BEVERLY HILLS, MICHIGAN – A few weeks ago Matt H. arrived to league night, slid into the casual bullshitting that often takes place the to start the evening, and tried to pretend nothing was bothering him.
However, when one of the guys initiated a conversation about the prior week’s recap and season Power Rankings, Matt seized the opportunity to air his grievance.
“How do the Power Rankings work? My record is 19-5 and I’m winning 79% of my games, but I’m only sixth in the Power Rankings,” Matt questioned.
KP explained Power Rankings were based on the size of one’s KPM, not the win-loss record, then attempted to explain the KPM is calculated by weighing three key factors to a cornhole player’s success:
- Points per Round (points one scores in a round before netting their opponent’s score)
- Accuracy (% of bags scored, counting both in the hole and on the board)
- Cornhole per Round (how many of your four bags go in the hole, on average, per round)
These metrics are weighted and then added together to arrive at KPM, which is akin to a hitter’s slugging percentage in baseball – a metric used to measure a hitter’s productivity and power.
KPM’s purpose is to measure a cornhole player’s effectiveness (how many points they score, how accurate they are and how often they put the bag in the hole), despite wins and losses. Certainly players with higher KPMs would be expected to win more, but it’s not always that easy when you factor variables such as how well/poorly the partner and opponents play.
Matt’s eyes glazed over as KP attempted to explain this, probably just as your eyes are glazing over if you’re reading this. KP sensed he was losing Matt, and stopped – “Just fucking throw better and you’ll climb the Power Rankings!”
“Got it!” Matt chuckled.
Speaking of throwing better, let’s give these boys a hand for exceling this week!
- Erik was on a heater this week, posting an 18.7 KPM as a result of 5.9 points per round (“PPR”), 81% accuracy and 1.4 cornholes per round (“CPR”). Those numbers helped him to a 5-1 record for the week, and jump from #18 to #15 in the Power Rankings. I sense JV’s eye-roll as he reads this, so let’s slam the door on what he’s assuredly thinking – Erik’s partners carried him all night and that’s the only reason he won five of his six games. Wrong! Erik won his six head-to-head match-ups this week to the tune of 237-205, which equates to 0.8 differential per round (“DPR”).
- Won the head-to-head against Joe S., 33-17, while throwing an 8.3 PPR
- Won the head-to-head against Dan G. (or Grandpa Dan) in two games, 99-77, while throwing a 5.8 PPR
- Won the head-to-head against JG, 38-25, while throwing a 6.3 PPR
- Lost the head-to-head against Flowers, 41-50, but threw a 5.2 PPR (above his season average)
- Lost the head-to-head against KP, 26-36, but threw 5.2 PPR and his team still won the game
- Paul threw an 18.3 KPM while logging an impressive 8-1 record, finally breaking his season-long trend of hovering around .500 in the win-loss column (his season record is now 18-11). Paul won his head-to-head match-ups, 343-292, representing 0.86 DPR, which helped his teams win by an average of +7.9 points per game (i.e., the average final score of Paul’s games was 21-13) – the +7.9 scoring differential per game was second-best on the evening behind Erik (+8.0).
GAME OF THE NIGHT
Numerous games were strongly considered for the Week 6 Game of the Night, with nine of the 26 games decided by six points or fewer. Alas, there can only be one winner and this week’s Game of the Night takes us to Game 18: Mike V. and Melissa vs. KP and Joe, with husband and wife facing off head-to-head.
Let’s get right to it, Mike V. looked like the best player in the league through the first four rounds of this game, averaging 9 points per round against KP – recording rounds of 5-6, 9-8, 10-8 and 12-8 during that stretch.
Meanwhile, Melissa slapped her husband around during that same period, scoring eight points for her team while averaging 6 points per round (compared to 5.25 points per round for Joe).
Mike V. and Melissa quickly built a 15-6 lead, and upped that to 18-8 two rounds later. Joe and KP offered encouraging words to each other, but every syllable rattled from the shock both players felt throughout their body.
Round 11 finally offered a glimpse of hope when KP earned three points for his team, followed by 5 more points from Joe in round 12. In a flash, the 10 point lead was down to two (18-16).
Mike V. steadied the ship by washing round 13, while Joe closed the score to 18-17 with one point in round 14…he missed a chance to win the game with a cornhole on his final bag, but missed – likely due to threats from Melissa as he threw the final bag.
In round 15, KP broke the hearts of Melissa and Mike V., as well as the audience rooting for a monumental upset. He couldn’t miss and won the round 10-3 to complete the comeback and hand his opponents a choke.
Melissa and Mike V. should hold their heads high, despite the disappointing loss. Melissa played her husband to a draw, 32-32, and averaged 4.6 points per round. Mike V. narrowly lost the head-to-head with KP, 51-57 (only due to the final round), and averaged 6.4 points per round.
MUSHROOM STAMP MOMENT
Erik received too much praise for everyone’s liking, so it’s time we bring him back to Earth. This week’s Mushroom Stamp Moment (“MSM”) occurred in Game 5 where Paul G. and Flowers battled Craig and Erik.
This was a phenomenal game with five lead changes until Craig and Erik earned a 19-17 advantage through 14 rounds.
