Clever Ways to Mitigate Dumb Luck in H2H Leagues? (1 Viewer)

[msudaisy26]

This topic seems to come up every month or so and is treated like it doesn't have a number of obvious answers. Here's a post I made 1 month ago which entails the simplest fix and just so happens to require the least amount of explanation to your feeble-minded league mates:

This "problem" has such an easy fix:

INCREASE STARTING LINEUP SIZE.

Based on OP's post, I'm guessing the starting lineup size for that league including K, D/ST and everything is somewhere in the range of 8; it needs to be bumped up to 10 at minimum, though it should be even higher than that really. And if you really want to separate the men from the boys you should add IDP, and I'm talking a big IDP starting lineup that's not far off the size of your offense starting lineup, if not equal to it.

I disagree..having a larger starting lineup gives you less choices to make on a weekly basis. making the correct weekly choices is a valuable skill component.

In my experiences the larger the starting lineup the more luck involved. I m 4 and 8 in my larger starting lineup league and 2 of my wins have come against borderline playoff teams and both times I got some heavy luck from guys you normally wouldn't start. I got 23 or 24 points from Donald Brown a couple weeks ago against the Titans and 13 points from Jared Cook. I won by like 15 points.

 

[flapgreen]

I just like to play

 

[silentcoach]

I saw where someone posted they were in a H2H league where the top 5 high score teams get an extra win for that week regardless of the outcome of thier H2H game.

I really like this concept. The stronger teams will distinguish themselve's over the course of the season. It seems like a much better way to still maintain H2H match ups and mitigate the luck factor with out resorting to a total points(all play) or vitory points set up.

That's exactly what victory points are.

Pretty much. Every week you play 2 games (1) against your opponent and (2) the other against the other 11 teams, assuming a 12 team league. You keep the result of your H2H game and then 1 win if you are top 1-6 in total points scored that week, and 1 loss if you scored in the bottom 7-12 for the week. Therefore, if you lose to the top team on a given week and were the second highest scoring team, you would be 1-1 for the week instead of 0-1.Rinse and repeat.

Yeah I understand it.

I think the simplicty of just adding a win for the top five or so teams makes things less total points ish.

A set up like this would be an easier sell to the dinosuars in my leagues..esspecially my long running one.

We tried a doudle header for a year or two to move the title game to week 16 and all they did was ##### about it..it got voted out pretty quick.

Most of these guys could not live with the idea of possibly lossing 2 games a week. And there are a couple of owners who after years of playing with them i have realized they are just consistantly lucky and rely on it.

And there you have it....that is the reason most people like H2H. People (most who are not that good) enjoy the randomness. Heck, even those are "good" must enjoy the randomness too, or there would not be that many H2H leagues.

Not many guppies want to play in a league full of sharks when the league is total points, or best ball, because they know they are just donating their money. H2H, sure, adds luck, and I don't really see a problem with that if more people are willing to play .

 

[Rove!]

a combination of all play and h2h would be the fairest; but you lose a lot in the entertainment factor.

with head to head you get the trash talking and the feel of a virtual game. It also gives a small, finite number of players to track on Sundays. With all-play, you kind of lose that. If I'm playing H2H against Romo and they are in the redzone and D Murray takes it in, I breathe a sigh of relief and cheer. In all-play, it doesn't matter because somebody probably got that TD against me.

 

[Goooals]

Like so many other FF owners, I have one of those teams that have scored a lot but have a very high points scored against. Also, of my league's playoff teams, all but one are among the teams with the least points scored against (#'s 8-12 out of 12 in terms of points against). One of those has the fewest points scored against.

I know there's all-play leagues and, in head-to-head leagues, tactics like awarding victory points and/or giving the league's final playoff spot to the regular season high scorer.

But do any of your leagues have any other clever ways that they try to mitigate some of the stupid luck involved in H2H match ups?

Just researching for next year...thanks.

I did not read through all responses, so this may have been proposed earlier. I really like this format:

Top 4 Teams make playoffs based upon H2H record

Next two teams are based upon total points scored

Love this format!

 

[Time Kibitzer]

This topic seems to come up every month or so and is treated like it doesn't have a number of obvious answers. Here's a post I made 1 month ago which entails the simplest fix and just so happens to require the least amount of explanation to your feeble-minded league mates:

This "problem" has such an easy fix:

INCREASE STARTING LINEUP SIZE.

Based on OP's post, I'm guessing the starting lineup size for that league including K, D/ST and everything is somewhere in the range of 8; it needs to be bumped up to 10 at minimum, though it should be even higher than that really. And if you really want to separate the men from the boys you should add IDP, and I'm talking a big IDP starting lineup that's not far off the size of your offense starting lineup, if not equal to it.

I disagree..having a larger starting lineup gives you less choices to make on a weekly basis. making the correct weekly choices is a valuable skill component.

