*** Official CRS CFB Pick 'em DISCUSSION ***

[Catch Prothro]

Congrats to everyone. It was fun ya'll.  Let's talk next year next year.  There will be too much gossip to fling around before then.

[SUPERCOACH]

Congrats to everyone. It was fun ya'll.  Let's talk next year next year.  There will be too much gossip to fling around before then.

If we are going to go with the confidence version, there will be work for me to do in the offseason to get it ready.  I will probably do this work any way so we have it as an option, so I guess there isn't any rush to decide right now.

[Merk]

Thanks to SC, Ssmith, and all who worked hard on this football pick em.
And congratulations to Jamos and all the winners. It was fun! Look forward to next season.

[BAMAWV]

Thanks to SC, Ssmith, and all who worked hard on this football pick em.
And congratulations to Jamos and all the winners. It was fun! Look forward to next season.

Great job SC. This was the trial run but was accurate and professional. Well done. Thanks to Ssmith for following up with putting the picks together each week. Not sure if you would rather wait to discuss changes, but now seems reasonable, while things are fresh in our minds.

I've prefaced everything I've suggested with "I don't know the amount of work for SC this entails..." but my suggestion on using the confidence weighting system seems to best simulate the bookie/gambler relationship by substituting money with points. The bowls are matched up (supposedly) with 2 teams of equal talents. When you throw a spread on top of 2 evenly matched opponents that narrows it even further. No gambler worth his salt ever plays all the bowls. Oh he may put a little something on each game for fun, but will hunt down the one, two, or three games he feels are glaring mismatches, and place his bet. There are other variations to his gambling (parlays), that are generally sucker bets, but is a way to make our 10 team weekly "bet" a little more interesting. But as to the bowl game side contest and regular season, I suggest the confidence system.

Not sure how the games were totalled, but I thought we were throwing out the worst week of picks for each player. But I noticed a 1 game difference (maybe) in players totals and thought it may come from a possible (trivial) mistake in accounting. Let's say you had a 10 game week a player failed to get his picks in on. But if there was a push (or tie) that week, then you should only give him 9 losses, not automatically 10. Was this accounted for? Not being critical, just trying to figure out the difference in totals.

My other thought was giving more weight, importance to the deviation on the season. It is just a tie breaker but that has become an interesting contest unto itself. You would have to have a standard question, (# of yds off. vs. # of 1st downs), but this turns into a contest without (I guess) anymore calculating than you are doing now. Except to eliminate anyone that has missed any weeks.

Another suggestion is one I think Smitty picked up on during the season. It has to do with selecting the games that are on TV (as best as possible), so it makes watching a normally "Who gives a s--- game" into one that's a little more interesting. Including the Alabama game is perhaps controversial. No point in playing it if all 25 players pick Bama everytime. Or worse yet, puts someone in the position of hoping Bama won't score that last TD, for example. If anyone took LSU over Bama for last night's game, let us know so we can start a new thread about them. LOL

Congratulations to you and Jamos (#1) for winning the "Big Kahuna! The bowl thing made the fairydiddles forget who'd been thumping their azz all season long, but I did not!" Roll Tide!!    

[SUPERCOACH]

The one game difference does come from the weeks were there is a push.  There were 14 weeks in the contest, plus the bowl games.  That makes 15 rounds.  So to calculate the score, we take the 13 best rounds and ignore 2.  If you entered your picks every week, you end up with a slight advantage of 2 mulligans.  If you missed a week, it puts more pressure on you to not mess up.  But you don't really get 10 losses counted against you on weeks were there was a push.  That week shows up as 0-0, so it doesn't make it into your top 13 that get counted.

The totals will get off if one guy goes say 8-1 on a week were there was a push, and another guy maybe went 3-6.  The 3-6 guy has his worst week, so that 3-6 doesn't make it into the top 13, while the 8-1 guy does.  Maybe the 3-6 guy has his best 13 rounds with only 2 weeks with a push, while some other guy has his best 13 weeks with 3 weeks with a push.  So the totals are different by 1 game.

The winner is determined by who has the most wins.  If 2 people have the same number of wins, we look at the loss column to see who has the fewest incorrect picks.  If we are still tied, then we look at the tiebreakers.

[SUPERCOACH]

I think the deviation part really is a contest within the overall contest.  We should probably award some e-creds for whoever has the best deviation, but that would take just a little more work to eliminate the people who didn't have at least 13 valid tie breaker entries (0's for the weeks they missed help significantly).  Also, as you noted, the tie breaker questions would have to be pretty similar or it would skew the results.  For example we had some weeks where the question was total number of points scored, while other weeks it was based on yards gained.  Obviously the points scored question would have lower numbers with a much smaller deviation than the yards gained question.

[SUPERCOACH]

You have valid points about having the Bama game as one of the picks.  If we go to a confidence system though we could still keep the Bama game and those issues go away.  You can still pick Bama and put them as your last pick if you think the game will be close, and it won't matter what the final score is.

[SUPERCOACH]

Another idea is to let you bet your e-creds.  I like this idea.  However I don't like the idea of taking away your e-creds if you get it wrong.

[BAMAWV]

The one game difference does come from the weeks were there is a push.  There were 14 weeks in the contest, plus the bowl games.  That makes 15 rounds.  So to calculate the score, we take the 13 best rounds and ignore 2.  If you entered your picks every week, you end up with a slight advantage of 2 mulligans.  If you missed a week, it puts more pressure on you to not mess up.  But you don't really get 10 losses counted against you on weeks were there was a push.  That week shows up as 0-0, so it doesn't make it into your top 13 that get counted.

