Points discussion

[ohms_law]

Scooter just PM'ed me with this:

This looks like it will be a lot of fun. I do have two suggestions. I think that you should discount 144 league to 1 point. At 2 points it really skews the rankings. The way I see it is a 60/day equalized league would get 2 points and since this is more than 2 times as fast 1 point would be more fair. Also perhaps next to each GM put how many different leagues they are in that are eligible for the rankings to add a little perspective.

I have to say that I somewhat agree with him, the thought crossed my mind as I was adding the names to the list. All 6 sims/hour leagues receive 1 point per championship, and equilized leagues get the +1 bonus. Nonstop leagues do have a distinct advantage though, in that the run much faster than all other leagues. We could add a modifier for the format that leagues run in. Something like:
Weekend: +1
Daily: +.5
Daily double: +.25
Normal (daytime or evening): +/-0
Nonstop: -.5

Or something similar. Any feedback on this would be more than appreciated. Thanks!

[scooter12321]

Scooter just PM'ed me with this:


I have to say that I somewhat agree with him, the thought crossed my mind as I was adding the names to the list. All 6 sims/hour leagues receive 1 point per championship, and equilized leagues get the +1 bonus. Nonstop leagues do have a distinct advantage though, in that the run much faster than all other leagues. We could add a modifier for the format that leagues run in. Something like:
Weekend: +1
Daily: +.5
Daily double: +.25
Normal (daytime or evening): +/-0
Nonstop: -.5

Or something similar. Any feedback on this would be more than appreciated. Thanks!

Format isnt nearly as imprortant as how many games per day. If you start by giving 144 - 1 point and go from there...

144 - 1 point
60 - 2.4
30 - 4.8
20 - 7.2
10 - 14.4

I also think you could do a multiple to account for equalized leagues, but for unequalized leagues there should be a bonus for small market teams and a minor penalty for big markets. So in unequalized leagues the points go like this...

150 mil or less revenue gets a 1.25 multiple
151-200 mil revenue gets 1
200+ gets multiplied by .75

Equalized teams would get a 1.25 multiple.

[ohms_law]

That is format. Every league has a speed, which determines how many games sim per hour. Format determines how often the game sims.

60/hour (super-fast) speed
Nonstop = 144 games
Daytime and evening = 48
Daily double = 12
Daily = 6

As for the revenue, I did originally put that into the rules actually. The problem is practicality. When you do the historical winners, someone would have to visit the league and look though the team histories to verify revenue... It'd be months before I could get the list that we have right now together. It's a great idea, but it's simply too much work.

One thing that we could do is change the equalized +1 bonus, and any eventual format bonuses, into percentages. That would be very easy to do. I could make the equilized bonus something like 20%, applied to the base rate.

[Justin63701]

Just something that should be kept in mind when scoring the 144 league:

It never stops. It's constant work, unlike leagues where people get a break. Please don't undervalue the work a lot of people put into staying on top there.

[haole]

I simply don't think it's fair to discount the 144 Nonstop just because it sims so fast.

In fact, one could argue that the rapid pace of sims makes it an even greater challenge. Because of the pace (a complete season in 46 hours) the league does not allow its GMs to take much time off, especially if that GM wants to compete at a high level.

During its heyday, the 144 league had nearly every great GM listed at the top of the points standings -- and winning a title was certainly no easy task. A World Series title was coveted in the 144 BECAUSE it was so hard to win. It's like BMO on methamphetamines, speed and crack at the same time.

Does it benefit (points-wise) some GMs because they play more seasons and therefore get more chances to win titles? Sure it does. But I would challenge any GM who wants the "easy points" of a WS title from the 144 to come try and steal one. Even with the league diminished, the level of competition is strong.

This entire line of argument (that one league is worth more than another, that one league is better than another, that slow leagues should be worth more points than fast leagues) is a slippery slope and should be avoided by a simple, consistent and fair points system for every league for which points are awarded and which bothers to post its winners. Anything less would be chaos.

Will we next be ranking the GMs of each league to make the "stronger" leagues worth more points? Will we be giving more points to leagues that have the tacit approval of the "elite" players?

Once you start making the points system subjective, rather than absolute, you open the door to arguments for every sort of delusional elitism.

Thanks for reading my insane ramblings.

[ohms_law]

Believe me, I know that the 144 is tough. If you have the time though, it's speed really is a distinct advantage. It's not just the 144 either, and this isn't aimed at them. Dabs 24 hour league, and all the nonstop leagues, are easier since they are faster. You can think longer term in nonstop leagues, since you don't need to wait as long for the payoffs.

Anyway, the points system is already subjective in this way. League speed is the largest factor in the number of points that you get. This is simply proposing an additional factor in the points determination, which ultimately would make the points more accurate. As it stands, the 144 is worth the same number of points as Mogul Addicts (60/day). Dabs 24 hour league is the same as Cascade league (20/day). There's something wrong with that, I think.

[scooter12321]

The way I see it is that over the next 12 months a 144 league will play 200 seasons and a 30 league would play around 45. under the current system the 144 league would spin out 400 points when the 30 league would have only around 150. That makes 144 almost 3 times more important that a league like BOTB and in a league like IL30 there would only be 112, I just am not sure that any league should be more important than another and definatly not 4 times as important.

[ohms_law]

That's an interesting way to look at it...
humm, I could set something up that will base points on the number of opportunities available within a time period. I'll have to think about that for a minute, and see what I can come up with.

[TheNamelessPoet]

Format isnt nearly as imprortant as how many games per day. If you start by giving 144 - 1 point and go from there...

144 - 1 point
60 - 2.4
30 - 4.8
20 - 7.2
10 - 14.4

Dont forget the 72 and 48 game sims :)

[Justin63701]

Any league which is 6 sims per hour should be scored the same. If it runs nonstop, you often have FA period at hours that don't work for you. Somtimes you can't get to your team for a day and lose a bunch of good players. These are risks you don't face in other leagues. You cannot simply give some leagues a deduction for their pros without giving a bonus for the cons as well.

I've won alot of titles in the 144 league, and I don't want more credit than I am due for it. But, I often would get up in the middle of the night just to look at free agents, and work on my team. Now you're telling me that since it runs fast I had a huge advantage? I think people in daytime only leagues, etc. also have some huge advantages over people in nonstops.

If this ranking system becomes popular, discounting a league like 144 non-stop that much would make it not worth the effort it takes to play in. Being a big fan of the fast league, I would hate to see that happen.

