I spent about 10 years competing in amateur pool leagues and tournaments (8-ball) before getting into competitive pinball, which I've done now for 8 years, and in that time I haven't been able to shake the idea that a solid handicap system would be the best way to entice and increase participation in competitive pinball.

What exactly is a handicap system? It's an artificial means of leveling the playing field designed to increase competitiveness amongst all participants. The NFL does this in the form of a salary cap and the result has been less stacking of teams and more game by game competitiveness across the board... making it more enjoyable for the majority of fans. Pool leagues do this by requiring more wins from higher ranked players when they play against lower ranked players. Having such a a handicap system also provides a mechanism to avoid team stacking like the NFL salary cap. A good handicap system isn't drastic enough to alter the expected outcome a substantial amount, it's primarily to give the impression that everyone has a chance no matter the skill level, so the question is how to do this with pinball.

There are those that are opposed to handicap systems on principal, as if it is a punishment to the best players and a reward to the worst, reducing incentives of both to compete and improve. All I can say is that I've never heard this complaint in pool leagues and tournaments... the better players enjoy the extra challenge that they would otherwise not have when playing against a low ranked opponent. It gives low ranked players the impression that they actually have a chance if the ball bounces their way. Individual competitiveness exists with or without a handicap system... I'd assert there are as many uber-competitive players as there are players who aren't concerned about winning, and nothing will change that. The problem that comes with handicaps is sandbagging by those who like to game the system for unfair advantage, particularly at tournaments where money is on the line. The latter is not easy to deal with, but at some point it's obvious enough to be be dealt with by league and tournament operators on an individual basis.... statistics and reputations are easy enough to acquire.

Pinball handicaps are already in use in many different forms, usually by a ranking system used to match players of similar skill together, or applying a score differential, but I've seen nothing that comes close to being effective at allowing the best and worst to feel like competing with each other is anything but an exercise in futility.

I'll illustrate how the APA handicap works. APA is an amateur pool player ranking system whose goal is to make it competitive for everyone, a slightly different goal than IFPA, which is to establish a world ranking. All players are given a handicap of 2-7, 7 being the best. It requires 10 matches before the handicap is considered accurate, and you can now pit any combination of players together in a match using a “games must win” chart. For example 4 vs 4 is a race to 3 (first player to win 3 games wins the match). 6 vs 6 is a race to 5. 5 vs 3 requires the 5 to win 4 games before the 3 wins 2. 7 vs 2 requires the 7 to win 7 games before the 2 wins 2 games. Like pinball there's some luck involved with pool, so for example if your opponent scratches on the 8 ball, you win the game even if you hadn't yet picked up a cue stick. Similarly in pinball, everyone has their share of house balls so a single game pinball match becomes a hit and miss proposition. A worldwide handicap rating allows players from across leagues and across the country to comfortably compete with each other in any level of competition.

APA leagues are typically team based, whereas tournaments can be either team or individual based, and this handicap is used to avoid team stacking. A max of 23 points can be spread across 5 matches, meaning you can play a team with ratings of 7+7+5+2+2 (23 points), against a team of 6+5+4+4+4 (23 points), at which point a league night is like chess game. The two 7's would usually beat the 6 and 5 (even with the handicap), the two 4's would beat the 2's, and then the entire night likely comes down to the much more competitive 5 vs 4 match. More uneven matches are risky, but frequently come into play as the situation demands it. This team concept is a key attraction to pool and bowling leagues but is rare in pinball. Strategy goes beyond individual matches and into team strategy, including sequence of matches. If you lose your match you let down your team, you win and you are a hero for the night. If you consistently win your match you will be earmarked as a clutch competitor for your team, commonly saved for the final match when it is a 2-2 tie, or even match #3 when you are up 2-0 and want to close the door. Leagues based on individuals playing within their skill groups pale in comparison to this level of strategy and socialization within and between teams.

APA pool tournaments for individuals tend to have more flexibility than leagues, and it's common for the handicap system to be relaxed into 3 tiers instead of 6 (2-3, 4-5, 6-7) so that the games to win differential isn't as drastic now that money is on the line. The result is that if you are playing above your rating on that day you will do well and if you are playing below it you will struggle. 6's and 7's still win the majority of the time as their advantage increases relative to league play, but now those two are on even ground with each other. In pinball I have yet to see a tournament that applies any sort of handicap other than applying tiers to the finals (A, B, C) which is not a handicap, it is used to shorten the finals rounds to the A group participants. Anything other finish is the equivalent of a participation trophy.

So the question is how to add a handicap into pinball. A good starting point is leagues with team play. Monday Night Pinball is an example of this (https://mondaynightpinball.com), and Ryan Wanger is trying to initiate a similar league in Colorado (see https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/interest-in-a-denver-front-range-team-league). A team league needs a thorough handicap system to enforce competitiveness. Monday Night Pinball uses the IFPA rankings for handicapping (no more than 1 player may be ranked in the top 150, nor more than 2 players ranked in the top 500, nor more than 3 players ranked in the top 1000 of IFPA's World Pinball Player Rankings), but it doesn't account for skills of players ranked below 1000. Also as IFPA's goal is to provide a world wide ranking, it tends to skew toward those who participate in a lot of rated events, whereas a typical league-only participant may take 10 years (2 leagues per year) to get the 20 minimum ratings for IFPAA regardless of the number o matches played (leagues commonly hold 100+ matches/player/year). The APA handicap system resolves this by using matches as the basis of ratings instead of league and tournament results, making it both more accurate and more real time.

