and bow out even in the 3rd/4th position, we're still "really good players", but we both don't deserve that representation IMO.

    If you're a player that intends on going to Nationals if you earn that right, PLAY BETTER and earn that right on SCS Day

    1 week later
    #229 3 years ago
    Quoted from shimoda:

    e Josh. Cause it isn't really a state championship like this.

    We did!

    "Championship of events held within the state based on players who aren't actually the best players in the state but those with the most free time".

    Congrats to Eric! The 2015-16 COEHWTSBOPWAATBPITSBTWTMFT Champion!

    #234 3 years ago
    Quoted from mattosborn:

    This argument just doesn't hold water, since the SCS champ is not necessarily representing their state.

    IMO it absolutely holds water.

    Remember that the SCS is not about representing the state you live in. It's the: "Championship of events held within the state based on players who aren't actually the best players in the state but those with the most free time".

    Anyone that won their State Championship is properly representing what was being judged in that state by the SCS.

    #238 3 years ago
    Quoted from mattosborn:

    Your quote clearly says "... only let the State Champion attend to represent their state".
    You can't have it both ways....

    Yes, "their state" being the state they played enough events in to earn enough points to qualify for a spot in the championship ... And then being the champ of that event.

    #239 3 years ago
    Quoted from metallik:

    I really wish you'd give up on the state borders... I think your insistence on dividing people by state is starting to cost support rather than build it. The majority of KY SCS finalists were from Ohio. Most of us here in Cincinnati identify with KY, support LAX and basically want nothing to do with the Ohio SCS. There is a big divide, both literally and figuratively, between SW OH and the rest of the state. Few people here want to drive up there, and vice-versa. I am ready and willing to host tournaments, but only if they count towards KY SCS and would be helpful for our group. But, because I'm 15 miles from the border, I cannot do so, and the tournaments never happen. Some flexibility would go miles towards improving overall participation.

    Larry - no matter where you put the borders, there will be people impacted.

    From a PR perspective (and this year was a massive success), state boundaries of events seems to be working just fine. Player interest is up, organizer interest is up, media interest is up.

    Yes, some organizers get the short stick (CP pinball in St. Louis IL, or you in Cincinnati, KY)

    #242 3 years ago
    Quoted from shimoda:

    Correction - tournament, not tournaments, he only had to compete in one tournament here. I would say Scott Kutheis played the best in state last year considering he ended with the top points in the state. He finished 7th in the main tournament and 21st in the classics which gave him almost 20 points in the state, but both tournaments were held in the same room, same time, same expo. I've got no issue with Eric coming. I still believe to compete in the SCS for a state you should compete in at least three events or a regular league in that state. Those in charge of IFPA disagree. I don't see why each state can't just have a state competition that doesn't become a potential place for people who don't qualify in their main playing state to make it to nationals. I just don't understand that. There are plenty of other big tourneys so why no 'real' state championship that is nationally coordinated doesn't make sense.
    As for the argument about the players in states that don't have enough tournaments, then they should be the ones starting enough tourneys to get one. I've got no issues with Eric coming down. He played well, was a gentleman, and earned the victory. I just disagree that he should have been included when there were enough players in the state that had played regularly but fell below his ranking from a single weekend. If he wins 'for GA' at nationals, great.

    So it's okay to tell players without a home state in the SCS too bad, get some tournaments started in your area .... But to say that to the entire state of Georgia isn't?

    Again I look to Wisconsin. If you don't want Eric to qualify by playing in one event, the local communities of in-state players and organizers need to step up and run more events. When Georgia goes from 15 events per year to 100, Pinvasion results won't matter.

    #243 3 years ago
    Quoted from metallik:

    Hey, your organization, your rules... do what you need to do

    There's that too

    What you should be doing is running the "Cincinnati Championship" every year and make a tour of events that feed a custom ranking we can make for you. Portland does this, Upstate NY does this.

    #246 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    In using WI as an example I think it also needs to be acknowledged that a few people could have played in WI SCS with ONLY a few select big events under their belt. They seem to have decided to play in their own home state. Some did it because, quote "I think it is weak shit when guys qualify in their own home state but look for an easier path to nationals" Others did it because more importantly, from running more events WI players have gotten better and it was no longer such an easy path...
    I can say on the flip side the current SCS incentives and rules surrounding this matter have provided some dis-incentive for running big events. While we may be running more smaller events in the state, there has not been any growth of larger events and may potentially be a decline this year. If we really wanted to shut down out of state SCS players we could just stop putting the effort into the larger events.

    For me the priority motivation for the SCS are these 'smaller' local community events (weekly, monthly, etc).

    The motivation for the bigger regional/national/international events lends itself more to impacting the World Rankings of those players participating.

    In my perfect world the points earned by those local events would trump the bigger events for the state because I hope to see a 50 or 100 ratio between small:big events for any given state.

    #247 3 years ago
    Quoted from metallik:

    I've considered this, but what does the custom ranking get besides a list? At some point it'd be nice to have regional championships outside the SCS. Maybe in a year or two.

    You get a championship that hopefully means something to the winner.