[scooter12321]

144 - 1 point
60 - 2.4
30 - 4.8
20 - 7.2
10 - 14.4

Dont forget the 72 and 48 game sims :)

OK, according to this format they would get 2 for a 72/day and 3 for a 48/day

[ohms_law]

OK, here's what I've come up with. According to my calculations, this is the number of real life days it requires to sim through one season of Mogul:



Speed
Slow Normal Fast SuperFast
Format Sims/Day 294 148 99 50
Normal 10 29.4 14.8 9.9 5
Nonstop 24 12.25 6.166 4.125 2.083



so, in 30 days, each league provides this many opportunities to win:


Speed
Format Sims/Day Slow Normal Fast SuperFast
Normal 10 1.02 2.027 3.03 6
Nonstop 24 2.449 4.865 7.273 14.4



if a normal speed, Daily, Daily Double, Daytime or Evening league is the baseline, and provides 10 points, here's what I come up with for points:


Speed
Format Sims/Day Slow Normal Fast SuperFast
Normal 10 19 10 6 3
Nonstop 24 8 4 2 1

(The above numbers are basically the opportunities/30 days from above multiplied by 1.407657658 and rounded)

So, a Daytime normal league like Cascade would give 10 points. 144 nonstop would give 1 point. AGML, as a Daily Slow league, would give 19!

I think that when you look at it from an opportunities standpoint, it makes sense. I mean, you have more than 14 opportunities per month in 144, whereas in a slow normal league (not nonstop) you only have one chance to win per month. It seems fair, to me, so unless someone can find something really wrong with this that's what I'll start using.

[haole]

I can find one logical hole in the argument: Succeeding in a superfast league limits your opportunities by not allowing you to be in several leagues.

Having been in the superfast league for more than 100 season sims, I can tell you that I've tried upping the number of leagues I'm in, but I simply can't devote the time to several other leagues when I know this league will be simming 6 games per hour at all hours of the day and night. I've had to drop down to the number of leagues I'm comfortable with: two 30/day leagues and one 144/day league.

Yes, it does give you more opportunities to win in that particular league, but the tradeoff is that you can't devote the time and energy to other leagues as well.

I think the formulations of your "discount" for the 144 league does not take that into account and seems to unfairly penalize the superfast league GMs, who, by and large, are not in a large number of leagues because of the format of the sim. And if they are, they tend to not do very well in the superfast league. I think you're getting caught up in the raw number of "opportunities per month" without taking into account that the number of opportunities based upon one league means less opportunities for that same GM in other leagues.

[ohms_law]

I'm open to counter proposals.

Based on what you just said, you yourself currently have more than 20+ opportunities to win a championship per month. To accomplish that without being in a nonstop super fast league, you'd have to be in 10 normal speed leagues, which doesn't seem to me to be much less of a workload. You get the higher speed leagues, giving you more opportunities, or you play in more leagues... either way, it seems like a heavy workload to me.
You forget, I was a 144 member myself for a while. The speed is something to respect, and you do that by being in fewer leagues. The payoff is more immediate opportunities. Screw up in a normal league, it'll be a month or more before you can really recover. In a super fast nonstop league, it's days at most.

Anyway, like I said I am open to suggestions. I don't see any actual counter proposal above though.

[haole]

Actually my counterproposal is a simple one: All leagues should be worth the same amount of points, regardless of speed.

Opportunities per month should not matter in the slightest unless you're also planning to penalize (or discount) people who are in a large number of leagues because they also have many opportunities per month. There are many ways to maximize your opportunities and joining a fast league is one of them.

Being in a fast league means more opportunites per month. So does being in a bunch of slow leagues. Is it more complicated to be in 10 slow leagues than in one superfast league? Perhaps. You've got more incidentals (revenue, payroll, expenses, contracts, injuries) to keep track of. But you also have more time to take care of those incidentals and a more standardized time frame in which to adjust team incidentals to maximize your chances for success. I just can't see a large disparity between the two approaches.

I choose to be in a superfast league not because it gives me more chances to win titles in a shorter time frame. I choose to be in a superfast league because I love the constant challenge. The tradeoff, for me, is being in fewer leagues so that I can compete well in each of my leagues.

This in no way pertains to the debate over whether points for winning in unequalized leagues should be worth less than in equalized leagues. That is a completely separate debate.

[scooter12321]

Justin, what about the fact that over the next 12 months there will be over 400 points given out in 144 and only 150 in BOTB and 112 in IL30. I understand how time consuming 144 is. But in our rankings should it be the most important league or should all be considered equal? Already the leaderboard is dominated by 144 GMs and it will just get more dramatic unless it changes.

[haole]

There are also many other leagues out there (I can think of several off the top of my head) that haven't reported their historic results yet. Some leagues might not have a complete record of their historic results.

I think the "domination" by 144 GMs reflects two things:

1) Those are some of the most prolific, best and longest-serving GMs in BMO. Many, many of the best GMs on BMO spent some time in the 144. Also, varying portions of their points come from leagues outside the 144.

2) There are many other leagues that either have not yet reported results or are no longer in existence. Getting those complete results would drastically change the leaderboards.

[scooter12321]

Whatever happens it strongly feel that all leagues should have the same amount of points available to them every 12 months. Next person to reply please address the point that under the current system the next 12 months 144 will get 3 times the points of a 30/day equalized (most common speed), an 4 times the points of 30/day unequalized. 144 opened in January of 2006 and has played 200 years giving it 400 points. IL30 has been running since August of 2004 and has played 103 seasons giving it a total of 257.5 points. IL30 has been open and has never had less than 30 owners and 144 has had less than 20 for almost 100 seasons. So over an extra 19 months the 30 league has produces only 60% of the points. Just doesn't seem like an accurate way to weight the leagues.

[haole]

I believe I have already addressed (at some length) why I do not feel leagues should be based on the same number of points over a 12-month period.

To assume that all leagues should be worth the same amount of points over a 12-month period is to assume that we're all playing in the same number of leagues and all have the same number of opportunities to win a championship. There is no limit on the number of leagues you can play, so there is no limit on the number of chances you have to win a championship, regardless of the league you play in.

[ohms_law]

Well, I'm not changing anything with just two opinions (not counting mine). It'd be nice if some of my fellow moderators and a few other commissioners would speak up, here...

[boomboom]

They get inflated WS totals.

[ohms_law]

look up
;)

[boomboom]

144 - 1 point
60 - 2.4
30 - 4.8
20 - 7.2
10 - 14.4




I like this. :)

but I think that equalized and unequalized leagues should be seperate. They are totally different. I think a 5-1 ration would really increase the 144 leagues. They can sim 14 times faster then a 10 a day sim, 4.8 times faster then 30 a day leagues.

[ohms_law]

Well, equalized leagues receive +1 point to whatever points you get already. I could easily change that to something like +50% bonus, though.

In the proposal that I mentioned above:


Speed
Format Sims/Day Slow Normal Fast SuperFast
Normal 10 19 10 6 3
Nonstop 24 8 4 2 1
Equalized Normal 10 29 15 9 5
Equalized Nonstop 24 12 6 3 2

[boomboom]

The only problem with haole theory. Is that each person is different. I have trouble managing my 3 major leagues. AGML- 10 a day, Cascade 20 a day, and IL30- 30 a day. Plus I am in a startup league weekend mogulers, which sims 40 days a week.