Gotta disagree with that too. I play in a few leagues with 18 total starters (9 offense, 9 defense). All relevant positions covered, etc and its actually worse because on that one fluke week where Jay Cutler somehow can't put the pipe down and Deangello Hall picks him off 4 times in a game...well, that just racked up enough points to offset, say, Arian Foster's 25 points that week. Big IDP lineups, IMO, actually help the weaker owners.

A good owner who knows his stuff can stranglehold a dynasty league when he is sitting on a who's who list of top WRs, Rbs, or has a Gronk/Graham combo, etc. THe wildcard IDP players level the field. In short, more lottery tickets=more chances for something to hit.

Actually, in short, the more lottery tickets you have, the less valuable that winning lottery ticket becomes. A WR scoring 3 TDs in a game when you're only starting 8 players will just about win you your week every time, but if you're starting 12+ players it's a lot less foretelling.

Also, if your league uses a tackle heavy scoring system (and it should), defensive players are incredibly more consistent scorers relative to their offensive bretheren, at least LBs and DBs anyway (DLs are admittedly inconsistent as #### in fantasy).

 

[Time Kibitzer]

This topic seems to come up every month or so and is treated like it doesn't have a number of obvious answers. Here's a post I made 1 month ago which entails the simplest fix and just so happens to require the least amount of explanation to your feeble-minded league mates:

This "problem" has such an easy fix:

INCREASE STARTING LINEUP SIZE.

Based on OP's post, I'm guessing the starting lineup size for that league including K, D/ST and everything is somewhere in the range of 8; it needs to be bumped up to 10 at minimum, though it should be even higher than that really. And if you really want to separate the men from the boys you should add IDP, and I'm talking a big IDP starting lineup that's not far off the size of your offense starting lineup, if not equal to it.

I disagree..having a larger starting lineup gives you less choices to make on a weekly basis. making the correct weekly choices is a valuable skill component.

The further you go down the positional curve, the more similar players there are that you having to consider. So more options, not less.

In a 12 team, .5 PPR league...

If the league starts 12 WRs, there are 16 backups within 2 ppg of the last starter.

If starting 24 WRs, there are now 37 backup WRs who score within 2 ppg of the last starter.

Increase to 36 WRs, 3 per team, and now you have 46 WRs you have to decide between on who should be on your roster after the starters.

Go to 48 WRs, and there's 62 WRs within 2 ppg of the last starter.

Then take into account that if you start more players, you draft more players. So now you have additional comparisons to do for player value at any point in the draft and how it impacts your team/later draft picks. You also would have more backup spots, which means you have more players at the position on your team that you have to choose from each week. And as I already showed, there are far more similar players out there to choose from the deeper that you go.

The above is what we should expect, and my experience in large lineup leagues (1 QB, 2 RB, 1 QB/RB flex, 4 WR, 2 TE, 1 WR/TE flex) match those expectations. I tend to have at least 5 players most weeks that I'm deciding between for my flex WR/TE spot alone, and I often have far more than that. Because TEs bunch so close together after the top ones, I am often choosing between 4 TEs for my TE2 in a given week. I almost never have to do that for a league with 1 starting TE.

 

[Alkahsu]

All play each week. Basically, you face every team each week and keep a running tally of all games from all weeks.

This.

All play isn't H2H though. You're not against a specific person each week.

You don't say.

Somebody had to explain it to these guys. Follow the conversation.

 

[ghostguy123]

Head to head is going to have a huge luck element to it no matter what you do.

Even in leagues I am in with victory points, there is always a team that is like 10th in scoring but makes the playoffs.

In the ALL-PLAY, that is almost impossible.

But really, if you don't like the dumb-luck aspect of head to head.................then don't play head to head. Simple as that. Whether you make the lineups more or less player isn't going to take away much of the luck factor. I would think larger starting lineups would take away SOME of the luck, but really not all that much for just one week of head to head.

 

[the UFFRM]

The top scoring half of the league each week gets an extra win and the bottom half an extra loss. It's the happy medium between straight up H2H and all play. Mitigates high scoring losses and low scoring wins. Tie breakers should be the same thing for H2H and VS the baseline or top and bottom. We use a designated non-starter.

 

[TheCommish]

My league went to a modified Victory Points setup years ago, and it has worked very well for us. 12-team IDP league with 9 starters on offense and 9 starters on defense. Division rankings are based on these Victory Points, not overall win-loss record. Teams get 8 points for a H2H win. For offense and defense, you get points based on how your total offense and total defense scored relative to all other teams that week:

1st ... 5 pts / 2nd ... 4.4 pts / 3rd ... 4.0 pts / 4th ... 3.6 pts / 5th ... 3.2 pts / 6th ... 2.8 pts / 7th ... 2.4 pts / 8th ... 2.0 pts / 9th ... 1.6 pts / 10th ... 1.2 pts / 11th ... 0.8 pts / 12th ... 0.4 pts

It probably sounds like more work than it is. I just export the weekly scores to an Excel spreadsheet and sort. Most possible points per week is 18. H2H wins are still almost certainly going to give you more points every week, but the team that loses with the 2nd highest offense and 2nd highest defense still gets rewarded for a good week in my system, instead of just taking a loss like the team that scored the lowest points.