The totals will get off if one guy goes say 8-1 on a week were there was a push, and another guy maybe went 3-6.  The 3-6 guy has his worst week, so that 3-6 doesn't make it into the top 13, while the 8-1 guy does.  Maybe the 3-6 guy has his best 13 rounds with only 2 weeks with a push, while some other guy has his best 13 weeks with 3 weeks with a push.  So the totals are different by 1 game.

The winner is determined by who has the most wins.  If 2 people have the same number of wins, we look at the loss column to see who has the fewest incorrect picks.  If we are still tied, then we look at the tiebreakers.

We are on the same page. I bumbled and fumbled but meant AFTER the free week was tossed out, and for instance you missed a second week, then instead of being 0 - 10 (if that week included a push) you'd be 0 and 9. This so that someone didn't miss more guesses than were actually possible to get correct. Now I'm confusing myself (LOL). Just so it didn't miss your attention altogether, then I'm sure all is good!

[BAMAWV]

Another idea is to let you bet your e-creds.  I like this idea.  However I don't like the idea of taking away your e-creds if you get it wrong.

Would you mind having a talk with my bookie?

[SUPERCOACH]

Hmmm... I have an idea that might encourage participation and let you bet your e-creds.  The more I think about this, the more I like it.

Each time you enter your picks for the week, you get "paid" X number of e-creds.  You can use these new e-creds to bet on the games.  You can put them all on 1 game, or you could spread them out a little and bet on multiple games.  You have to bet them on a game or you don't win anything.

I think a concrete example would help here.  Let's say you get 10 e-creds to play with each week that you participate.  You can bet all 10 on the Bama game.  If Bama wins, you get +10 e-creds.  If they lose, you get nothing and just stay where you are at.  Or you could bet 5 on Bama to win and 5 on Auburn to lose.  If they both win, you get +5 for the Bama game, but don't get anything or lose anything for the Auburn game.

You would have to use the spread for something like this though, or everybody would bet all 10 on the cupcake of the week game (10 on Bama to beat Ga Southern).

The good thing about this is that EVERYBODY can win each week.  Maybe this is an additional side bet that you can do on top of the normal contest.

[SUPERCOACH]

The one game difference does come from the weeks were there is a push.  There were 14 weeks in the contest, plus the bowl games.  That makes 15 rounds.  So to calculate the score, we take the 13 best rounds and ignore 2.  If you entered your picks every week, you end up with a slight advantage of 2 mulligans.  If you missed a week, it puts more pressure on you to not mess up.  But you don't really get 10 losses counted against you on weeks were there was a push.  That week shows up as 0-0, so it doesn't make it into your top 13 that get counted.

The totals will get off if one guy goes say 8-1 on a week were there was a push, and another guy maybe went 3-6.  The 3-6 guy has his worst week, so that 3-6 doesn't make it into the top 13, while the 8-1 guy does.  Maybe the 3-6 guy has his best 13 rounds with only 2 weeks with a push, while some other guy has his best 13 weeks with 3 weeks with a push.  So the totals are different by 1 game.

The winner is determined by who has the most wins.  If 2 people have the same number of wins, we look at the loss column to see who has the fewest incorrect picks.  If we are still tied, then we look at the tiebreakers.

We are on the same page. I bumbled and fumbled but meant AFTER the free week was tossed out, and for instance you missed a second week, then instead of being 0 - 10 (if that week included a push) you'd be 0 and 9. This so that someone didn't miss more guesses than were actually possible to get correct. Now I'm confusing myself (LOL). Just so it didn't miss your attention altogether, then I'm sure all is good!

I think it is good.  Look at the guys at the bottom of the list that only played 1 or 2 weeks.  They are 5-4, 5-5, 3-6, etc instead of say 5-125.  They don't have any losses counted against them in the weeks they didn't pick.  So I think it works.

[BAMAWV]

Hmmm... I have an idea that might encourage participation and let you bet your e-creds.  The more I think about this, the more I like it.

Each time you enter your picks for the week, you get "paid" X number of e-creds.  You can use these new e-creds to bet on the games.  You can put them all on 1 game, or you could spread them out a little and bet on multiple games.  You have to bet them on a game or you don't win anything.

I think a concrete example would help here.  Let's say you get 10 e-creds to play with each week that you participate.  You can bet all 10 on the Bama game.  If Bama wins, you get +10 e-creds.  If they lose, you get nothing and just stay where you are at.  Or you could bet 5 on Bama to win and 5 on Auburn to lose.  If they both win, you get +5 for the Bama game, but don't get anything or lose anything for the Auburn game.

You would have to use the spread for something like this though, or everybody would bet all 10 on the cupcake of the week game (10 on Bama to beat Ga Southern).

The good thing about this is that EVERYBODY can win each week.  Maybe this is an additional side bet that you can do on top of the normal contest.

You have a competitive spirit. What fun is there to winning with no loser. Unless this was a separate account the ecreds would disappear into your ecred total and no one would know who has been beating the book or taking a beating. Your onto something-- we've discussed it before. But we are now a lot closer to figuring something good out than we were back in May. Maybe a way for me to say, "OK SC, I'll give you LSU plus 20 in the bowl"! That should lead to some spirited conversation.

[SUPERCOACH]

I agree, this idea is getting closer to being fully cooked.  We'll let it simmer some more and see how it turns out.

[BAMAWV]

I agree, this idea is getting closer to being fully cooked.  We'll let it simmer some more and see how it turns out.

You recall I was trying to turn this into "Viva Las Vegas" and you were thinking "Little Forum on the Prairie". Somewhere about the middle is a fun game for everyone!

[Guest]

Username:
Password:
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

There aren't any users online.

Loading Tweet...