AGML and 144 leagues are equaly hard. AGML, if you mess up, you will be punished for at least a month, or two. Remember this, I took over AGML in August, 6 months later we have simmed how many seasons (5) I took over at the end of 2062, we are now in 2067. (6months later)!!

Not all leagues are created equally. IL30 is the most competitive league out there. Should a league with a bunch of newbies whos influx of owners changes day to day, when the core of IL30 hasn't changed in 1 year, (the core is between 26-28 owners, with 3-4 who have quit and rejoined.) while a new owner might see a turnover rate of maybe 1000%, IL30 in a years time might see a turnover rate of 10% over a year (3 owners)

These startup leauges get to beat up on the newbies, until they learn, once they learn, they will quit and join another league so that they can beat up on other newbies ect...

Not all people can manage 400 chances a month, not many people can manage 1. For example in AGML, we might have 10-11 seasons a year. Remember tanking will take a few months, then you can dominate, while in 144 leagues it will take days, to rebuild.

ALso, it is easier to dominate in 144. that is right, I said easier. Not all 30 owners, oh sorry, I meant 15-20 owners, can be on every hour of every day, most miss free agency just by not being online during the 3 hour window...The ones who are can easily pick up the players that TEAM forgot to resign due to not being online for 1 day.

Maybe this world series thing is a bad idea. We all know the kings of all leagues is IL30, while BoTB, Cascade League follow right behind. Turnover rate should be included with a -% per month. Plus open slots. should have a negetive impact. To me this seams like too much work.

I think that we should only include teams that have 25 owners or more, for the past 5 seasons. Or 1 month, (which ever is lesser), if you dip below 25 owners then your league can not be included for 5 seasons. Also, Start up leagues/reset leagues should have to wait until 5 seasons after there reset inorder to count in the ratings. Either way, the current system is retarted.

An equalized point system should have WS% instead of WS Wins. (WS wins/chances)

Also, maybe only include top 3 Leagues from each platform. (10 a day, 20 a day and 30 a day) one for equalized and one for unequalized.

[scooter12321]

Well, equalized leagues receive +1 point to whatever points you get already. I could easily change that to something like +50% bonus, though.

In the proposal that I mentioned above:


Speed
Format Sims/Day Slow Normal Fast SuperFast
Normal 10 19 10 6 3
Nonstop 24 8 4 2 1
Equalized Normal 10 29 15 9 5
Equalized Nonstop 24 12 6 3 2


I think rounding is not necessary We can go out one decimal place to get the exact numbers. I haven't had a chance to digest all of boom's post, but he has some good points. I do not agree with them all, but the premise is right. I think no matter how difficult a league is should matter. Only factor to consider is a multiplier (a flat bonus is why the 144 league has such an advantage). I had thrown out some numbers before, and with the help of the commish from each league we can reconstruct the rankings pretty easily. We just need to find the leagues with 25+ owners with a commish who cares enough to keep a thread for his league. Only seasons with 25+ owners count in the standings (we can grandfather 144's titles-don't want the to feel too abused:cool: ).

My idea for the multiplier -
Easy is multiplied by .8. A WS ring is considered Easy if the team's revenue was $200,000,000+.

Medium is multiplied by 1.0. $151,000,000 - $199,999,999

Difficult is multiplied by 1.2 Teams who earend less than $150,000,000.

Almost all equalized leagues would have a champ with revenue less than 150, and in a nonequalized league if you earn less than 150 it is tough to compete.

[ohms_law]

I'm just not going to check on revenues. Too much work.
I can apply a bonus when people let me know what they've earned, though. No bonus is the default.

No matter what, we can't be completely accurate in terms of points/opportunities. There's simply too much to check on, too many people to check, and too much missing information. we'd have to check the number of people in a league immediately after every world series occurred, or something, in order to verify owner minimums. We'd also have to check each players account page to verify the number of leagues that their in. That opens a whole other set of problems in and of itself as well, since that information isn't kept in records anywhere. It's never going to be a perfect system, but it's acceptable, and it's much better than nothing at all. Keeping stats about something, even imperfectly, is much better than simply not keeping stats at all.

Anyway, here's the numbers from above going out one decimal place (rounded to quarters, so their all 0, .25, .5, or .75):


Speed
Format Sims/Day Slow Normal Fast SuperFast
Normal 10 19 3/4 10 6 3/4 3 2/4
Nonstop 24 8 1/4 4 1/4 2 3/4 1 2/4
Equalized Normal 10 29 3/4 15 10 5
Equalized Nonstop 24 12 2/4 6 1/4 4 1/4 2

I think that that's a little weird, though. Leaving them un-rounded out to one decimal place, many of them are strange values, like 19.87 or 2.79, which I think would be difficult to follow.

[scooter12321]

I'm just not going to check on revenues. Too much work.
I can apply a bonus when people let me know what they've earned, though. No bonus is the default.

No matter what, we can't be completely accurate in terms of points/opportunities. There's simply too much to check on, too many people to check, and too much missing information. we'd have to check the number of people in a league immediately after every world series occurred, or something, in order to verify owner minimums. We'd also have to check each players account page to verify the number of leagues that their in. That opens a whole other set of problems in and of itself as well, since that information isn't kept in records anywhere. It's never going to be a perfect system, but it's acceptable, and it's much better than nothing at all. Keeping stats about something, even imperfectly, is much better than simply not keeping stats at all.

Anyway, here's the numbers from above going out one decimal place (rounded to quarters, so their all 0, .25, .5, or .75):


Speed
Format Sims/Day Slow Normal Fast SuperFast
Normal 10 19 3/4 10 6 3/4 3 2/4
Nonstop 24 8 1/4 4 1/4 2 3/4 1 2/4
Equalized Normal 10 29 3/4 15 10 5
Equalized Nonstop 24 12 2/4 6 1/4 4 1/4 2

I think that that's a little weird, though. Leaving them un-rounded out to one decimal place, many of them are strange values, like 19.87 or 2.79, which I think would be difficult to follow.

those numbers represent actual time each season takes including offseason?

[ohms_law]

their based on it. The first block of numbers in post #12 (http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showpost.php?p=705131&postcount=12) above is (approximately) real days per Mogul season.

The second block is those numbers converted to seasons per 30 days.

Then, those numbers are divided into 14.4, which normalizes all of them so that the number of championships per year in a super fast nonstop league is equil to a value of 1 (everything else is a relative percentage of 1). Those numbers are then adjusted to a multiplier which sets a Daily or Daytime/Evening normal speed league to 10 (turns out that the multiplier is 1.4 something).

So, those points above are as close as possible (their all rounded, of course) to being mathematically equal to the number of chances every 30 days a person would have to winning a championship in one league.

[haole]

This is exactly what I meant about opening a pandora's box. This also is exactly why I don't like this proposed system and feel the higher-speed leagues are being discounted too heavily.

We're proposing to take into account some things (sim speed, number of league owners, etc) but not other things (strength of a league's competition, revenue, market size, etc).

