LPL Season 9 Rules - vote share bonus points rule amend (item 10a), 20 April

[Captain Blood]

I find no trace of the matching rules to determine who meets who in every round. This is random or there are rules?

There are no rules - it's a random draw, which is then adjusted if it throws up an obviously uncompetitive match (or a pair who have been matched previously).
In practice this means a fair amount of adjustment, because of the huge range of differing abilities amongst the contestants.
If the draw throws up one of the very best painters against one of the least accomplished, that is going to result in an uncompetitve match with a 500 votes - nil result. This would be of no real interest or benefit to anybody.
Under these circumstances I redraw the match until a pairing emerges where at least both entries have a fighting chance - even if one seems to have an obvious edge.

I'm afraid that is a subjective process. I have to decide from the draw what is a reasonable match versus a pointless match.
But if we simply let nature take its course, with the top painters hammering the less good painters all the way through the league for 10 weeks, that wouldn't make for a very entertaining competition, and wouldn't be very motivating for the underdogs 

So it's a compromise I'm afraid.

By the way, further manual adjustment takes place in the later rounds, to make sure that the leading pack of painters all face each other (if they haven't already done so), to make sure the eventual winners have been properly challenged, with no easy matches smoothing their way to the final.

[Atheling]

Man..... how come I always miss this??? 

Darrell.

[malto cortese]

Could you please clarify one aspect of the following:

Round 10 – Women

Paint a team of 5 or more female figures and gain 10 bonus points. Paint a team of 5 or more female figures AND an accompanying 'big thing' (e.g. a vehicle, large animal or creature, ship, siege engine or structure, aeroplane, armoured fighting vehicle, spacecraft) and gain 20 bonus points.

Should the accompanying "big thing" be necessarily a friend or can it also be an enemy?

[Captain Blood]

Accompanying, meaning something that thematically fits in with the 'team'. We will not be too strict, as long as the big thing makes some kind of sense in relation to the team itself 

[eluczaj]

Would it be possible in the future to leave the contestant names hidden until after the vote is cast for each match (in each round)?

This would prevent name recognition from giving even the appearance of a factor in voting.

Also, I find it quite unsettling when a contestant places no entries for a round and round after round their same re-used entry receives more votes than the other.  I would like to see some adjustment to address this.  Maybe something to the effect that a contestant gets 1 miss per season and then after that no votes are recorded and the match is forfeit.

[Dolmot]

Would it be possible in the future to leave the contestant names hidden until after the vote is cast for each match (in each round)?

This would prevent name recognition from giving even the appearance of a factor in voting.

I think we've seen the main arguments at least in LPL4 aftermath and probably a couple of times after that too.

[eluczaj]

I just looked at that thread and that really isn't the issue.  It's not a matter of unsportsmanlike it's the unconscious bias of expectation that is very tough to fight.  I know I try to look at the photos and make a decision before making a voting decision, but it's not always easy to not look at the who before the what.

[Captain Blood]

It's a fair enough point eluczaj, and as Dolmot says, we have debated the point of 'anonymity' many times before. But it's been decided we will stick to how we do it for now. Most of the painters are readily identifiable by their style of painting, presentation, and preference for subject matter anyway.

The problem of recurring entries becoming boring is again a complaint we have heard before
The problem is, someone decides to take part fully intending to paint 10 new teams - and then real life intervenes, and they are unable to keep up the production line, so have to resubmit a team that's already been used, or let an existing team run on through several rounds.
It happens every time - a few people are always forced by circumstances outside their control to fall by the wayside.
Happy to hear your suggestions for how to handle it differently.

[Mad Doc Morris]

Don't think you can avoid 'fanboyism', it's part of the hobby and perhaps life in general. I will freely admit that I voted for certain painters again and again, since I like their style regardless of topics. Also I want them to be honoured for their contributions and hopefully be encouraged at least by a place higher up the leaderboard. So that may well have influenced how I cast my votes. However, I prefer quality paintjobs or ingenious ideas anytime, so I tend to share my favourite entries with quite a few people.

Recurring entries are a different matter. On average I'm in favour of anyone who makes the effort to paint up something new each and every week during LPL (or at least paints as many teams in advance). Yet at times the recurring entry is simply superior for any number of reasons, and I feel it's not the spirit of this august competition to vote for something I don't like. In fact, I would find it unfair to simply expel someone who's unable to continue but has at least provided the required three unpublished teams to enter initially – that's more than I can manage, so…

In essence, I'm happy with the rules as they are. There's always room for improvement – and I would love to see the amount of rules obviously required to be reduced, which's illusive, of course –, but they've produced another high-quality, yet friendly competition in the best spirit of LAF.

[Silent Invader]

Well said, Doc.   

[Dolmot]

Regarding anonymity, it clearly won't and shouldn't happen completely. For example, people want to give personal compliments and ask questions during the ongoing round, thus if nothing else, checking the comments will usually reveal the identities. However, I think it would be possible to hide the names partially with some kind of spoiler tag functionality, near-invisible colours, or just moving them to the bottom of posts. That way people could personally vote with or without peeking as they wish. Conversely, worrying about other people voting "wrong" for any reason is rarely justified.

Still, we have a long tradition of painters using various tropes or signature bits on top of their inherent painting style. If any level of anonymity is attempted, would it then be considered inappropriate to include such signatures in the photos? I wouldn't find the ensuing debate and/or restrictions worth the trade-off.

