[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

What does the current ABT point system really measure?

Posted By: Rich Munitz
Date: Tuesday, 6 October 2009, at 4:13 p.m.

In Response To: Factors for Tournament Attendance (2) -- WSOB Point System (Bill Riles)

"as I understand the current ABT point system the points awarded to the various cashers are directly related to the number of participants."

TRUE

The number of total points awarded to ALL cashers is equal to the number of players in the event. Thus Michigan had 95 players and distributed 95 ABT points.

"Thus, winning Michigan (95), as an example, is worth the same as winning Minnesota (21), the US Open (25), Thousand Islands (27), and Colorado (22) combined."

NOT TRUE

As you said:

"(I know it varies a bit with the number of places paid in each tourney.)"

It is much more than "a bit". Larger tournament has more cash positions paid out. As a result, the percentage of the total points received by the winner is generally much lower in large events than in small events. The dilution due to number of positions paid out could even cause a smaller event to pay more ABT points to the winner than a larger event. Last year, Vegas had more players than Michigan but paid less points to first because Vegas paid 10 spots while Michigan paid 9.

For example, Michigan with 95 paid 9 places and 31.67 points to first. Thousand Islands with 27 paid 3 places and 15.43 points to first. With 28% of the players, it paid nearly half the ABT point. Colorado also paid 3 places, and 11 points to first. With 23% of the players as Michigan, Colorado paid 35% of the ABT points to first.

Nevertheless, the ABT point system is designed to measure a different kind of success than W/L record. If every tournament charged the same entry fee and rake, and if every tournament paid first place twice what it paid second place, etc. Then the current ABT point system would be exactly measuring calendar year prize winnings. No more, no less. That is a perfectly valid measure of success in a given year. There are also other perfectly valid measures as well. So lets start measuring.

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.