I counterproposed the idea that all leagues should be worth the same amount regardless of sim speed for reasons of simplification. The reason it that I think we're placing an overemphasis on opportunities/month on particular leagues and an underemphasis on other mitigating factors.

The main thing that seems unfair to me (and I'm not saying this for myself, because anyone can see that I'm well down that list and would never consider myself a serious contender for any kind of points battle) is that we're making up a weighted points system for titles that have already been won and only taking two factors into consideration -- sim speed and equalized/unequalized.

I absolutely agree that it is currently much easier to win a title in the 144 Nonstop League than it is in most leagues for the reasons listed in the insightful post above. But I heartily disagree that this has always been the case in that particular league. Some of those titles and some of those title runs (not mine) came with a full and very active league that included some of the very best GMs on BMO. We should not denigrate the past accomplishments of GMs when we don't really know what the level of competition was at any given time. As ohms pointed out, there is no record keeping of such things.

Much of my opposition to the points system has nothing to do with future titles or points; it almost entirely focuses on past titles and points.

I think the best way to run this system, and implement any weighted points system you feel comfortable with, is to implement it starting now. All past titles should be counted equally, make a list of rankings for those players, and then start a new list with weighted points titles starting at a specific date. That way we are all playing with the same set of rules and points and we all know what each league is worth going into the "competition."

This way, we can also work out a system that takes into account other mitigating factors and leave that up to individual league commisioners (or league representatives) to report things like: how many active owners are in the league, the winning team's market size (in unequal leagues).

And if we're going to enact a weighted points system, I would also like to see some consideration given to weighing points based on a person's OVERALL opportunities per month, not just an individual league's opportunities per month.

This is what I mean by a pandora's box.

Those are my thoughts. Having expressed them one final time, I will now leave this discussion in the capable hands of ohms and scooter and all other the other moderators and GMs who want to weigh in on this issue.

Should you wish it, I am more than happy to volunteer myself for anything you guys need to make this rankings system a reality, and I'd be happy to help brainstorm an effective weighted points system if you desire my further input.

[ohms_law]

The real problem with that line of reasoning isn't that it's any better or worse of a system than we have, or has been proposed here. The problem is pure and simple practicality. For this to be successful, people have to report that they've won. Asking people to specify "I won in this league, which is this speed, is/is not equalized, I made $XXX in revenue, there are Y number of owners, etc...", it's just not going to happen. Getting people to report at all is already a problem, and you can look through all the old, locked threads to see that it's always been that way.

Basing points on league speed is practical. I can check it, if people don't tell me what it is. Nothing else that has been brought up as additional weighting factors is really verifiable (except maybe revenue, but I'm not digging through 100's of team's history pages to dig it up).

So, the choice is really between a (admittedly imperfect) weighted system, or a flat system. The only thing that I see being offered against a weighted system is that it somehow "punishes" leagues for being faster, which I've addressed above. In favor of a weighted system is, in my opinion, the much stronger argument regarding opportunities. It's like stolen bases in baseball itself. Who's the better player, the guy with 50 stolen bases who's been caught 30 times, or the guy with 20 stolen bases who's been caught 3 times?

[michaelg123789]

I meant to post on this subject earlier but that didn't work out so here is my abbreviated 2am version for now. In a perfect world both IL30 and BoTB should get a significant bonus "modifier" over every other leagues out there. You win a title in a league like that you've definately earned it.

As was previously mentioned, IL30 hasn't gone thru a complete season without at least 29 human owners in it EVER. BoTB had a very brief stint where it fell to 24ish when Jim had to leave for a while but other than that BoTB is in the same boat in that they rarely have an opening, and when an opening pops up the league basically advertises for itself and fills almost instantly. There are never computer players and certainly NO deals with the computer AI run franchises which involves nothing more than sending 14 **** players and a little cash for a computer AI's best player. You can't get away with that in these leagues.

BoTB and IL30 have strict tanking penalties in place so owners aren't able to sit around and stagnate, losing on purpose for years while collecting top 7 picks without having to answer for their actions. In the 144 you can pretty much tank for a decade or more without ANY penalty, roll for 2 decades, then start it all over again in a matter of about a month's time RL. Not hard to collect trophies like that especially if the 144 is your main focus.

Bottom line if you want to make a name for yourself in Mogul, come to IL30 or BoTB. Cascade and AGML if you prefer the slower sim. These are truly the major leagues of Mogul and should be treated as such in these World Series rankings.

[ohms_law]

I don't have a real problem with that, but we need some sort of... something, to decide what leagues then count. An "elite league" bonus of some sort would be easy enough to add, as long as it's very clear what the elite leagues are. For that, someone needs to come up with some (pretty strict, I'd think) guidelines on what constitutes such a league. In my opinion, it can't just be "the following leagues get the bonus because their the best". The guidelines should be inclusive, giving any league that can become successful the chance to join their ranks.

I'll tell you straight out, I'm not going to be the one who comes up with or verifies that information. If anyone would like to take on the task, I would accept it with open arms however.

[haole]

In favor of a weighted system is, in my opinion, the much stronger argument regarding opportunities. It's like stolen bases in baseball itself. Who's the better player, the guy with 50 stolen bases who's been caught 30 times, or the guy with 20 stolen bases who's been caught 3 times?

So do this mean you support the idea that a weighted points proposal should be based on an individual owner's overall opportunities and not just the number of opportunities the owner has in one specific league?

[ohms_law]

sure, I'd like to do that. How do I verify that sort of information on a consistent basis though? I know that, for the vast majority of time, it'll be me doing all of the checking. I can't (yet) get people to simply come here and post one line saying "I won in {name} league", and I've put an announcement about it on all of the BMO forums!

Anything that requires me to do more actual verification work on my part (and don't kid yourself, it'll be me doing 90% of it) is basically a non-starter of an idea for me.

[haole]

Bottom line if you want to make a name for yourself in Mogul, come to IL30 or BoTB. Cascade and AGML if you prefer the slower sim. These are truly the major leagues of Mogul and should be treated as such in these World Series rankings.

I heartily agree that some leagues are much more competitive (and more difficult to win) than other leagues. This could be resolved by creating three "classes" of leagues: an upper tier, a middle tier and a lower tier.

Requirements for the upper class could include things like the league being full for X number of years, a certain percentage of the GMs being listed in the top X number of spaces on the initial ranking board and selection by vote of BMO's GMs.

Requirements for the middle tier could include things like being populated by X number of owners (20? 23? 25?) for X number of years and a league longevity beyond 10 (or whatever number you like) sim years.

That would simplify the rankings significantly from trying to weigh some mitigating factors that everyone agrees would be impractical.

Unfortunately most of the discussion thus far has centered around considering only sim speed and equalized/unequalized for the purpose of weighing points.

[michaelg123789]

I don't have a real problem with that, but we need some sort of... something, to decide what leagues then count. An "elite league" bonus of some sort would be easy enough to add, as long as it's very clear what the elite leagues are. For that, someone needs to come up with some (pretty strict, I'd think) guidelines on what constitutes such a league. In my opinion, it can't just be "the following leagues get the bonus because their the best". The guidelines should be inclusive, giving any league that can become successful the chance to join their ranks.