We already have established 4 tiers of participants in pinball(A-D divisions), so it's a reasonable place to start. We can use a simple game differential like
A vs A is a 3 to 3 match, A vs B is a 3 to 2 match, A vs C is a 4 to 2 match, and A vs D is a 5 to 2 match.
B vs B is a 3 to 3 match, B vs C is a 3 to 2 match, B vs D is a 4 to 2 match
C vs D is a 3 to 2 match

If the game differential isn't attractive, we can use a scoring differential. I used crude calculations based on 655 games from 3 or 4 player match play from a 29 player league, IFPA rankings from unranked up to #50, all game eras, and applied estimated A-D rating to all players to come up with the following:
A vs B players won by an average of 183% of score. A vs C 265%, A vs D 466%.
B vs C 144%, B vs D 239%,
C vs D 185%.

Based on that, it's more than reasonable to apply score differentials in an otherwise even-game match between unequal players. Lets start by using no more than half that differential for the handicaps with consistent gaps:

A has to beat B's by 130%, C's by 160%, and D's by 190%.
B has to beat C's by 130%, and D's by 160%
C has to beat D's by 130%

How does that affect players? Realistically if you are an A player going against a D player is it going to be tough to outscore them by 2x? Not if the rankings are legitimate. Is it going to be tougher for an A going against a B than it would be a D? Of course, it will be tougher with or without the handicap.

To summarize the goal here is to make all the matchups more interesting, give the better players more challenge, and the beginners the impression that they actually have a chance. What do you think?

The important point to realize is that handicapping is already prevalent in leagues around the world, and it usually involves matching players of equal skill level together. If you are a B or C who wins the league over the A's you do realize you will have had a much easier time getting there than an A. In other words while you were spending many of your games against B and C players the A players were spending all their time against A players. A players will feel slighted by losing the league to a lower ranked player, and the lower ranked player will have used their ranking to their advantage. It's not substantially different the system I am proposing.

The prerequisite to be able to match equal players together is to have a rating system. Leagues commonly use a bubble sort over the course of a season, matching players next to each other in their own internal ranking, where the best rise to the top, and the worst performers fall to the bottom. What happens to new players who join a league or players who change from one league to another? It will take weeks to get them to bubble into their legitimate spot. What I'm proposing is a universal handicap system that can be accurate for all players day 1 in all leagues.

One of my goals is to allow casual players and "ringers" to play competitively together, whether it be in a team format or head to head. If you don't have a good mechanism for doing that, the league winds up being divided, acting more like 2-3 leagues playing in the same place on the same night but not together. For example it wasn't until after my first season at Lyons was concluded, that I met people at other events without realizing I was indirectly competing against them in the same league season. It's really awkward, and would never happen in a team based setting, or a league with mechanisms for random pairings.

The bubble up/down system also lacks rating stability... as a middle-of-the-road player, I'll wind up bouncing top to bottom during a season because of my inconsistency (that factor that segregates the best from the rest), and the result is it's not not fair for the beginners to play me, and it's not fair for me to be on level ground with the top 100 players in the world.

Originally I thought that randomness was something that would make pinball handicaps difficult, but when I ran stats this is just not the case... better players consistently outscore lesser players, and the difference in score is directly proportional to the difference in skill.

On the surface, pool or tennis or basketball look like pure skill sports, but that ignores unexpected moves by a direct opponent. In pinball you have no direct opponent as such, but you get similar unexpected moves from bad bounces in the game, and better players are better at recovering from those bad bounces. It's also why pool, tennis and basketball tournaments tend to be "best of x" matches rather than single game matches. Pinball should be treated the same.

Handicapping is more about rewarding consistency. Those rare big wins will still be there, and will be just as rewarding, and if you continue to win consistently with a handicap you will move up until you can no longer win consistently, at which point you settle in to a true ranking. A handicap system is a more stable ranking system than a standard league uses when they try to match like players because you're no longer moving up and down each week, it takes a series of of wins to move up, and a series of losses to move down. In this respect, an A player would not only win most of the time, but win most of the time with a handicap against him. That's a whole other level above what is offered now. A player that can beat the majority of players the majority of the time but struggles with a handicap would be considered a B player, a differentiation that wouldn't otherwise be as obvious.

What I see around town is the A players regularly bowing out of competitions either because there isn't enough competition at an event, and/or the event doesn't offer enough WPPR points to make a difference in their IFPA ranking. It's a catch-22, because A players are what increase the point value in a competition. A handicap system should increase interest in the competitive aspect of even the smallest competition to challenge themselves, even if the point value isn't attractive, the result of which increases the value of the competition for everyone. It's a positive feedback loop.

