(888) 445-PONG(7664)
Define your top bar navigation in Apperance > Menus

General Approach for WSOBP Rules

Home Page – Flat Forums Rules Debates General Approach for WSOBP Rules

This topic contains 101 replies, has 22 voices, and was last updated by  prusch 6 years, 12 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 102 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1157

    William Gaines
    Keymaster

    The rules we play by at The WSOBP are NOT the rules that we grew up playing with. Instead, the rules we decide to use are based on several factors that we believe are the best set of rules for a tournament of such great size.

    The main factors that we consider when making rules are (1) fairness, and (2) dispute minimization. The two factors can be closely linked. These reasons are not limiting, but when you are giving away $20,000, we want to make sure somebody doesn’t lose out because of some unfair call. The more objective the rules, the better they are. We also strive to minimize disputes for similar reasons, but we are also trying to put on a fun event. If the rules leave openings for people to start arguments, it will only detract from the experience and atmosphere of the entire event.

    Another factor that we consider is that we want to try to find the best players out there. This has a lot to do with the event format, but it also has to do with some of the rules we choose. We don’t care if the best team doesn’t win The WSOBP, but we hope that whatever team wins, we hope it is a pretty damn good team.

    With all that being said, we are always open to suggestions and arguments for us to change rules. We have made the rules after great consideration of several factors (other than those mentioned above), but we also recognize that there may be factors we have not considered.

    Please feel free to suggest rule variations or make arguments for or against certain rules. At the same time, remember – beer pong is supposed to be fun and we can’t please everybody (even though we do our best). If we do not adopt your particular rule or if we disagree with your arguments, it’s not personal. We still want to hear your thoughts. Chill.

    #1158

    mlayth
    Member

    I understand where you’re coming from, so let me ask you this – Why are there no rollbacks?

    Not only do rollbacks benefit the more skilled player, but they make games go faster. I’m not trying to argue, its obviously your call, but from what I understand Rollbacks support every point you just made.

    It’s like Pool. The fact that you get to shoot again when you sink a ball benefits the pros, not the amateurs.

    #1159

    travis14
    Member

    well my opinion is if there are rollbacks then there has to be rebuttles honestly. i dont care either way if there are or there are no rollbacks but if there are there defintly should be rebuttles. yes the games may go quicker if a team gets rollbacks but at the same time you could get a real shitty team that happens to make between 4 and 5 in a row against a really good team and if you make the last cup the game is over. thast why im saying rebuttles are important if there are rollbacks

    #1160

    William Gaines
    Keymaster

    I understand where you’re coming from, so let me ask you this – Why are there no rollbacks?

    I think travis14 nailed (but again, we can always change). I guess I don’t agree that rollbacks benefit the pros – they simply allow the pros to finish a game quicker. We actually ALWAYS played rollbacks, but we thought that in this type of event, a bad team could hit a quick string of shots and even end the game without the best team in the world even getting more than a shot or two.

    In summary, if you don’t allow rollbacks, the better team will always win because each team gets an equal number of shots, and the team that can sink all the cups in the fewest shots will therefore obviously win. If we allowed rollbacks, it’s possible that the best team may get less shots than an inferior team, thereby giving the inferior team a chance to win, not based on pure skill but instead based on the fact that they got extra shots via rollbacks.

    Thoughts?

    #1161

    boltfan4sho
    Member

    I don’t personally care either way. Beer pong is played so many ways you kinda have to learn to adapt to whatever is being played. Having said that it seems like everyones too busy trying to ensure the better team is going to win, but it should just be about who the better team is that game. I’m used to rollbacks and would most likely be how I’d like to play, but like I said either way works for me.

    Also on the topic of rules…If I shoot a ball that happens to knock over one of the back row cups off the table, does that coun as a made cup or is it refilled and put back on the table???