I'll tell you straight out, I'm not going to be the one who comes up with or verifies that information. If anyone would like to take on the task, I would accept it with open arms however.
A couple ideas we could include in this criteria for a league to be considered "Elite"

Any league that can maintain 30 owners consistantly for over 50 seasons.
No computer trading
Strict anti-tanking rules
Is the league invite only?
Active forum?

[haole]

sure, I'd like to do that. How do I verify that sort of information on a consistent basis though? I know that, for the vast majority of time, it'll be me doing all of the checking. I can't (yet) get people to simply come here and post one line saying "I won in {name} league", and I've put an announcement about it on all of the BMO forums!

Anything that requires me to do more actual verification work on my part (and don't kid yourself, it'll be me doing 90% of it) is basically a non-starter of an idea for me.

ohms, believe me, I completely understand all of that. And regardless of what it might seem like in my posts, I'm not advocating that we SHOULD create all these mitigating factors to weigh points. I am simply trying to say, in my verbose and redundant way, that the weighted points system currently proposed is too heavily biased against faster-sim teams.

The argument that the pure number of opportunities per league is the ultimate decider in how valuable a league's title is, is ignoring many other factors, the biggest one being the decreased overall number of opportunities that a GM in a faster league actually has.

I wholeheartedly support a weighted points system. But I think the distribution of points along the sim-speed scale, as suggested in prior posts, is too drastic. In the proposed system, a title in an equalized slow league is worth 14.5 times more points than the same title in an equalized nonstop superfast league. The points differential is 29-2. That is a huge disparity in points and it ignores the commitment that being part of a superfast league demands.

If you would give me a points distribution that varies by no great than a scale of 6 times instead of 14.5 times, I would completely support it.

[boomboom]

A couple ideas we could include in this criteria for a league to be considered "Elite"

Any league that can maintain 30 owners consistantly for over 50 seasons.
No computer trading
Strict anti-tanking rules
Is the league invite only?
Active forum?

Mikey, that would be three leagues, BotB, IL30 and Cascade.

[michaelg123789]

Mikey, that would be three leagues, BotB, IL30 and Cascade.
Well then, consider yourself among the elite :D

[boomboom]

I am in only two of those leagues, but Dont commish them, just founded one of them...

[ohms_law]

Well, I could do that... It's less accurate, I think. But, it is a good compromise.

I can understand what you mean, but comparing a slow league to a super-fast nonstop league is a very drastic comparison. The actual difference isn't that large when you consider normal-nonstop with the same speeds. superfast: 3 vs 1 (3:1), fast: 6 vs 2 (still 3:1), normal: 10:4 (2.25:1), and slow: 19:8 (aprox. 2.33:1). Their all basically the same (actually, they are all the same 3:1 ratios, it's just rounding that changed them somewhat). I set normal/normal leagues to be the baseline though, and chose 10 as that value so that there would be a spread without fractions less than 1 on the low end. That is what really makes the values at the ends pop out like they do. between speeds the ratios are somewhat wild, but that's more due to the fact that the speeds themselves are so widely different rather than anything that I did. Slow, normal, and fast have a 10 game spread between them all (10, 20, 30 games per sim/hour/day) while super-fast doubles the fast speed up to 60.

Anyway, I can think up something that lowers the differential between the extremes somewhat. If you're willing to come up with a proposal yourself though, I'd be more than willing to see it. I'd be eager to see it, actually.

[ohms_law]

Mikey, that would be three leagues, BotB, IL30 and Cascade.

Cascade wouldn't be. There's no anti-tanking rule.

[ohms_law]

Well, OK there is. It's not exactly enforced though.
lol

[boomboom]

it is, nobody has broken it. But not as strict as IL30...BoTB has the best one, if you are in the bottom 5 then you could be voted out.

[haole]

Anyway, I can think up something that lowers the differential between the extremes somewhat. If you're willing to come up with a proposal yourself though, I'd be more than willing to see it. I'd be eager to see it, actually.

Bah, I was told there would be no math on this test. Unfortunately I have a modest background in mathematics and statistics, so I feel obliged to compile something -- a simple formula that will help to eliminate statistical deviations from the norm and keep everything under a standard bell curve points-wise.

If you don't mind waiting a couple of days, I can put that together for you by Saturday. I'd also like to tinker with a multiplier by which we can "bonus" league's points based on a three-tier heirarchical system: an "Elite" category, an "Advanced" category (I hate that name, someone come up with something better) and a "Standard" category.

[ohms_law]

Sure thing. Nothing is set in stone, by any means. As long as I have values to enter into a spreadsheet, it only takes entering those values to make changes.
*shrug*

[scooter12321]

So what we need it a committee to put together all the eligible league, and make a determination on how many points it should be worth each year. Say a 200 base. And leagues that are the toughest get up to 250 and leagues that are easier (new) get 150. This will allow us to make "challenge" leagues such as Mogul elimintation, Cash money, and any other 15-20 year challenges have a pool of say 50 points to give out to the top 5 (20-12-8-6-4- or something like that). I think with the help of the commissioners who want their league to be included this will be easy to get off the ground. Haole, Mike, JMO, Justin and Ohms have shown an interest in working this out and we have the start to a good committee. My proposal to account a factor for revenue wont be as much work as you had thought Ohms. We wont ask you to dig all that up. If the commish wants his league in it'll take 10 mins to get set up and 5 mins per season. With your permission Ohms, I will contact all the correct GM's and request the needed info.

[boomboom]

Hey guys, I don't think that rating the leagues is a good idea. Problem is that maybe I think that IL30 is a hard league, and somebody else might think that it is easy.

At the same time, which is more impressive?
7 world series in 7 seasons
or
8 world series in 50 seasons

I won't give you more information then that, but I think we should have world series wins divided by world series chances, *100.

[michaelg123789]

If the commish wants his league in it'll take 10 mins to get set up and 5 mins per season. With your permission Ohms, I will contact all the correct GM's and request the needed info.
For those commishes that want to be a part of this I (or Ohms or Bobby) could easily place an "announcement" at the top of each participating league's forum which would link directly to each individual league's World Series tracker thread to make the task of keeping track even easier for everyone.

It would be as simple as step 1- win a World Series... Step 2- click the link at the top of your forum... Step 3- post your name, team and the year and voila! let ohms handle it from there.

[ohms_law]

Yea, that's a good idea. We could easily have two lists, as well. The first one we've already got: a simple list of all world series winners. Then, there would be this second list of winners from the "special" leagues, with win percentages and everything.