It seemed round 15 would be pivotal, likely leading to one of the players clinching victory. Flowers stepped up for his team and drained four consecutive cornholes; Erik could not keep up, managing only two points. Flowers’ 12-2 round secured victory, handed Erik his only loss of the night, and offered JV the ammunition to yell, “YOU SUCK!” as Erik limped off the court.
Oh, and it also earned this week’s Mushroom Stamp Moment.
This week’s box score is below.
| Week 6 Power Rank | Name | Week 6 Wins | Week 6 Losses | Week 6 Win % | Week 6 Saves | Week 6 Chokes | Week 6 Comebacks | Week 6 KPM | Week 6 Gross Points Per Round | Week 6 Toss Accruacy | Week 6 Cornholes Per Round | Week 6 Cornholes | Week 6 Cornholes Per Game | Week 6 Gross Points | Week 6 Gross Points Per Game | Week 6 Net Points For | Week 6 Net Points Against | Week 6 Net Points For Per Game | Week 6 Net Points Against Per Game | Week 6 Net Point Differential | Week 6 Foot Snags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | KP | 2 | 3 | 40% | 1 | - | 1 | 22.0 | 6.8 | 81% | 1.8 | 57 | 11.4 | 218 | 43.6 | 73 | 93 | 14.6 | 18.6 | (4.0) | 0 |
| 2 | Barker | 3 | 1 | 75% | 1 | - | - | 21.6 | 6.7 | 82% | 1.7 | 41 | 10.3 | 161 | 40.3 | 70 | 58 | 17.5 | 14.5 | 3.0 | 0 |
| 3 | Jake | 4 | 2 | 67% | 3 | - | - | 18.7 | 5.8 | 71% | 1.5 | 61 | 10.2 | 238 | 39.7 | 116 | 91 | 19.3 | 15.2 | 4.2 | 0 |
| 4 | Erik | 5 | 1 | 83% | 4 | - | - | 18.7 | 5.9 | 81% | 1.4 | 54 | 9.0 | 237 | 39.5 | 124 | 76 | 20.7 | 12.7 | 8.0 | 0 |
| 5 | Paul G. | 8 | 1 | 89% | 4 | - | - | 18.3 | 5.8 | 81% | 1.3 | 76 | 8.4 | 343 | 38.1 | 182 | 111 | 20.2 | 12.3 | 7.9 | 0 |
| 6 | Matt H. | 3 | 3 | 50% | 3 | - | - | 17.8 | 5.6 | 79% | 1.2 | 56 | 9.3 | 254 | 42.3 | 102 | 90 | 17.0 | 15.0 | 2.0 | 0 |
| 7 | Joe S. | 6 | 2 | 75% | 5 | - | 1 | 17.7 | 5.6 | 73% | 1.3 | 62 | 7.8 | 262 | 32.8 | 150 | 97 | 18.8 | 12.1 | 6.6 | 0 |
| 8 | Dan G. | 2 | 4 | 33% | 1 | - | - | 16.9 | 5.5 | 85% | 1.0 | 49 | 8.2 | 257 | 42.8 | 97 | 111 | 16.2 | 18.5 | (2.3) | 0 |
| 9 | JV | 3 | 5 | 38% | 3 | - | - | 16.4 | 5.2 | 73% | 1.2 | 55 | 6.9 | 251 | 31.4 | 112 | 124 | 14.0 | 15.5 | (1.5) | 1 |
| 10 | Flowers | 2 | 3 | 40% | 1 | - | - | 16.2 | 5.0 | 62% | 1.3 | 37 | 7.4 | 146 | 29.2 | 78 | 84 | 15.6 | 16.8 | (1.2) | 0 |
| 11 | JG | 3 | 3 | 50% | 1 | - | - | 15.8 | 5.0 | 69% | 1.1 | 47 | 7.8 | 210 | 35.0 | 92 | 103 | 15.3 | 17.2 | (1.8) | 0 |
| 12 | Craig F. | 3 | 4 | 43% | 2 | - | - | 15.3 | 4.9 | 69% | 1.1 | 53 | 7.6 | 243 | 34.7 | 102 | 133 | 14.6 | 19.0 | (4.4) | 0 |
| 13 | Mike V. | 3 | 4 | 43% | 2 | 1 | - | 14.5 | 4.6 | 63% | 1.0 | 50 | 7.1 | 221 | 31.6 | 100 | 124 | 14.3 | 17.7 | (3.4) | 0 |
| 14 | Mike R. | 2 | 5 | 29% | 1 | - | - | 13.7 | 4.4 | 66% | 0.9 | 44 | 6.3 | 220 | 31.4 | 93 | 134 | 13.3 | 19.1 | (5.9) | 0 |
| 15 | Melissa | 3 | 5 | 38% | 2 | 1 | - | 12.2 | 3.9 | 59% | 0.8 | 40 | 5.0 | 201 | 25.1 | 119 | 133 | 14.9 | 16.6 | (1.8) | 0 |
| 16 | Manny | 0 | 6 | 0% | - | - | - | 10.3 | 3.3 | 49% | 0.7 | 25 | 4.2 | 122 | 20.3 | 78 | 126 | 13.0 | 21.0 | (8.0) | 0 |