    #1162

    gaw2069
    Member

    Wassup all…. and whats up billy… im sure you cant forget Greg/ Joe from CT haha. I play both doubles/ retribution at my home games…. but since we played a certain way for the 1st wsobp….. and i guarantee at least 50% of the guys who were there will return for #2….. wouldnt it only seem right to keep the rules EXACTLY the same. I agree that many times those who are not as skilled happen to luck out on a streak of hits…. so therefore i dont approve the rules of getting doubles back….. but the idea of rebuttle, Im actually nuetral with…. or that Im actually sort of for rebuttles….. overtime makes everythin more exciting. As for worrying about saving time….. im sure billy can admit…. time was never even close to an issue last yr. Anyone willing to spend $1,000 for airfare/entry fee is obviuosly able to play the game to some extent. So i guess my vote is for NO doubles…. but YES for rebuttles every game. Be good all… and look forward to seeing many familiar faces again in January.

    greg

    #1163

    William Gaines
    Keymaster

    We’d love to do rebuttals all the way, but did you notice what happened during the finals (Day 3) last year when we did allow them? Some of those games really got drawn out. You’d better believe that those games were exciting – the pressure of knowing it’s do or die on that last cup: that’s my ultimate favorite part of the game.

    As you saw on Days 1 & 2 last year, we had to keep a pretty tight schedule in order to get through all the games – that was running what? 14 tables almost constantly for 6-8 hours? With what we’re planning for next year, 14/15 tables will be nothing. Accordingly, (1) we probably won’t have redemption in prelims because of time constraints, but (2) we totally respect and love that part of the game, so we will almost certainly include it in finals.

    #1164

    skinny
    Member

    i’m sure i’ve made this point before, but I agree with no rollbacks/rebuttals in prelims – mainly for the time issue (overtime(s) can obviously push games too long).

    In addition, I agree that the existence of rollbacks does not in fact aid the stronger players in general – From a statistical standpoint (though this is based on my intuition rather than any empirical evidence), I would say it would probably favor the weaker player. My reasoning for this: A better player is more consistent/less streaky than a weaker player, and would fare better in a system where both teams get an equal number of shots than in a system where streaks are rewarded. I will run some lab tests this weekend…..

    skinny

    #1165

    mlayth
    Member

    I really respect you guys for what you are trying to do for this game, Billy.

    And I’m OK with rollbacks not being in the world series, don’t worry I’m not going to bitch and moan. But if you guys are trying to make informed decisions about beer pong, you may want to consider a couple of facts.

    Once you can sink a cup more than 70% of the time, then the odds are you will bring it back every time you bring it back.

    It’s a self feeding loop, where extra shots lead to extra shots. (.7*.7 = .49)
    Thus, an exponential skill curve.

    When you take away Rollbacks you are making beer pong linear.
    Beer pong is supposed to stop being linear after 50%

    You don’t need to understand all the mumbo jumbo on my graph, it’s just how many cups a player will average each turned based on their shooting average.

    As you can see, it wasn’t an opinion when I said rollbacks benefit the stronger players. Rollbacks are barely even a factor (long term) until you consistently hit 50% (And few beer pong players can even hit that!)

    With rollbacks, a match of teams at 40% vs 70% is just as one sided as 70 vs. 80

    The worse you are, in fact, the LESS rollbacks will benefit you overall.
    I couldn’t imagine a professional pool tournament changing the rules to where you only get 1 shot a turn.

    But hey, I’m only here as a resource, so its just something for you guys to consider.
    Like an RIAA judge listening to a geek explain the technical issues lol.

    I’m not asking you to change the rules, just giving some facts about our game.

    #1166

    mlayth
    Member

    In addition, I agree that the existence of rollbacks does not in fact aid the stronger players in general – From a statistical standpoint (though this is based on my intuition rather than any empirical evidence), I would say it would probably favor the weaker player. My reasoning for this: A better player is more consistent/less streaky than a weaker player
    skinny

    Skinny, if a better player is more consistent, that means they would consisently get more rollbacks. Go ahead and try it out in your lab tests.

    Actually the biggest impact is that it’s less of a team game without rollbacks.
    When theres rollbacks you NEED your teamate to hit his cups.

    If your teammate sucks, though, no matter HOW GOOD you are, you will never be able to beat a team that consistently rolls it back.

    If you have rollbacks, you NEED a good team to win.

    #1167

    William Gaines
    Keymaster

    Sure, the worst you are, the less rollbacks will benefit you, i.e., if you and your teammate can never hit two cups in one turn, you will never get a rollback, and therefore, it’s to your advantage to not have a rollback to a stronger team because you will just fall further behind. Of course, then the game is just over quicker – no real harm.

    However, the converse is not true. (Skinny, I hated that theoretical math shit, as you remember helping me through it so I could drink sooner … actually, we did that work while drinking, but anyway, give me some math theory here to prove what I’m saying.)