[scooter12321]

We should come up with a point structure for "challenge" leagues. Mogul Elimination league and Cash Money league are just a few of them that should be rewarded some points. I know there was another elimination league dave was running too. These things usually last 3-4 months and the goal is to rank in the top 10 (not ws rings) If an average league puts up 200-250 points over 12 months (make sure this is right), i feel a league like this should give out a total of 50-80 points to the top 10. It will be structured like a poker tourney's payouts. I could easily get the commish's to post the rankings from MEL1-3 and CML1-4. I think going forward there ought to be "challenge" leagues created and run by GM's on these lists (and sanctioned by ohms and a point pool be awarded to reflect the challenge). I would be willing to step forward and commish one this year, and use the top GMs on these rankings to fill it up.

1st - 25
2nd - 15
3rd - 10
4th - 8
5th - 7
6th - 5
7th- 4
8th - 3
9th - 2
10th -1

[ohms_law]

sure, we could do that. Unless someone objects? O_o

[haole]

I've got no objections. In fact, I ran the numbers several different ways and I'm at a loss to come up with any points system or simple formula that is definitively better than what scooter originally proposed. The more complicated I made the formula, the more the numbers started skewing right back to the original proposed points system.

Closing the gap (even slightly) between the points does nothing but skew the results bigtime toward the superfast leagues, which is exactly what you guys were saying in the first place. So I remove my objection, especially if we're going to put together a working committee where we can start to count the "intangibles" like strength of league and other factors.

I absolutely volunteer myself for this committee. And I have a few thoughts:

If we're going to rank leagues, we should do it in a 3-tier system (like I proposed before) where the "Elite Leagues", "Advanced Leagues" and "Standard Leagues" get points multipliers added to their standard score as a bonus. Nothing big, though. Say an Elite League team's points are worth a multiplier of 1.5 (2 points would be worth 3), Advanced are 1.25 (2 points would be worth 2.5) and Standard are 1.0 (2 points would be worth 2).

To be an Advanced League, the league would have to meet certain criteria some of which we already discussed here -- a certain number of owners (20, 22, 25, whatever), a certain set of rules (no tanking, 1-year FA contract restrictions, whatever), historical longevity and a designated league representative who reports the yearly results to the committee in a timely manner.

From the list of qualifying Advanced leagues, we hold a vote and elect five leagues to be elite leagues. On the first of every month, we update the list of Advanced Leagues and hold a new vote. If a league gains elite or advanced status, it takes effect with the first season that holds its opening day after it gets the new status. A league that loses elite or advanced status would take effect also in the same way.

Elimination leagues being scored based on poker payouts and a total points system that is set by the length of the tournament... that's pretty clever. I like that idea, too.

[scooter12321]

Good post. I think we are just about there.

[ohms_law]

Yea.

[Kotoll]

http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthread.php?t=93111


There is Mogul Elimination league standing. 3rd-10th can be figured out by records.

[scooter12321]

http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthread.php?t=93111


There is Mogul Elimination league standing. 3rd-10th can be figured out by records.

From what I can tell the average league is worth about 360 points per year, and fast leagues are worth about 6 points per WS. Since the league runs 15 seasons that would make sense that length of a challenge league would be worth 90-100 points.

1st- 28
2nd- 20
3rd- 14
4th- 10
5th- 8
6th- 5
7th - 4
8th - 3
9th -2
10th -1

[haole]

how come so many people got banned?

[scooter12321]

how come so many people got banned?

if you quit without being eliminated i think the commish made them ineligible for future challenges.

[haole]

ahh... makes sense

[Kotoll]

Just world series are being counted correct ? Anything else I would think be way too much to keep up with.

[ohms_law]

Just world series are being counted correct ? Anything else I would think be way too much to keep up with.
Yes. I wanted to give credit for league championships as well by giving them a half point, but it quickly became apparent just how much work (especially with the lack of participation already) that that would be.

[haole]

what can I do to help with the lack of participation?

[ohms_law]

I don't know, really. Mention participating everywhere you can, I guess.
It's starting to pick up some. I think that a few were hesitant to get involved until things got going, just to ensure that it would keep going.
*shrug*

[scooter12321]

I don't know, really. Mention participating everywhere you can, I guess.
It's starting to pick up some. I think that a few were hesitant to get involved until things got going, just to ensure that it would keep going.
*shrug*

Daves is putting together a competition. NCAA style. Let's give points for sweet 16, elite 8, final 4 and chamion. 64 teams. Perhaps give a ton of points for it to get some interest and give the scoreboard a little action.

[haole]

very nice. daves is the man

[ohms_law]

Yea, that could certainly help.

[ohms_law]

From what I can tell the average league is worth about 360 points per year, and fast leagues are worth about 6 points per WS. Since the league runs 15 seasons that would make sense that length of a challenge league would be worth 90-100 points.

1st- 28
2nd- 20
3rd- 14
4th- 10
5th- 8
6th- 5
7th - 4
8th - 3
9th -2
10th -1

This seems like a good structure to me, for the current Cape Cod League elimination that's starting up. It would be easy enough for me to add this to the database (even for the old elimination leagues. Someone still has results from all of them, right?)

Comments?

[scooter12321]

This seems like a good structure to me, for the current Cape Cod League elimination that's starting up. It would be easy enough for me to add this to the database (even for the old elimination leagues. Someone still has results from all of them, right?)

Comments?

I can get the results for MEL1-MEL3 and Sole Survivor challenge. For the NCAA challenge I think we should score it like an office pool where you get points for each round advanced. So win round 1 you get 1 pt, round 2- 2 pts, round 3- 4 pts, round 4 - 8 pts, final 4 - 16 points, champ 32 pts.

[ohms_law]

I can get the results for MEL1-MEL3 and Sole Survivor challenge. For the NCAA challenge I think we should score it like an office pool where you get points for each round advanced. So win round 1 you get 1 pt, round 2- 2 pts, round 3- 4 pts, round 4 - 8 pts, final 4 - 16 points, champ 32 pts.

For the other survivor league challenges, go ahead an post them to a new thread in this forum.
Regarding the current NCAA challenge, I agree about the scoring.
Thanks scooter!

[ohms_law]

I'm considering adding an additional "Victory points" to the system. Basically, a set number of points for each actual victory, beyond the points already assigned. Just something small, like 2 points per win.

I'm noticing that there's slightly too severe of a drop off between winners in slow leagues and winners in fast league is all. Notice in particular how, currently, several of the top 10 have considerably fewer victories than winners in the 20-30 positions do. I'm still convinced that opportunities should be the primary factor in scoring, but I'm also sensitive to the criticism that it discounts fast leagues slightly too much.

What do you all think? I could go either way on this, at this point.

[Kotoll]

Totally agree that slow leagues are getting way too many points. 20-30 day leagues are the norm and should be the main influence on points. And nothing against some of the GMs from those slow leagues but seriously half those names no ones even heard of them. Well other than the people in that league. :rolleyes:

[ohms_law]

lol

[scooter12321]

I'm considering adding an additional "Victory points" to the system. Basically, a set number of points for each actual victory, beyond the points already assigned. Just something small, like 2 points per win.

