Server upgrade complete!

Welcome to the upgraded server! If you notice anything wrong with the board, please let Jeffrey know!Free packets for study/practiceAnnounced tournament dates

Bonus stats

Discussion of quizbowl topics not related to specific tournaments
Post Reply
User avatar
merv1618
Posts: 81
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 6:32 pm

Bonus stats

Post by merv1618 » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:13 pm

I'm curious as to why most MOQBA tournament stat reports are given as a decimal percentage instead of out of 30. I mean it's easy to convert it, but it still strikes me as pretty odd.

User avatar
Mickey0R0urke
Posts: 1292
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2011 11:42 pm
Location: Pacific, MO

Re: Bonus stats

Post by Mickey0R0urke » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:18 pm

That's how SQBS converts bonus conversion when you use bouncebacks (which a lot of tournaments have this year).

User avatar
merv1618
Posts: 81
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 6:32 pm

Re: Bonus stats

Post by merv1618 » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:35 pm

But there are separate bounceback stat lines for that reason, which make sense to be a percentage. However there are plenty of tournaments which have both bounceback percentages as well as XX.XX/30.00 ppb statlines.

User avatar
Jeffrey Hill
Posts: 6359
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 11:00 pm
Location: In between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown (aka Johnson County, KS)
Contact:

Re: Bonus stats

Post by Jeffrey Hill » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:42 pm

When using bouncebacks, it's technically possible to enter bonus stats however you want in SQBS since it's all manual entry, but it's my understanding that they are typically entered using bonus points scored out of bonus points possible so that the bonus and bounceback statistics are calculated the same way, instead of having to explain something like "first chance bonuses are points per bonus (i.e. out of 30) but bouncebacks are percent of available points". (Granted, it's not that hard to figure out, but that's the main reason I still do it that way, at least.) I seem to remember there being a guide at one point that instructed stats for bounceback tournaments to be entered that way, but I'm not sure who wrote that.

I guess I didn't realize tournaments elsewhere in the country did it differently. I see that PACE NSC has done normal PPB (out of 30) and then % bounceback parts converted since switching over to 20/20. You would think I would have remembered that since I did some SQBS entry of stats at NSC in 2010 and 2011... (well, I guess for the latter there was plenty more to remember than that little detail.)

User avatar
christino
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:16 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: Bonus stats

Post by christino » Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:23 am

This year, WUHSAC bonus stats are out of 30, and bounceback stats are out of 10. I don't know whether this was easier to do due to WUStL replacing conventional scoresheets, however.

User avatar
scphilli
Posts: 1899
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:00 am
Location: St. Louis, MO
Contact:

Re: Bonus stats

Post by scphilli » Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:59 am

christino wrote:This year, WUHSAC bonus stats are out of 30, and bounceback stats are out of 10. I don't know whether this was easier to do due to WUStL replacing conventional scoresheets, however.
I think this has to do with how Richard entered the points possible in SQBS. I would refer questions about that to him.

User avatar
richardyu
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 10:57 am

Re: Bonus stats

Post by richardyu » Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:46 pm

What WUStL put out on the "Scoreboard" page was the total score of each game and the bonuses heard + BPts earned for each team in that game. This made it easy for me to do mental arithmetic and figure out how many bonus parts were rebounded to the other team per game, instead of having to count things out on a score sheet. Dividing the total BBPts earned by the number of parts rebounded feeds out the number of points earned per single bb, e.g. 5 out of 10. You could of course get the same thing just by multiplying the out-of-one statistic by 10. Hopefully this is a bit more aesthetically pleasing, at least.

Post Reply