Pre-season discussion thread nsb pick em 2020

[BLASTER1]

Just wanna gets this thing started.

I thought you were into all the sematics of the game.
Don't be inpatient bro it might put you off ya game.

[NC Uppercut]

Ok sweet bro.
I kinda put down what I would like to see this year.

Bruz I just hope to get the year of to a winning start.
Theirs nothing worse than starting the year on a loss like I did in 2018. Lol.
Goodluck to you brother.

Man I had a crap 2019 Pick Em. 2018 was a much better year for me. Hopefully we can get a good one rolling this year.

[Idunnoshet]

Not a big fan of the x5 multiplier.
IMO x2's and 3's were working just fine.

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

[Articulateboxin]

I quite like the idea of a x5, for those 1 of moments where we are absolutely convinced we know how something plays out (it's these are moments where i end up being 100% wrong! froch vs abraham, martinez vs cotto as examples)

Very excited to get it started! I joined late, started poorly but finished well

Thanks for all your efforts in this again guys, it's incredible!

[Citizen Koba]

Well if we weren�t confused before, we damn sure are now!! Lol. Sorry I had to get that out.

Damn. Am I really doing that bad a job of explaining it?

Ok I'll give it another shot, but I've got this sinking feeling I may just confuse the issue more.

Right. So my concern is when you get up to the bigger combined multipliers, x3s and x4s mainly we can get an unbalancing effect... a combined x9 or x12 is a lot of points and we got to figure if we want the possibility of someone lucking out on such a pick to weigh more than a regular player getting 9 or 12 regular picks correct. My feeling is x9 or x12 is unbalancing so an alternative - and completely legitimate way of calculating the multipliers - is to treat the 'Dog multiplier and the Optional multiplier as two seperate operations.

So in effect you're saying:

OK Dude gets a 30 point Winner and method pick on a x3 Dog with one of his x3s on it.

First you calculate the points acquired from the Dog multiplier: 30 x 3 = 90

Then you calculate the points gained from the Optional multiplier: 30 x 3 = 90

The you add 'em together. 90 + 90 = 180.


The alternative is of course to apply the two multipliers consecutively.

30 x3 x3 = 30 x 9 = 270


Note that in all but the rarest of circumstances with a high multiplier on a huge underdog the two methods won't yield massively different results, and TBH in 2 years of playing the circumstance hasn't yet arisen where there would have been any major issue, but I like to anticipate ahead of time potential issues that could arise. If we get it nailed down now, we won't have to face the criticisms halfway through the year when some semi casual player suddenly shoots tio the top of the rankings with some freak stroke of luck or incredible acumen.

Thing is there's an argument for either way of doing things, my personal preference is to keep the potential score from a single fight from getting to high (same reason I'd prefer not to allow multipliers on DRAW picks) but I'm really wanting to get the will of the players on this one... some are likely to prefer the chance of Hail Mary... if I had to guess those of a more risk taking nature, whereas others might feel it unfair that potentially what might be just a desperation gamble can get you so much credit.

There is no right answer, I'm just interested in coming to the solution most players prefer.

[NC Uppercut]

Damn. Am I really doing that bad a job of explaining it?

Ok I'll give it another shot, but I've got this sinking feeling I may just confuse the issue more.

Right. So my concern is when you get up to the bigger combined multipliers, x3s and x4s mainly we can get an unbalancing effect... a combined x9 or x12 is a lot of points and we got to figure if we want the possibility of someone lucking out on such a pick to weigh more than a regular player getting 9 or 12 regular picks correct. My feeling is x9 or x12 is unbalancing so an alternative - and completely legitimate way of calculating the multipliers - is to treat the 'Dog multiplier and the Optional multiplier as two seperate operations.

So in effect you're saying:

OK Dude gets a 30 point Winner and method pick on a x3 Dog with one of his x3s on it.

First you calculate the points acquired from the Dog multiplier: 30 x 3 = 90

Then you calculate the points gained from the Optional multiplier: 30 x 3 = 90

The you add 'em together. 90 + 90 = 180.


The alternative is of course to apply the two multipliers consecutively.

30 x3 x3 = 30 x 9 = 270


Note that in all but the rarest of circumstances with a high multiplier on a huge underdog the two methods won't yield massively different results, and TBH in 2 years of playing the circumstance hasn't yet arisen where there would have been any major issue, but I like to anticipate ahead of time potential issues that could arise. If we get it nailed down now, we won't have to face the criticisms halfway through the year when some semi casual player suddenly shoots tio the top of the rankings with some freak stroke of luck or incredible acumen.

Thing is there's an argument for either way of doing things, my personal preference is to keep the potential score from a single fight from getting to high (same reason I'd prefer not to allow multipliers on DRAW picks) but I'm really wanting to get the will of the players on this one... some are likely to prefer the chance of Hail Mary... if I had to guess those of a more risk taking nature, whereas others might feel it unfair that potentially what might be just a desperation gamble can get you so much credit.

There is no right answer, I'm just interested in coming to the solution most players prefer.

