## Percentage Points System

The Percentage Points System (PPS) is a new way to calculate statistics for teams and quizzers in an attempt to more fairly represent their performance at a tournament. The basic idea is to only calculate statistics based on performance up to the point at which a game is locked.

Credit for the PPS statistics concept goes to Chad Nash, Ryan O'Neil, and Calvin Fisher, who have been discussing and calculating these statistics since 2005. Much of the information below is directly quoted from their discussions.

### Rationale for the PPS

There are quite a few quizzers through the years that have gotten two wins and two losses then loaded up on the 90+ free points in the losing quizzes and taken ATT spots from people rightly deserving. Calculating ATT based on PPS would more accurately represent the true worth of points being scored because it's while the competition is still going. This system rewards quizzers who get the job done while the game still matters!

### Calculating PPS Statistics

Quizzer PPS - the percentage of the total points that the quizzer scored while the game was still competitive. To calculate, take the number of points earned up to when the game was locked and divide by the number of possible points at the time the game was locked - comes out to be a percentage of the points that the quizzer scored while the game still mattered

EA - Extrapolated Average - (PPSx350) - represents the number of points that a quizzer would score IF they were to continue quizzing at the pace that they were when the game was locked; basically, it just gives some more "quiz-type" scores to look at instead of speaking in percentages.

All other statistics are calculated the same way as usual, except that they are based only on the questions up to the point at which the game is locked.

### Advantages of PPS Statistics

- It rewards ten-point quizzers who perform really well, allowing their team to lock the game earlier. Certainly, their average might only be 60, but they are so valuable to their team that their percentage points might be higher than some number 1 quizzers.
- This gives teams no incentive to run up the score. Points after the game is over don’t matter anyway, so why smash a team? This will give number 2 and number 3 quizzers more of a chance to answer tough questions without number 1 quizzers worrying about ‘helping their average.’
- Quizzers who LOSE can’t eat up the points either. When teams go 2-2, it is very easy for a quizzer on the losing team to get all three thirties in both games. Is their high average indicative of how they performed? Certainly not, but currently we reward them all too often on the ATT because of this, and "better" quizzers are left off.
- It would reward quizzers who quiz as a ‘team.’ If a team has two quizzers that quiz fairly evenly, quite often they are punished by just average scores. In one game, if Quizzer A1 gets 5 tens and 2 twenties, and Quizzer A2 gets 3 tens and 3 twenties, they have locked the game. But then Quizzer B1 gets 6 of the last 7 questions. Quizzers A1 and A2 have only 90 points apiece, as compared to 150 for Quizzer B1. Quizzer B1’s score will be much higher, but did he deserve it? And did the ‘team’ quizzers deserve to be so far behind? However, if you take their Percentage Points score, they both have a 50, which is very good. This method encourages teamwork.

### Disadvantages of PPS Statistics

- A ten-point quizzer who has a weak number 1 quizzer is at a serious disadvantage to an equally strong ten-point who has a strong number 1 quizzer. Example: Two quizzers from different teams each get all 8 tens. However, one team wraps it up by Question 13, whereas, the other number 1 quizzer labors and takes until the last thirty to win it (or lose it). Although the quizzers performed the same the differences in percentage points is 50 compared to 26.

* Invalid because: In reality, neither quizzer would make the normal ATT on scores alone (most likely). Thus, it’s not ‘punishing’ a quizzer, it’s just giving another quizzer a fairer shake. Also, if a ten point quizzer has a weak twenty point person, they should switch places. The only penalization for that quizzer is that they aren't being used for their full potential. - It would be difficult to make universal. Some districts are so small and obscure, they don’t have but one tournament a year, are unfamiliar with even the setup, etc, etc. It could be difficult to convey how to do this.

* Invalid because: Even the smallest districts can use the BQTournament Software, and it calculates all of these statistics automatically. - This is one of which I am not sure: Does this method punish two even quizzers for quizzing a solid game? Here is what I mean: In case you haven’t noticed, the longer a game goes, the more points are possible, and the lower a quizzer’s percentage points can become. So is it fair to lower the points of two extremely good quizzers who are having good games against one another?

* Invalid because: 1) Good quizzers are going to take advantage of winning easy games early, thus evening out their own score and 2) this levels the playing field for second-tier number 1 quizzers to have a couple of good games and make the bottom of the Percentage Points ATT. - Somewhat related to the above point. Does this approach discourage ‘smart’ quizzing? For example, if a team needs one of the last five question to win, normally they sit back, wait, play the odds, and pick and choose: ‘smart quizzing.’ However, in the percentage points scheme, they know that the earlier they get it right, then less points will be possible, and they will have more percentage points. So they could become more aggressive, when they should be quizzing smart and playing the odds.

* Invalid because: It is the same as choosing to take a chance and re-open a game now. If a quizzer cares so much about their average that they take a chance, they are only hurting themselves. So again, patience and teamwork rather than individual scores, are encouraged. - The last argument would be that it is very time-consuming for someone to average all these figures. It would take forever for someone to sit down and do this.

* Invalid because: Using BQTournament Software during tournaments calculates all of these statistics for you automatically.