Here is the breakdown by era:

EM (6 unique titles)
A beat B's by 123%, C's by 149%, and D's by 180%.
B beat C's by 127%, and D's by 150%
C beat D's by 121%

Solid State (4 unique titles)
A beat B's by 163%, C's by 323%, and D's by 332%.
B beat C's by 169%, and D's by 247%
C beat D's by 173%

90's DMD (5 unique titles)
A beat B's by 244%, C's by 352%, and D's by 954%.
B beat C's by 149%, and D's by 305%
C beat D's by 236%

Modern DMD (10 unique titles)
A beat B's by 196%, C's by 269%, and D's by 447%.
B beat C's by 141%, and D's by 256%
C beat D's by 203%

You can see that SS/DMD scores show unquestioned scoring dominance of upper tier players relative to lower tier players, so my initial proposed differentials were more in line with EM differentials. In other words, it's just giving the lesser players a shred hope that they have a chance, while not impacting the end result unless the better player is having a bad night AND the worse player is having a great night.

You have any remaining concern about your ability to beat D's by 190% score?

It seems not many people are familiar with handicaps at all, so I have other a couple other examples to share, this one being hypothetical, but easy to understand.

Lets say you are a rec-league basketball player and Michael Jordan is in your league, matches are 1-on-1, race to 21 points. You will likely struggle to get any points on MJ and MJ will get bored of beating you, making you wonder why he bothers to be in the league, but he is older now and wants some exercise. One day he approaches you and says, "I'll spot you 10 points", so Jordan needs to score 21 points before you score 10. That makes it a little more interesting for both of you, no? There is also a former collegiate level starter in the league as well, Jordan may spot him 4 points, and if you play the collegiate player he will spot you 6 points. Therein is the mechanism to make each match of this mixed league more competitive for everyone involved regardless of opponent or skill level.

Earlier I stated that I didn't want to drastically change the overall outcomes of each match, but the more I thought about it the more I don't think it's the right way to go. A truly competitive handicap system tries to even out matches such that if you are playing at your correct level your win ratio will be closer to 50%. If you are consistently exceeding, say a 60% win ratio with your assigned handicap it's probably time for you to move into the next, more competitive, bracket, and if you are losing more than 40% you should move down to improve your win percentage. The next example is going to be tougher to illustrate but wanted to give another real world example of an accepted handicap.

For years I've been playing a board game called Go, but primarily online with people around the world. Most of you won't know the game, but it's been around for 2000 years and as popular in Asia as Chess is in Europe and the states. The standard board is a 19x19 grid and each player in turn places stones to claim territory, the player with the most surrounded areas wins.

It's an extremely competitive game across the world, and professional players are highly revered in Asia. The interesting thing is that unlike Chess no one has been successful programming a computer that can beat the best Go player in the world. Kids with high aptitude for the game are sent to institutes, and there are volumes of books on strategies. This also means that the game has a wide variance of skill levels.

You can think of a Go handicap system as 40 notch ladder which covers both professional and amateur ranks, grouped as follows:

30–20k - Beginner
19–10k - Casual player
9–1k - Intermediate amateur
1–7d - Advanced amateur
1–9p - Professional player

Once individual ratings are established players can play each other and handicaps are implemented in the form of the lower ranked player gets to make up to 9 moves before the better player gets to make one. It's a substantial disadvantage to higher ranked players to compensate for pre-moves, and alters strategy from defensive to offensive, but a on level playing field a separation of only 5 ranks is too much, the better player will win every time. The handicap system provides a great way for local Go clubs to pit players against each other of different skill levels because it's not easy to find a substantial number of opponents at one's own level. In this case it mimics the 60/40 rule... if you are winning more often than losing you're going to move up the ladder, and if you are losing more often than not your rating is going to drop.

Ultimately what it means is world rankings are only renevalt for, say the top 100 players, and everyone else is rated using only this handicap system. I see pinball as in the same boat, the vast majority of players will benefit from a handicap rating rather than a IFPA ranking, and competitions will improve as a result.

Lets put it another way. If you play in a league you are likely already under a handicap system, so if you don't like handicaps on principle, maye you should be lobbying to get rid of it in your league. If you find value in it, then why not explore options that will make it even more valuable?

A hollow victory to me is an A player defeating a beginner, in which there is little satisfaction on either side unless the beginner chalks it up their entry fee as a tutoring fee. I think you can agree to this, and agree that leagues and tournaments include players from all skill levels. My stated goal is to increase competitiveness across the board. If an A player has to beat a beginner 4 games to 2, the match is now more meaningful to both sides, effectively eliminating the hollow victories that occur without a handicap.

That's is what I'm saying. Lets say your league ranks all players and puts them in groups relative to their league ranking. In a 32 player league it means player #1 has to compete against players #2-4, while #32 only has to compete against players ranked #29 or lower, making the path to victories easier for #32 than it is for the top seed. #1's is handicapped because they don't get the benefit of easy wins by including beginners in their matches (average opponent should be #16 or so but is actually #2-3). Don't get me wrong that system works great to rank the overall league, but it reduces the value of the league as a venue for socialization and learning, when people in the same league may never match up against each other.

If you like tournaments, increasing participation should be important to you because it increases the tournament pot.