|
Post by Moo on Dec 14, 2012 9:29:57 GMT
OP updated. I haven't put last night's result on there yet though.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Dec 17, 2012 11:13:37 GMT
Week 15 results are in.
:moop:
|
|
|
Post by elth on Dec 18, 2012 8:05:35 GMT
Did I ever get lucky. If RGIII was ruled out before I made my picks, I was going to go with Cleveland...
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Dec 21, 2012 9:40:42 GMT
DC has picked.
I have picked.
THe rest of you haven't. You have until Sat 4pm ish to get your act together.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Dec 22, 2012 17:08:40 GMT
All picked and OP updated.
|
|
|
Post by DC on Dec 23, 2012 23:03:36 GMT
100% if Denver hold off the Clevelanders, giving me a big week over Elthy.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Dec 28, 2012 14:53:33 GMT
Table updated, apologies for the lateness, but I was eating and drinking my own body weight. Mostly the latter. DC in prime position to win this.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Dec 30, 2012 16:10:54 GMT
OP updated with choices. It looks like the only way Elth can win is if both his different picks come in.
Enjoy the games, lads!
|
|
|
Post by elth on Dec 30, 2012 22:20:10 GMT
So...
:smug:
?
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Dec 31, 2012 0:30:54 GMT
OP has been updated.
Well done to Elth, sneked in at the end. :humb:
Also, what did everyone think of the scoring format? Did it work? Should we do this again?
|
|
|
Post by DC on Dec 31, 2012 1:01:03 GMT
I'm sure I have some sort of moral victory due to me. Can you think of one for me Moo?
PS - well done Elth.
PPS - the scoring worked well. The only thing I might consider is a bonus point if someone correctly guesses every game right in a given week, not sure about the number of instances of that with regards to its impact as to whether it should be worth 1pt or 2 or 3.
A quick glance at previous weeks seems like it happened 9 or so times, Horn, me and Moo at least twice and everybody else once (not sure if I saw a Stu in there).
|
|
|
Post by elth on Dec 31, 2012 1:08:39 GMT
Ahthankyouverymuch.
I liked the scoring format. A bonus for getting all right in a week might be an incentive away from picking upsets in the hope of scoring a big comparative win, so I don't mind that idea either.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Dec 31, 2012 1:18:13 GMT
There definitely needs to be an incentive toward picking the right score, because otherwise landing one upset correctly is worth enough to just pick the "wrong" team in every game.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Jan 1, 2013 14:20:21 GMT
OK, I hear that and I think it's a good idea. We'll see how that works next season, if we play this again.
|
|
|
Post by DC on Jan 1, 2013 20:46:32 GMT
Looking at that system Moo, best way would be something like you get 1/2th of your total points for that week as a bonus. So if you got 6pts for a week, you would get a 3pt bonus. If you got 9pts for the week you would get 4.5pts.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Feb 22, 2013 9:57:55 GMT
Dave - I think the first time I read that, I didn't understand it (I may have been drunk or tired), but I have read it again and I like it. I'll think of a way of incorporating that.
I guess all would be interested n this next season.
I have thought of something else too. How about a game where we guess the season record of each team? This would be a one-off before the start of the season and I wouldn't need to update it until the end of the season. My initial thought was to just see how many games we were out over the course of the season and lowest points wins. But then I thought we could incorporate it with who we think would make the playoffs. If we have the records, then we would have the division order, so maybe that could be used as a multiplier for wrong predictions. Something like difference in wins multiplied by (difference in position + 1)....?
Predict 1. San Francisco 13-3 2. Seattle 10-6 3. St Louis 8-8 4. Arizona 4-12
Actual 1. San Francisco 12-4 2. St Louis 10-6 3. Arizona 8-8 4. Seattle 7-9
So my score for the NFC West could be: San Francisco = (13-12 games out) * ((1st-1st)+1) = 1 * 1 = 1 pt Seattle = 10-7 * ((4-2)+1) = 3*3 = 9pts St Louis = 10-8 * ((3-2)+1) = 2*2 = 4 pts Arizona = 8-4 * ((4-3)+1) = 4*2 = 8 pts NFC West total = 1 + 9 + 4 + 8 = 22 pts
So Arizona and Seattle were similar points, one because of final position, one because I was out on the wins.
Just throwing it out there.....
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Jul 30, 2013 18:59:17 GMT
Are we doing this again? Same as last time?
In other words, Dave will be a twat and Elth will win?
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Jul 31, 2013 15:55:00 GMT
Anyone interested?
:tumbleweed:
|
|
|
Post by DC on Jul 31, 2013 17:23:53 GMT
I'm interested, just so I can fuck around with your scoring system and abuse you.
It worked quite well last year I thought.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Aug 1, 2013 3:54:01 GMT
The scoring system last year clearly favoured abuse - it was better to pick and miss five times if you landed one underdog, which is a bit mental in a pick the winners competition.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Aug 1, 2013 10:20:13 GMT
So should we change it?
We had ten players in the SpInG LLMers forum and because there were more points available, but more games to miss on, it wasn't really an issue and we have decided to keep the scoring as it was.
I'm open to changing it, but more importantly hearing the views of the players.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Aug 1, 2013 11:06:46 GMT
"The Bairn" has also expressed an interest in this for the 2013 season.
He has also asked if we will be doing a Fatnasty League. I'm up for it, but I guess interest has been lost now due to numbers.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Aug 2, 2013 13:59:35 GMT
Bonus for predicting all six correctly?
If you are in the minority of voters, the 50% is more beneficial. If you are in the majority, a 6 pt bonus would be better. As you're already getting a lot more points than others if you're the minority getting everything correct, then wouldn't 6 points be the fairer option?
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Aug 6, 2013 8:56:03 GMT
Am I bothering with this?
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Aug 6, 2013 13:02:44 GMT
OK, I'll set this up so that there is a 6pt bonus if you predict all the games.
New thread on it's way....
|
|