I'm noticing that there's slightly too severe of a drop off between winners in slow leagues and winners in fast league is all. Notice in particular how, currently, several of the top 10 have considerably fewer victories than winners in the 20-30 positions do. I'm still convinced that opportunities should be the primary factor in scoring, but I'm also sensitive to the criticism that it discounts fast leagues slightly too much.

What do you all think? I could go either way on this, at this point.

The problem is that those 10/day leagues have been going since 2001. Going forward a win should be worth that much, but it is like those teams had a 5 year head start on the rest.

[ohms_law]

yea, that's definitely a large part of the "issue". Which is mostly why I'm torn on whether or not I should to deal with it as proposed.

[Kotoll]

Maybe this would make more sense. Set the points to value the last two years at the point system you have set in place. Any points before that get a half deduction.

[Kotoll]

Because honestly we are talking about what one or two leagues that are affecting all the scoring? And just because someone kept records. I mean we all have won more titles than are listed presently.

[daves]

Believe me, I know that the 144 is tough. If you have the time though, it's speed really is a distinct advantage. It's not just the 144 either, and this isn't aimed at them. Dabs 24 hour league, and all the nonstop leagues, are easier since they are faster. You can think longer term in nonstop leagues, since you don't need to wait as long for the payoffs.

Anyway, the points system is already subjective in this way. League speed is the largest factor in the number of points that you get. This is simply proposing an additional factor in the points determination, which ultimately would make the points more accurate. As it stands, the 144 is worth the same number of points as Mogul Addicts (60/day). Dabs 24 hour league is the same as Cascade league (20/day). There's something wrong with that, I think.


I'm not sure if speed of the league is the main issue as the number of participants in a league or how many years the league have simmed. You can't micro manage a team in the 144 like you can in a 30 or less. If you really think it easy, join it! I had MANY veterans BBMO users at a total loss because of the speed. And you can't have a manual draft in a 144. Yeah you can win more championship in a shorter time, but you have to be online, active and think quick to do it.

Also new leagues should initially have less points since you are using current day predictable players rather than using fictional players. In addition, Points should be shaved down .1 for every player below the 30 max.

[ohms_law]

I know, and I don't disagree with all of that. However, people who do have time, also have more opportunities... I just managed to get on the list myself for the first time, and guess what league I won in? Dabs 24 hour league!
:)

The thing is, I understand exactly what you are saying. I agree, if there were a system to keep track of the number of owners in a league, I would most definitely use it to handicap the scores. Unfortunately, I can't be everywhere at once to check this stuff out, and I don't really see representatives stepping forward that could help. If it's in effect for one league, it'll need to be in effect for all leagues. I can't expect all commissioners to handle reporting on their league numbers constantly, they have enough to do as it is. Between that and the fact that I have to beg winners to tell me here that they've won...

[ohms_law]

Here, tell me what you all think of this. This is the normal points that we've been using + MEL points + (2* Number of wins):


