| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
roknroll
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:43 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| picking all games will be more work for whoever runs this, kinda kills the flavor as well...less focus on strategy and a little more like flippin coins imho. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
drkalbi
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| roknroll wrote: |
| picking all games will be more work for whoever runs this, kinda kills the flavor as well...less focus on strategy and a little more like flippin coins imho. |
Sorry, I think the opposite. If you pick just 5, it's easy to pick 3-4 no brainers. If you pick all, there are more chances for upsets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
roknroll
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| drkalbi wrote: |
| roknroll wrote: |
| picking all games will be more work for whoever runs this, kinda kills the flavor as well...less focus on strategy and a little more like flippin coins imho. |
Sorry, I think the opposite. If you pick just 5, it's easy to pick 3-4 no brainers. If you pick all, there are more chances for upsets. |
I see what you mean and there are, of course, pros and cons to either. From your point of view here, picking all could eliminate the focus on 'no-brainers' and also perhaps having a few people with basically the same picks. However, by picking all, this problem is still not eliminated because now you're forced to pick them so we're still going to get the same results (pick the strong team, pick the [strong]home team). Then we're left with the games that people were likely wanting to avoid: closer matchups and perhaps teams one is not so familiar with. Sounds good but I think there are still the basic pitfalls.
The thing I personally don't care for is 'analyzing' all the games (teams)--if one is not up on each team's recent performance, then it's likely a guessing game and people are still going to go for the stronger team or probably home team if it's close. With there being a choice of 5 out of 15 or whatever, you can focus on the teams you like and follow and in this respect I think there is more strategy. It gives one more leeway to utilize their knowledge of the teams they like and follow. For instance, when San Jose was in St.Louis last year, most chose SJ because they were on a roll. But STL won their home games vs SJ. So, where one might think this is a 'no-brainer', I thought it was a close call. In this way, I could utilize more strategy b/c it was easy to follow select teams. By betting on all, I'd just be guessing at many b/c I don't want to spend a lot of time at it.
On a more practical level, if you think about each person listing their 13ish picks and the record-keeping, it's a tad cumbersome. Again I think the problem of 'no-brainers' or whatever will not get eliminated b/c you'd be forced now to choose and peeps will do the same anyway. Also, it's unlikely they will follow all teams etc. so you'll have even more of the same problems with the selects for the other matchups.
Usually, the GotW was focused on close matchups. More games of the week?? 
Having said all of that, I'm game for whatever.....lol |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blurgalurgalurga
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 1:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
There's a really fun, free online pool at sportsnet.ca you guys might enjoy.
You pick a twelve man roster, weekly, with a salary cap of 50 "million." You have to choose 2 Centers, 4 wingers, 3 D, and a goalie, and all the salaries are rounded off evenly.
Dead easy, takes five minutes to submit your picks, and free. The prizes are an extreme long shot of course--there's like 50 000 people in the pool most years--but it's fun anyway.
I'd like to do the pool in the old style, but I also would like to pick every game like the good Doctor suggests.
How about two pools? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
roknroll
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 4:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| How about two pools? |
I'd say one or the other or something between. Too redundant me thinks. There's 2 votes for pick all and 1 for pick 5 (or 7ish lol). I'm in whichever way it goes so whatever is played at the end of the day is alright. Would be nice to get some further input from more of the peeps here. Are you ok with all the work for the full picks blur? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
D.D.
Joined: 29 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 6:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
I like the 5 picks thing. The whole reason to have 5 picks is the ability to know what games to stay away from. Please don't talk about two pools in this thread. Let's keep it simple-somebody become the chief so we dont have too many Indians.
As it goes we have five pics and the game of the week needs to be decided. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blurgalurgalurga
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Looks like nobody else wants to run the stats, so I'll do it. Speak up now or forever hold your peace! I'm happy to do it or happy to pass it on.
Sounds like most people want the five-team classic system. If everybody was into picking every game, I'd do the stats for it, but it seems the Classic is easiest, most popular, and least problematic.
As for who picks game of the week...debatable. The suggestions so far...
1) roving picker, as suggested by VI...
2) a nice pleasant civilized vote/ discussion, no doubt quickly resulting in a happy consensus...or,
3) I'll suggest a Game of the Week every Sunday/ Monday when I post the results, and we can hash it out by Wednesday or Thursday by vote or by debate. I'll always suggest either a classic rivalry or a game featuring closely matched teams, without picking the same team too many times.
Re: Game of the Week, I vote #3.
I'll go ahead and post the thing tomorrow night, unless somebody else wants to be stats man. I'm on the road for Chuseok so I wanna get my picks in...and as for the first Game of the Week, I suggest the Battle of Alberta, Calgary @ Edmonton.
What do you guys think? Are we good to go? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Free World
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Drake Hotel
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sounds great.
Thanks Blur! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
D.D.
Joined: 29 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Just remember Canucks are gods. Get that fact down and your pool will go smooth as silk. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yingwenlaoshi
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: ... location, location!
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Calgary
Vancouver
Boston
Pittsburgh
Washington |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
D.D.
Joined: 29 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Edmonton
Chicago
Vancouver
Pittsburg
LA Kings |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drkalbi
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Calgary
Washington
Chicago
Carolina
Pittsburgh |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blurgalurgalurga
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yingwenlaoshi has officially voted for Vanislander's rotating picker system to determine the Game of the Week. That makes me outvoted, 2-1...so, unless the vote changes, we'll go with that.
To determine pickers' order we'll go with the same order that the Week One picks are submitted.
I picked this weeks Game.
Next week is Ying's.
The next week is D.D.
The following week is drkalbi.
And so on...
Seems like a good system. And, as Ying said via PM, people can make suggestions if they want, but when it's your turn, you can pick whatever game you want. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the boy next door
Joined: 08 Jun 2008
Location: next door
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
i'll play if these goddam voices in my head stop! 
i have feelings too you know?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