Regarding missed rounds and recurring entries, I can think of a few small or large changes:

• Currently the rule seems to be that if no communication is received, the last entry is repeated. Otherwise the participant can choose, possibly favouring what they consider their best team. However, the greatest gripe seems to be continual repetition of the same entries, not missing rounds per se. As people already submit three initial teams by default, could we introduce some rotation principle among those (and any further entries) to avoid five-week streaks of the same team?
• At least this year we had an odd number of participants. The last one was thus left out due to pairing. Could we maintain a list of substitute painters to step in if some of the original participants clearly can't keep up? (Say, three weeks of total silence or announcing the situation themselves?) There should be some acceptable options for scoring in that case as well.
• What is the current rule for submitting old stuff from your collection? Obviously there won't be a new team bonus, but can you do that in the first place? In some cases it might be more interesting for the audience than repetition of ongoing season's stuff only.

One or two rounds of repetition is hardly a problem. After all, it's always been a rule that you don't have to submit something every week. In fact, I think the original idea of LPL was "replace whenever you feel like". Only later it gradually turned into expecting new entries every round, which is quite exhausting. I believe that's among the reasons why the number of entrants has been decreasing in recent years, thus we definitely cannot afford even stricter requirements for updating.

[Captain Blood]

• Currently the rule seems to be that if no communication is received, the last entry is repeated. Otherwise the participant can choose, possibly favouring what they consider their best team. However, the greatest gripe seems to be continual repetition of the same entries, not missing rounds per se. As people already submit three initial teams by default, could we introduce some rotation principle among those (and any further entries) to avoid five-week streaks of the same team?
• At least this year we had an odd number of participants. The last one was thus left out due to pairing. Could we maintain a list of substitute painters to step in if some of the original participants clearly can't keep up? (Say, three weeks of total silence or announcing the situation themselves?) There should be some acceptable options for scoring in that case as well.
• What is the current rule for submitting old stuff from your collection? Obviously there won't be a new team bonus, but can you do that in the first place? In some cases it might be more interesting for the audience than repetition of ongoing season's stuff only.

Point 1, yes. That would make sense.
Point 2, personally I don't think changing horses mid-race would be right - it then becomes a kind of tag-team effort, when it's supposed to be individual.
Point 3, perfectly acceptable to use old stuff from your collection or previously published pics. Which indeed is what Lt Hazel has done in the latter stages of this LPL, since his accident prevented him from painting any more new stuff.

There's no ideal answer - well apart from asking all participamnts to provide 10 new teams up front
But in the absence of any instructions to the contrary, I do think a rotation of repeat entries (rather than running the same one again and again) would be a good idea and easy to implement.

[valleyboy]

Good answers to the above I think, one of the problems is perhaps the timing or window of the competition
I didn't enter this year because I knew that I would have to return to the UK at some point because of a family illness and be unable to complete 10 entries

I would like to enter next year but the timing of the LPL coincides with a planned visit to the UK at Salute time and will mean that I will not be able to paint for 3-4 weeks, I can however prepare teams in advance and enter several before I leave, or having already completed and photographed them send the entries from a laptop during my travels each week (as I've done in the past)

Please can I ask a question? - if the special bonus teams were known well in advance, say before Christmas then one would have longer to prepare and complete and be in a position to be ready for the competition well in advance - the advantage is that those with a commitment during the "running period" would be able to take part - they still have to produce the teams but to their own time frame.

However under these circumstances they are not under weekly pressure - how much or how important is the ethos of "painting a team in a week under pressure for a deadline week after week for a short period" a desirable part of the LPL against painting all year round for the LPL but keeping it under wraps until the timing of the event

[Captain Blood]

Please can I ask a question? - if the special bonus teams were known well in advance, say before Christmas then one would have longer to prepare and complete and be in a position to be ready for the competition well in advance - the advantage is that those with a commitment during the "running period" would be able to take part - they still have to produce the teams but to their own time frame.

However under these circumstances they are not under weekly pressure - how much or how important is the ethos of "painting a team in a week under pressure for a deadline week after week for a short period" a desirable part of the LPL against painting all year round for the LPL but keeping it under wraps until the timing of the event

Kerry, I don't think the ethos of having to paint a team a week against the clock is that important really. I don't believe The Prof ever intended the LPL to be an exercise in self-flagellation

Truthfully, if one wants to enter 10 new teams across the 10 weeks of the league, it's always been perfectly possible to paint at least 7 of those teams any time you like in the preceding year.
Obviously, the only teams you're actually going to have to paint within the window of the league are the three teams for the theme bonus rounds - if you're chasing the maximum points. Which of course most participants want to... 
But to be fair, over the last two or three leagues, the announcement of the LPL (including bonus round themes), has been made around 6 weeks before the league actually starts... So there's plenty of time to paint 15 or 20 figures.
My approach in the last couple of leagues has been to have 2 or 3 teams already painted before the league is announced (I'd normally do this over Christmas). Then get another 2 or 3 teams finished during that 6-week preparatory period before the league actually starts. Leaving me with only 4 or 5 teams to paint during the actual 10-week running period of the league itself. I'm sure many LPLers take the same approach

[Drachenklinge]

No self-flagellation?
damn, should have known that before. However, the scars look cool on my back.  

This year - my second LPL - my taking part came out more or less spontaneous, because at time of anouncement I realized, I already had 6 teams nearly ready, also never shown before.
Nothing special, cause it was fast painted purely for gaming, not show-case or show-off in any case, but cool enough for me (which is the most important part, anyway).
I had planned to take part with far more ambicious minis, but heck ... there is alway a next LPL.

Anyway, I can only strongly recommend to try the LPL. Seeing Your pix battle others in addition to other matches sharpens and opens ones mind to new ideas. And on top I am doing the pic-battle with people all over the world ... more or less literally.

It's simply great to be a part of.

so ... nike ... just to it  
DK