HWBOT Rev5 Development: Voice Your Opinion On How Tied Results Receive Points

In the HWBOT Rev5 subforum, there is currently an interesting discussion going on related to the way tied results are being awarded points. As you know, currently results with an identical score are ranked by submission date. In simple terms, the oldest result will always receive the highest amount of points in case of a tie. Xxbassplayer suggested two alternatives to this method based on his own situation as an example

Suggestion #1: For a tie, the points normally given to the users would be added together and divided by the number of users (an average). In the rankings, all users would show as having the same rank. For example:

(39.8+33.5+29.7)/3 = 34.3 points each

  • 1. 4sec 437ms 49.9pts
  • 2. 4sec 453ms 34.3pts
  • 2. 4sec 453ms 34.3pts
  • 2. 4sec 453ms 34.3pts
  • 5. 4sec 464ms 27.2pts

Suggestion #2: The other way to divvy points would be to give them all whatever 2nd place normally receives, in this case 39.8 points. The 5th place user would still receive the points that 5th place normally awards. For example:

  • 1. 4sec 437ms 49.9pts
  • 2. 4sec 453ms 39.8pts
  • 2. 4sec 453ms 39.8pts
  • 2. 4sec 453ms 39.8pts
  • 5. 4sec 464ms 27.2pts

Currently, we are still looking for more opinions and votes on the matter. If you want to voice your opinion or cast your vote, just check out the thread at the forums. You can find the thread here: click


Belgium Teemto says:

Either leave it as is or suggestion 2.

Belgium leeghoofd says:

I vote for the same points as it's the same score. Even though I can understand method 1.

You could look at efficiency score versus MHz, then again some would downclock to take the screenshot :p

United States hokiealumnus says:

I'd vote for #2. They get a 2nd place result, they should get 2nd place points.

United States reggiesanchez says:

looks like im alone here but I vote either leave it or suggestion 1. "Tied for second" is not the same as "in second" and should = a little less. But tbh I think the current way makes alot of sense too. I think being the first one there is a decent tie breaker as far as points go.

United States Bones says:

I believe suggestion 1 would be better for deciding.

United States Mikecdm says:

I like option #1 better.

United States I.M.O.G. says:

Mikecdm said: I like option #1 better.

I do too, but I already voted for #2. Given more thought, #1 makes more sense.

Germany stummerwinter says:

I prefer old system, first come, first serve... Even with new hardware an older submission deserves more points...

United States Halo_003 says:

I think #2 is more fair to be honest.

Please log in or register to comment.