I don't see the difference between not counting a missed card in the win-loss record and counting the whole card as losses when we are only ranking based on wins. If someone misses a card, or starts halfway through the year, why not give the person an even record for missed cards? 5-5 or 6-6 or whatever. 50% is what you would get (in the long run) by just guessing anyways.
That would be a huge ***** to calculate. Especially in the middle of the year.
That would be a huge ***** to calculate. Especially in the middle of the year.
Fair enough. If the only people who can win are the ones who start the year, that's fine by me. The late starters can compete for event wins and eventually compete in the main standings next year. My bigger concern is how devastating missing even a single event can be. I think at the end of the year, if someone has missed one or two events, giving that person a 50/50 record for those events (or at least equal to the worst record in those events as m9 suggested) would seem fair to me.
Fair enough. If the only people who can win are the ones who start the year, that's fine by me. The late starters can compete for event wins and eventually compete in the main standings next year. My bigger concern is how devastating missing even a single event can be. I think at the end of the year, if someone has missed one or two events, giving that person a 50/50 record for those events (or at least equal to the worst record in those events as m9 suggested) would seem fair to me.
Fair enough. If the only people who can win are the ones who start the year, that's fine by me. The late starters can compete for event wins and eventually compete in the main standings next year. My bigger concern is how devastating missing even a single event can be. I think at the end of the year, if someone has missed one or two events, giving that person a 50/50 record for those events (or at least equal to the worst record in those events as m9 suggested) would seem fair to me.
OK I get that point. I thought you meant like someone who missed 10 events.
If we're ranking based on wins, recording a loss and not recording anything is the same thing rankings-wise. If you miss two events, you almost have no chance of winning, which I think is a bit crazy as everbody occaisonally forgets an event or goes on vacation or whatever. To make it easier on northstarsforever, we could even put the onus on the poster to notify northstars of missed events that they want "replacement level" wins for. By replacement level I mean the same number of wins you would get by randomly guessing (which I prefer), or atleast what mark9 suggested, the number of wins that the worst picker got for that event.
If we're ranking based on wins, recording a loss and not recording anything is the same thing rankings-wise. If you miss two events, you almost have no chance of winning, which I think is a bit crazy as everbody occaisonally forgets an event or goes on vacation or whatever. To make it easier on northstarsforever, we could even put the onus on the poster to notify northstars of missed events that they want "replacement level" wins for. By replacement level I mean he same number of wins you would get by randomly guessing (which I prefer), or atleast what mark9 suggested, the number of wins that the worst picker got for that event.
Why should you get wins for an event that you didnt pick for?
That would be my thing. Also it would again mean extra work for the guy tabulating the results. In this day and age of smart phones and wifi at every Macdonalds I cant see how people cant make their picks. If you know you are going to be out of town then maybe pm your picks to someone?
Why should you get wins for an event that you didnt pick for?
That would be my thing. Also it would again mean extra work for the guy tabulating the results. In this day and age of smart phones and wifi at every Macdonalds I cant see how people cant make their picks. If you know you are going to be out of town then maybe pm your picks to someone?
If you want you could pm them to me if you like.
I got into issues twice because of this. I went to Mexico for a week in november 2010 and there were two events that weekend. I did not have international data and the cost of an internet terminal at the resort was like $10 per 15 minutes. I also went to India this past year for two weeks, and by some miracle I was able to find a computer. As connected as the world is now, traveling to a third world nation makes picking MMA difficult.
Looking through the results, it is rare that anyone gets less than four wins in any event. I propose that if at the end of the year, if someone has one or two events missing (no more), they can request that 4 wins per event be added to their total (the onus is on them to ask so no one else has to actually go through the list and check). I think that would be fair and easy to do, but if anyone disagrees, I'm okay with the status quo. I did win this year after all , and at this point I'm sure it just seems like I'm whining for the hell of it so I won't push it any further.
I got into issues twice because of this. I went to Mexico for a week in november 2010 and there were two events that weekend. I did not have international data and the cost of an internet terminal at the resort was like $10 per 15 minutes. I also went to India this past year for two weeks, and by some miracle I was able to find a computer. As connected as the world is now, traveling to a third world nation makes picking MMA difficult.
Looking through the results, it is rare that anyone gets less than four wins in any event. I propose that if at the end of the year, if someone has one or two events missing (no more), they can request that 4 wins per event be added to their total (the onus is on them to ask so no one else has to actually go through the list and check). I think that would be fair and easy to do, but if anyone disagrees, I'm okay with the status quo. I did win this year after all , and at this point I'm sure it just seems like I'm whining for the hell of it so I won't push it any further.
Just to back you up, I agree with you, with the exception that the person should get the lowest picked total for the event as opposed to an arbitrary # like 4.
And as you said, it would be at the posters discretion to ask. If I missed an event, I would just post in the standings thread "Could you please post me for the low score of 5-7 for UFC 141 since I forgot to pick it". Maybe we limit it to the week after the event so people aren't coming out weeks later.
Just to back you up, I agree with you, with the exception that the person should get the lowest picked total for the event as opposed to an arbitrary # like 4.
And as you said, it would be at the posters discretion to ask. If I missed an event, I would just post in the standings thread "Could you please post me for the low score of 5-7 for UFC 141 since I forgot to pick it". Maybe we limit it to the week after the event so people aren't coming out weeks later.
That's what I worry about, people posting like 5 weeks later that I missed that event. Also, shouldn't something be said for picking all of the events? Maybe that's just me.
That's what I worry about, people posting like 5 weeks later that I missed that event. Also, shouldn't something be said for picking all of the events? Maybe that's just me.
I agree. You miss an event, tough ****. You get nothing. No wins, losses, ties. Nothing. You made no picks. Why should you get anything? Arbitrary or not? I mean, it isnt like you win a prize for winning.
, and at this point I'm sure it just seems like I'm whining for the hell of it so I won't push it any further.