Total Points Normal Points MEL Points Wins Name
280.50 250.50 0 15 scotty
261.50 218.50 1 21 jmo
242.00 220.00 0 11 rolaids
210.50 128.50 40 21 scooter12321
181.00 83.00 38 30 Kotoll
153.00 119.00 0 17 Saintevil
144.00 112.00 0 16 Stealthdog666
136.00 105.00 1 15 Mavngoose
126.00 98.00 0 14 Brentsg
118.00 104.00 0 7 jmarter
114.00 94.00 0 10 kpop07
111.00 49.00 48 7 SSVinny
110.00 100.00 0 5 JMCasu2k5
110.00 100.00 0 5 alifromca
110.00 100.00 0 5 cardstrump
108.00 84.00 0 12 cjennings33
90.00 70.00 0 10 Zacamaquati
88.00 80.00 0 4 getwry
86.00 64.00 2 10 Idahoyank
84.00 56.00 0 14 rixter1
84.00 70.00 0 7 sgarnold
81.00 63.00 0 9 metdenn
72.00 28.00 0 22 Justin63701
72.00 56.00 0 8 ttaylor
69.00 27.00 12 15 khkoenig
69.00 57.00 0 6 kellys11
66.00 60.00 0 3 mrchip4
64.00 28.00 28 4 shutface
63.00 49.00 0 7 kingroman
63.00 13.00 24 13 daves
60.00 50.00 0 5 boomboom
58.00 35.00 13 5 mikeorav
54.00 42.00 0 6 Hash
54.00 42.00 0 6 jimmyst
51.00 25.00 0 13 RMA2
49.00 41.00 0 4 Tdks
48.00 40.00 0 4 rippincott
46.00 40.00 0 3 worthy
45.00 35.00 0 5 Kblodgett
45.00 37.00 0 4 knightly
45.00 35.00 0 5 Michaelg
45.00 35.00 0 5 Discodave
44.00 40.00 0 2 cartman00000001
44.00 40.00 0 2 bandit41
44.00 40.00 0 2 briangsr600
44.00 40.00 0 2 Coglin/Synocco
41.00 3.00 32 3 dirtyd
36.00 30.00 0 3 bgsexy66
36.00 26.00 0 5 edburns
36.00 28.00 0 4 NYyanks
34.00 10.00 4 10 gravestock
34.00 30.00 0 2 SFSteveG
33.00 11.00 0 11 Haole
33.00 27.00 0 3 Douglastthedj
33.00 23.00 0 5 dabruinss
32.00 26.00 0 3 Yentoman
31.00 27.00 0 2 glwillis25
30.00 18.00 0 6 vincal609
29.00 16.00 1 6 tordman5
27.00 9.00 0 9 babahanz
27.00 21.00 0 3 superstar
27.00 9.00 0 9 lecherous
27.00 20.00 5 1 tdawg81484
25.00 15.00 0 5 Juicepigs
24.00 20.00 0 2 Degadog
24.00 8.00 0 8 bboccio
24.00 20.00 0 2 cbax44
24.00 20.00 0 2 yank4251
24.00 20.00 0 2 koufax1955
24.00 20.00 0 2 xamo545
24.00 20.00 0 2 dasox
24.00 20.00 0 2 Vernond
24.00 20.00 0 2 jamieoverkamp
24.00 20.00 2 1 duhme7
24.00 20.00 0 2 sharkx
23.00 17.00 0 3 greeder
22.00 20.00 0 1 Draven88
22.00 20.00 0 1 gc2003
22.00 20.00 0 1 drm
22.00 20.00 0 1 cocreator22
22.00 20.00 0 1 exep
22.00 20.00 0 1 ldiamond
22.00 20.00 0 1 bwienand
22.00 20.00 0 1 brion1234
22.00 20.00 0 1 jdiggin
22.00 20.00 0 1 jace0221
22.00 20.00 0 1 davehorn
22.00 20.00 0 1 Winks469
22.00 20.00 0 1 sportsnut
22.00 20.00 0 1 shanevg
22.00 20.00 0 1 torbad
22.00 20.00 0 1 Mystic
22.00 20.00 0 1 nbaumgart
22.00 20.00 0 1 frenchredsox
21.00 7.00 0 7 hoosierhomer
21.00 17.00 0 2 Dahuse0603
21.00 17.00 0 2 Ras10jr
21.00 7.00 0 7 kyle05
20.00 7.00 11 1 Sailor90278
18.00 14.00 0 2 Ajwilly2
18.00 14.00 0 2 Sturge
18.00 14.00 0 2 Jackoften
18.00 6.00 0 6 dejapooh
18.00 14.00 0 2 stezman04
18.00 14.00 0 2 Mastiphal
18.00 14.00 0 2 cmeden
18.00 14.00 0 2 Clay
18.00 14.00 0 2 oldman
18.00 14.00 0 2 Boomhauer8782
16.00 10.00 4 1 jardo
15.00 9.00 0 3 frasch
15.00 5.00 0 5 spcowboy
15.00 9.00 0 3 weeks05
15.00 5.00 0 5 TAZ20075
15.00 9.00 0 3 asop1
15.00 9.00 0 3 shazaamman22
13.00 7.00 4 1 Harrycary
12.00 10.00 0 1 goldfinger77
12.00 10.00 0 1 glawtonwesley
12.00 4.00 0 4 booberry
12.00 10.00 0 1 geoshale
12.00 10.00 0 1 docjr
12.00 10.00 0 1 Dpmmw77
12.00 10.00 0 1 cdavis77
12.00 10.00 0 1 thoma
12.00 10.00 0 1 donyoungdropsit
12.00 10.00 0 1 nuzzy62
12.00 10.00 0 1 Marsha21
12.00 10.00 0 1 vmattch
12.00 10.00 0 1 traxel
12.00 10.00 0 1 xl22k
12.00 10.00 0 1 cneal
12.00 10.00 0 1 tboner
12.00 10.00 0 1 hambone17
12.00 10.00 0 1 klk
12.00 4.00 0 4 khan
12.00 10.00 0 1 redhanrahan
12.00 10.00 0 1 JGballer
12.00 10.00 0 1 sampsonm37
10.00 6.00 0 2 hdomingue
9.00 7.00 0 1 rhodsey
9.00 3.00 0 3 tsquare64
9.00 7.00 0 1 Uther44
9.00 7.00 0 1 Rollsroyce11991
9.00 7.00 0 1 Daller
9.00 3.00 0 3 aj58078
9.00 7.00 0 1 mattmo14
9.00 7.00 0 1 Billjoe
9.00 7.00 0 1 Diego
9.00 7.00 0 1 outkast
9.00 7.00 0 1 cubsfanscorey74
9.00 7.00 0 1 Qhowes
9.00 7.00 0 1 Supermex
9.00 7.00 0 1 Jasonmatheny
9.00 7.00 0 1 Mobetta
9.00 3.00 0 3 mogulexpert
9.00 3.00 0 3 avrooster
9.00 7.00 0 1 skinstm33
9.00 7.00 0 1 mcpickl
9.00 7.00 0 1 Tarek
9.00 7.00 0 1 taub
9.00 3.00 0 3 ryangardiner
9.00 7.00 0 1 seancrookston
9.00 7.00 0 1 deke
9.00 7.00 0 1 jgballer2511
9.00 7.00 0 1 dismaldream
9.00 3.00 0 3 tom505
9.00 3.00 0 3 Crassy74
9.00 7.00 0 1 Ilyassoyasso
6.00 4.00 0 1 ohmslaw
6.00 2.00 0 2 rickjamesbetches
6.00 2.00 0 2 Jorge1000
5.00 3.00 0 1 nwj22
5.00 3.00 0 1 baseball09
5.00 3.00 0 1 strawberry
5.00 1.00 0 2 Whoami
5.00 3.00 0 1 jube27
5.00 3.00 0 1 ssviland
5.00 3.00 0 1 jaymo80
3.00 1.00 0 1 rotoman
3.00 1.00 0 1 andyandrews
3.00 1.00 0 1 icb
3.00 1.00 0 1 coolmini
3.00 1.00 0 1 toogood69
2.50 0.50 0 1 lordofwar
2.50 0.50 0 1 Mikerov
2.50 0.50 0 1 oswaltt
2.50 0.50 0 1 Rasor
2.50 0.50 0 1 Mettdenn
2.50 0.50 0 1 Ragecage
2.50 0.50 0 1 Bassman

[daves]

Very interesting. When did this start? I know myself and others may have won more than shown. Oswalt (Lecherous) won around 17 WS in the 144 and he's near the bottom?

Nonetheless this looks nice. Thanks Ohms.

[ohms_law]

It's been running for a while now. I've been advertising it...
Anyway, As long as the league still exists, let me know about your victories in the leagues "Champs: {league name}" thread here. If you can't find one, make one (although, I'm almost positive that there is a thread for each existing league).

[Kotoll]

Actually make more sense. Still a few names that make you go WHO!? And some great GMs on that list that haven't come forward and posted their wins.


And Daves alot of players are missing WS wins, me included. It is up to the GM themselves to hunt down their wins in existing leagues.

[scooter12321]

Actually make more sense. Still a few names that make you go WHO!? And some great GMs on that list that haven't come forward and posted their wins.


And Daves alot of players are missing WS wins, me included. It is up to the GM themselves to hunt down their wins in existing leagues.

So Kotoll, do you want to bet $5 on who will take the lead first? What do you have brewing in those leagues of yours? I joined one of them as COLO for the heck of it. Similar market to Minny and we both have some pretty huge market bullies. I will win at least a few with this COLO team and the rest of my points are going to have to come in IL30, BOTB and survivor leagues.

[Kotoll]

So Kotoll, do you want to bet $5 on who will take the lead first? What do you have brewing in those leagues of yours? I joined one of them as COLO for the heck of it. Similar market to Minny and we both have some pretty huge market bullies. I will win at least a few with this COLO team and the rest of my points are going to have to come in IL30, BOTB and survivor leagues.

I have a few good teams :D

[ohms_law]

So, go with the new points?
(I know what you think Kotoll...)
:p

[bboccio]

Why do my 8 144 wins only count as a point each? :(

[ohms_law]

It's based on opportunities. See earlier on in this thread for more info.

[ohms_law]

Alright, I'm going with the updated points system, since no one seems to have any significant complaints.

[scooter12321]

The march Madness is ending soon. Lets figure out what points it deserves and I can work with Dave to get a list of what round each GM got eliminated.

[ohms_law]

Yea, good idea. It shouldn't be as much as a normal tournament league, in my opinion.

[scooter12321]

I was thinking like this

1 Win - 5
2 Wins - 10
3 Wins - 15
4 Wins - 20
5 Wins - 25
Champ - 30

or

1 Win - 3
2 Wins - 6
3 Wins - 9
4 Wins - 12
5 Wins - 15
Champ - 18

[ohms_law]

1 Win - 3
2 Wins - 6
3 Wins - 9
4 Wins - 12
5 Wins - 15
Champ - 18
That sounds good.