    If I didn't have much on my plate I would contact other cities to get involved with the goal of running a tournament made up of all the city winners.

    We would gladly endorse something like that if there was support from enough cities to want to get involved. It's just not on our corporate campaign to-do list.

    #249 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    Can i get a custom ranking made up for the madison championship? Every event held within madsion for the year?

    Yep, just email ifpapinball@gmail.com and we will get it made up no problem.

    I think for Ohio the winner of those 3 cities should determine the city that then hosts the SCS for the following year. That 3-player battle royale would be something like a 40 game playoff, person with the most wins, wins it for their city

    #251 3 years ago
    Quoted from metallik:

    If we go with a regional league here in the Tristate area, we'd be even less inclined to drive/deal with anything north of I70. This is just a situation where the state borders do not serve us well. Chuckwurt is looking at creating an NKY league, and we have a few location-based tournaments starting up locally,, so I'd expect even less incentive to travel...
    Question: Cincy league declares for Ohio SCS points. So far all our matches have been held in Ohio. If a cincy league member who lives in NKY wants to host a league session, would the points still count for OH as they normally would? The league is submitted as one entry so would be hard to split results. What is the verbage on this... is the requirement simply to have the majority of sessions in the proper state, or is it not allowed to cross state lines for local leagues?

    Leagues that have "activity" across multiple states count for the SCS in all the states where there was activity.

    If there was a Cincy league for example that had sessions in both Ohio and Kentucky, the results of that league would count towards both SCS standings (similar to the NEPL that counts in like 6 states out in New England).

    #253 3 years ago
    Quoted from EvanBingham:

    I thought the decision was made to have the points count wherever finals was held?

    For tournaments it's where finals are held.

    For leagues it's still based on wherever that league season has play over the course of those sessions.

    #256 3 years ago
    Quoted from metallik:

    Sounds reasonable. How do you divide the results... do you count how many league events were held in each state and split proportionally?

    Leagues can't submit individual events any longer. Leagues can only submit results at the end of a season.

    There's no dividing of any results. That season counts 'in full' in every state where the league had activity for that particular season.

    #258 3 years ago
    Quoted from metallik:

    Yep, I knew the leagues are counted as one item, but did not realize it'd count in each state fully. Looks like we should have at least one session in NKY next year, in that case

    Now you're cookin with gas

    #263 3 years ago
    Quoted from Black_Knight:

    Who is the idiot that scheduled this weekend for the finals? Ok your probably not an idiot but you don't have a spouse who gets federal holidays off. (So keep it in mind for next year)

    "The Saturday after Super Bowl Sunday" has always been our plan . . . as an homage to when the original PAPA World Championships were always held.

    First year for the SCS, Super Bowl XLVIII was held February 2nd.

    Second year for the SCS, Super Bowl XLIX was held February 1st.

    This third year for the SCS, Super Bowl XL was held February 7th.

    I blame the NFL!

    I believe that the NFL's plan is to always hold the Super Bowl on the first Sunday of February, which makes the 7th the absolute latest day it'll be held (which in turn makes February 13th the latest day that SCS day will happen).

    *our plan will officially blow up in 2018 anyway when my work trade show moves from mid-March back to February 28th, which will make Nationals March 1st. While giving everyone 2 weeks to get plans together to get to Vegas sounds fun, we'll probably be forced to move back SCS day to earlier in January. Details coming much much later.

    #268 3 years ago

    While the SCS was created with the interest of the players in mind, the bigger picture has always been about using the SCS as a tool to help promote the awareness of competitive pinball across the country. This year has been the best yet, with millions of media impressions generated across all the various media outlets run all over the US.

    A full list of media pieces can be found at:


    Las Vegas Informer – Nevada State Pinball Championship
    The State – The gathering of wizards: Pinball champions go flipper to flipper in Columbia
    The Middletown Press – Pinball championship to offer full-tilt action for Middletown man
    Detroit Free Press – A few minutes with . . . a guy you can call a pinhead
    Pittsburgh Tribune – Hot Ticket: International Flipper Pinball Association Pennsylvania State Championship
    Rhode Island News – Pinball fills a blank for semi-retired Lantagne
    Providence Journal – Pinball wizards at full tilt in R.I. championship
    Portland Press Herald – Maine’s pinball wizards show they’re on the ball
    Boston Globe – Pinball wizards bring intensity at state championships
    Pittsburgh City Paper – Pinball Wizards Visit Tomorrow for the Third Annual IFPA State Championship series
    Boulder Daily Camera – Lyons resident helped spur pinball’s rebirth in Boulder County and Colorado
    Free Times: South Carolina – Ballers of a Different Breed

    FOX 44 Vermont – Darin’ Erin: Pinball vs. 2015 Vermont State Champion
    CBS 3 Madison – Madison to host state pinball championships
    CBS 18 Lafayette – Pinball wizards go to head to head in state championships
    ABC 11 Louisville – Gamers compete for state pinball championship
    ABC 9 Manchester – Gamers gather for Pinball State Championship Saturday
    NBC 6 Portland – Maine Pinball Champion crowned
    CBS 4 Minneapolis – Flippers Fly At Minnesota Competitive Pinball Championship
    KTVK Phoenix – Pinball wizards hone their craft as they prep for championship
    CBS 3 Burlington – How to play pinball like a pro
    NBC 15 Madison – Jackpot! State Pinball contest to be held in Madison
    Student Gamecock Television – Monday Night Mashup: February 1st, 2016 | SGTV News 4

    CBC News Nova Scotia – Pinball wizards celebrate classic game in Halifax league
    750AM The Game Portland – Greg Dunlap talks IFPA Oregon State Pinball Championship (20 minute mark)

    #271 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    Madison actually had 4 seperate video pieces and 2 print pieces

    Can you send me the links I'm missing Hilton?