    First, let me put it this way to clarify the theory. The theory is NOT that rollbacks will not help a stronger team in any way. The theory is that rollbacks could cost a stronger team a game (because of luck), but not allowing rollbacks will never cost a stronger team a game.

    I was going to layout a scenario, but I’ve got to get busy with other stuff. The underlying idea is that a weaker team is defined as a team that takes more shots to end a game than a stronger team. Rollbacks essentially allow a weaker team to get more shots (if they can both hit on the same turn, obviously). The weaker team’s disadvantage was that it takes them more shots to hit the same number of cups, but rollbacks could negate this advantage of the stronger team by giving the weaker team more shots.

    Sure, it’s more complicated than that. A weaker team is probably less likely to even hit two cups in the same turn (as your last post points out), for example, but nonetheless, I believe my main theory holds: a stronger team (defined as the team that takes fewer shots to end a game) will never lose to a weaker team if rollbacks are not played; but it is possible that a weaker team could defeat a stronger team if rollbacks are allowed.

    Now, here’s the question: is there a hole in that theory that I am overlooking?

    #1168

    William Gaines
    Keymaster

    Actually the biggest impact is that it’s less of a team game without rollbacks.
    When theres rollbacks you NEED your teamate to hit his cups.

    If your teammate sucks, though, no matter HOW GOOD you are, you will never be able to beat a team that consistently rolls it back.

    Uh … ok, that’s kind of true, but I think you are missing a fundamental concept: if your teammate (or both of you suck), you are at a disadvantage no matter whether rollbacks are allowed or not.

    Quick scenario: Other team hits every shot; you hit every shot. You’re teammate sucks –> hits no shots. Who will win if there are rollbacks? Other team. Who will win if there are not rollbacks? Other team. Why? Not because there were or were not rollbacks – because you were on the weaker team. Period. (Only difference that having rollbacks would have made would be that the game would end quicker.)

    #1169

    mlayth
    Member

    Uh … ok, that’s kind of true, but I think you are missing a fundamental concept: if your teammate (or both of you suck), you are at a disadvantage no matter whether rollbacks are allowed or not.

    Haha yeah, obviously it helps if your teamate is making cups either way.

    I’m just saying the disadvantage is more pronounced with Rollbacks in the equation, than it is without.

    #1170

    mlayth
    Member

    I believe my main theory holds: a stronger team (defined as the team that takes fewer shots to end a game) will never lose to a weaker team if rollbacks are not played; but it is possible that a weaker team could defeat a stronger team if rollbacks are allowed.

    Now, here’s the question: is there a hole in that theory that I am overlooking?

    If you define a stronger team as the team that takes fewer shot to end the game, then by your very definition the stronger team always wins. peroid.

    There are no other factors to consider, because what you’re actually defining is the winning team, not the stronger one. In beer pong the winners are the one’s that sink the cups first and thats what your definition is.

    Instead, I would argue that the "stronger" player is the one that is more likely to sink a cup when they shoot. It’s all about odds.

    Shit happens, and sometimes the weaker players will hit when a good one misses. Good players don’t hit every time, right?

    But If you give them 100 balls to shoot, the stronger player is the one that will make more cups out of those 100 balls than the weaker player will.

    By my definition I just gave, Yes, it’s possible that a bad team will get lucky every once in a while and hit together. And In ANY scenario a bad team can beat a good one. Upsets happen, and the luck factor is going to exist – With or without rollbacks.

    Take this scenario -

    A bad team averages 40%, playing a good team at 80%
    The bad team only has a 16% chance of making a rollback, but the good team is going to get a rollback 2 out of every 3 times.

    Maybe the bad team will hit 6 cups in a row (that will happen 1 out of every 2,500 rounds) but the good team will hit 6 cups in a row 1 out of every 4.

    The exponential skill curve created by Rollbacks undeniably weights things in the favor of the better players. Statistically speaking, by taking away rollbacks you’re actually increasing the chance of upsets.

    #1171

    travis14
    Member

    well instead of talking about all these precentages and charts about beer pong just play the game and who ever wins then they win.. i mean upsets happen all the time and whoever wins the 20,000 is obviously a good team you dont just make it to the finals and are a shitty team so just play the game with what ever rules are decided on

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 102 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Free Domestic Shipping on Orders of $50 or More in the US.

Facebook