Alright brother....I’m following ya. I feel like the draw is so far from reach that it should be a much more valuable pick, however also agreeing with the point of the “Hail Mary”. It shouldn’t be possible for someone that throws a lucky pick in to catch up to someone that has hit say 6 perfect picks. That would definitely derail moral imo.
Personally I think the scoring system is really good, but I like the idea of a split. Details on KO are 3 ways- 1-4/5-8/9-12... so a “split” would help even it out the decision side vs KO side. Not a huge fan of the consecutive part though.
I’m rambling...it’s still early over here, for a Sunday anyhow.
Good breakdown Koba

[HeadBodyBodyBody]

Damn. Am I really doing that bad a job of explaining it?

Ok I'll give it another shot, but I've got this sinking feeling I may just confuse the issue more.

Right. So my concern is when you get up to the bigger combined multipliers, x3s and x4s mainly we can get an unbalancing effect... a combined x9 or x12 is a lot of points and we got to figure if we want the possibility of someone lucking out on such a pick to weigh more than a regular player getting 9 or 12 regular picks correct. My feeling is x9 or x12 is unbalancing so an alternative - and completely legitimate way of calculating the multipliers - is to treat the 'Dog multiplier and the Optional multiplier as two seperate operations.

So in effect you're saying:

OK Dude gets a 30 point Winner and method pick on a x3 Dog with one of his x3s on it.

First you calculate the points acquired from the Dog multiplier: 30 x 3 = 90

Then you calculate the points gained from the Optional multiplier: 30 x 3 = 90

The you add 'em together. 90 + 90 = 180.


The alternative is of course to apply the two multipliers consecutively.

30 x3 x3 = 30 x 9 = 270


Note that in all but the rarest of circumstances with a high multiplier on a huge underdog the two methods won't yield massively different results, and TBH in 2 years of playing the circumstance hasn't yet arisen where there would have been any major issue, but I like to anticipate ahead of time potential issues that could arise. If we get it nailed down now, we won't have to face the criticisms halfway through the year when some semi casual player suddenly shoots tio the top of the rankings with some freak stroke of luck or incredible acumen.

Thing is there's an argument for either way of doing things, my personal preference is to keep the potential score from a single fight from getting to high (same reason I'd prefer not to allow multipliers on DRAW picks) but I'm really wanting to get the will of the players on this one... some are likely to prefer the chance of Hail Mary... if I had to guess those of a more risk taking nature, whereas others might feel it unfair that potentially what might be just a desperation gamble can get you so much credit.

There is no right answer, I'm just interested in coming to the solution most players prefer.

I getcha. I quite ilke the idea of someone throwing down a multiplier on the underdog and it paying off big time (i.e. 3x3, rather than 3+3) but I don't mind either way really.

I don't like the idea of a x5, since some fights are relatively easy to pick, and everyone will throw on at the same time

[Citizen Koba]

I getcha. I quite ilke the idea of someone throwing down a multiplier on the underdog and it paying off big time (i.e. 3x3, rather than 3+3) but I don't mind either way really.

I don't like the idea of a x5, since some fights are relatively easy to pick, and everyone will throw on at the same time

Fair enough man, it ain't to everyone's taste but that's why I'm suggesting that it could only be placed on fights with a sub +300 Underdog... in fact we could make it tighter. Say it could only be placed on fights when both fighters are less than +/- 200. Hell we could even say that it could only be placed on a bookies underdog... that would really make folk think about it.

Damn. Actually, yeah. I like the sound of that one.

What's your take on extending the number of DEC picks to 3 (SPLIT/V.CLOSE, WIDE and DOMINANT - or whatever we decide to call 'em)? It's an idea I been gently pushing since we took this over but I don't think we're likely to introduce it this years at such short notice. Maybe 2021 though if I can work on talking a few more people round to the idea.

[NC Uppercut]

Fair enough man, it ain't to everyone's taste but that's why I'm suggesting that it could only be placed on fights with a sub +300 Underdog... in fact we could make it tighter. Say it could only be placed on fights when both fighters are less than +/- 200. Hell we could even say that it could only be placed on a bookies underdog... that would really make folk think about it.

Damn. Actually, yeah. I like the sound of that one.

What's your take on extending the number of DEC picks to 3 (SPLIT/V.CLOSE, WIDE and DOMINANT - or whatever we decide to call 'em)? It's an idea I been gently pushing since we took this over but I don't think we're likely to introduce it this years at such short notice. Maybe 2021 though if I can work on talking a few more people round to the idea.

I think that�s a good idea with the x5 multi. If it�s a tight fight(+/- 200). We still have time to get input on it

[Citizen Koba]

I think that�s a good idea with the x5 multi. If it�s a tight fight(+/- 200). We still have time to get input on it

Yeah. I really shoulda put this thread up between Xmas and New Years as I was orignally planning, but... well y'know...

But yeah, it is what it is. Ima let it run right up til Tues I reckon then throw up the masterthread and PICK EMs 1 and 2 then, trying to strike the best balance possible with the feedback we get here.