    Zach and I have been trying our best to keep track . . . that's been unusually and awesomely difficult this year

    #275 3 years ago
    Quoted from GRR:

    I really don't think you northern Illinois guys would be happy if we started crossing borders here lol.

    As a northern Illinois guy myself, I say BRING IT ON.

    Worst case if you guys actually start to make an impact on the IL standings, we'll just run a crap ton more events.

    (That's sort of the SCS goal - local communities one upping each other by running more and more events to be the group that captures most of those State spots)

    #278 3 years ago
    Quoted from TaylorVA:

    the stress this puts on hosts and TDs to run more events takes a toll though. I liked it when I thought the purpose of the SCS was to actually bring together the best players that played events in the state.

    I consider it a healthy consequence.

    Obviously at some point there's a saturation point to the number of events players can even support by playing, and hosts can support by organizing.

    My statement was said mostly in jest regarding not being worried about any IL/MO cross state leagues

    #280 3 years ago
    Quoted from GRR:

    Well League probably wouldn't be scary, as all the Leagues here are the 10 week with 1 week playoff type. Winner usually earns around 25 points. so like 4 events a year. That could be handled by ya, but If we did like Seattle did, and we hold a weekly tournament where we can turn out 30-40 qualified players. Winners start making 15-25 points a win. with 52 chances to win, that's a lot of points.You don't even have to win consistently, just keep adding a point a week or so and you got 52 at years end.

    That's exactly why cross state LEAGUES count for both states, while cross state TOURNAMENTS are no longer handled that way.

    If you can get 30-40 players to show up once a week consistently to a location, you SHOULD be doing that. That location would love you guys!

    #283 3 years ago
    Quoted from GRR:

    Upping event count does little if you don't have the players.

    Totally agree here. You have to grow the player base and advertise locally to get new potential players interested.

    Our monthly tournament in the Chicago suburbs averaged roughly 6-15 players per month last year. This year we moved venues, switched up the format to a Super League style format, and had 41 players in the first month. Instead of the winner getting 2 points for the month at Gameworks, the winner got over 24 points for the win at our new monthly for January. 12X WPPR jackpot!

    #303 3 years ago
    Quoted from Whysnow:

    Curious what happens if the venue wants to restrict a specific person from entry for other reasons?
    I used to host more events at my house but have not done so for a while due to a few disrespectful people in the past.
    Will IFPA still sanction an event which has banned select people for behavioral reasons?

    This is typically no problem.

    If someone gets caught robbing my house, or hitting my son, or smacking my wife, you better believe he wouldn't be allowed back in my house but that I would still host events.

    We've dealt this kind of situation quite a bit. Just let us know ahead of time in case the excluded player contacts is about the situation being unfair.

    Promoted items from the Pinside Marketplace
    From: $ 9.99
    Matt's Basement Arcade
    From: $ 38.00
    Playfield - Decals
    Pinball Mod Co.
    $ 109.99
    $ 26.50
    Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
    The MOD Couple
    $ 125.00
    Cabinet - Toppers
    Sparky Pinball
    $ 24.95
    Cabinet - Armor And Blades
    $ 159.99
    Lighting - Other
    Lighted Pinball Mods
    $ 66.99
    Lighting - Led
    Lee's Parts
    $ 89.99
    Lighting - Led
    Lighted Pinball Mods
    From: $ 25.00
    Various Other Swag
    Shoot Again Pinball
    From: $ 175.00
    Gameroom - Decorations
    Pinball Photos
    $ 128.00
    Playfield - Other
    ModFather Pinball Mods
    From: $ 179.99
    Lighting - Led
    Comet Pinball
    $ 45.00
    Playfield - Plastics
    Vandelay Industries
    $ 25.50
    From: $ 9.99
    Matt's Basement Arcade
    $ 45.00
    Cabinet - Shooter Rods
    $ 39.00
    Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
    The MOD Couple
    From: $ 9.99
    Matt's Basement Arcade
    $ 10,999.00
    $ 79.95
    Cabinet - Shooter Rods
    Super Skill Shot Shop
    $ 50.00
    Lighting - Other
    PinGraffix Pinside Shop

    You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider ifpapinball.
    Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.

    Hey there! Got a moment?

    Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run thanks to donations from our visitors? Please donate to Pinside, support the site and get anext to your username to show for it! Donate to Pinside