It took a little while for people to get used to the fact that it was possible for a 8-5 team to be leading a division over a 9-4 team, but once they understood the reasoning and saw it work very well for a couple of seasons, it stuck. I haven't received any complaints in years about it.

 

[just_want_2_win]

Head to head is going to have a huge luck element to it no matter what you do.

Even in leagues I am in with victory points, there is always a team that is like 10th in scoring but makes the playoffs.

In the ALL-PLAY, that is almost impossible.

But really, if you don't like the dumb-luck aspect of head to head.................then don't play head to head. Simple as that. Whether you make the lineups more or less player isn't going to take away much of the luck factor. I would think larger starting lineups would take away SOME of the luck, but really not all that much for just one week of head to head.

Oh, I agree. Not trying to remove every last vestige of luck. Real-life sports is full of lucky/unlucky occurrences. And it's the good/bad luck stories in FF that sometimes are the most interesting, though sometimes painful.

However, it seems that H2H leagues should try to do something to handle numerous instances of high performing teams that keep losing tough matchups weekly when they would consistently be beating most of the other teams routinely. If you don't reward your best owners, you risk losing them.

All-play or total points are definite and compelling alternatives if this sort of thing bugs you too much but many owners don't want to go there. Victory points seem like the best compromise but some owners oppose or just don't understand the concept. That's why I was curious to see if there were any simpler or more innovative ways to try to deal with this issue.

 

[Krilons Resa]

How about this:

Each week you can end up 2-0, 1-1, or 0-2 based on H2H and points scored for that week. You get your H2H matchup, and get a win or loss based on the top half/bottom half of points scored that week in the league. I am going to try this next year.

I one of my leagues, I have the highest points scored BY FAR and am not even going to make the playoffs because I also have the most points scored against me BY FAR. Travesty.

 

[Da Guru]

In our 14 team league we keep point standings like the NHL.

Teams get 3 points for a H2H win, then you get one point for every other team you beat in total points for that given week. We have been doing in that way for 5 years and the best teams even with some bad luck always have made the playoffs.

A crappy team may win a low scoring H2H game, but only beat one other team in the entire league and end up with 4 points for the week. A good team may lose a high scoring game and still come out with 10-11 points. Teams are rewarded for consistent high scoring.

Playoffs are only H2H scoring.

 

[silentcoach]

Head to head is going to have a huge luck element to it no matter what you do.

Even in leagues I am in with victory points, there is always a team that is like 10th in scoring but makes the playoffs.

In the ALL-PLAY, that is almost impossible.

But really, if you don't like the dumb-luck aspect of head to head.................then don't play head to head. Simple as that. Whether you make the lineups more or less player isn't going to take away much of the luck factor. I would think larger starting lineups would take away SOME of the luck, but really not all that much for just one week of head to head.

Oh, I agree. Not trying to remove every last vestige of luck. Real-life sports is full of lucky/unlucky occurrences. And it's the good/bad luck stories in FF that sometimes are the most interesting, though sometimes painful.

However, it seems that H2H leagues should try to do something to handle numerous instances of high performing teams that keep losing tough matchups weekly when they would consistently be beating most of the other teams routinely. If you don't reward your best owners, you risk losing them.

All-play or total points are definite and compelling alternatives if this sort of thing bugs you too much but many owners don't want to go there. Victory points seem like the best compromise but some owners oppose or just don't understand the concept. That's why I was curious to see if there were any simpler or more innovative ways to try to deal with this issue.

That is fine. If the "best" owners don't want to play, then they (you?) will find another league setting that they will play, which will NOT be H2H. You cannot keep trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. "Victory ponts" is the happy medium, and if your league mates do not understand it or chooe to not embrace it, then they will not understand or even accept any other more complicated format, to be honest.

The simpler option is to only award the top 6 in total points an extra win (apart from their H2H results), and then base the standings based on "Win percentage."

This way the teams in the bottom 6 in total points don't feel like they lost an extra game if they also happened to lose their H2H game and the winners that happened to be in the bottom 6 do not get a loss they do not feel they "deserved."

 

[RBM]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

We switched to it a couple years ago in my local league and it's been great. It somewhat mitigates the luck involved in H2H while still maintaining what's great about H2H.

 

[steelerfeever]

Head to head is going to have a huge luck element to it no matter what you do.

Even in leagues I am in with victory points, there is always a team that is like 10th in scoring but makes the playoffs.

In the ALL-PLAY, that is almost impossible.

But really, if you don't like the dumb-luck aspect of head to head.................then don't play head to head. Simple as that. Whether you make the lineups more or less player isn't going to take away much of the luck factor. I would think larger starting lineups would take away SOME of the luck, but really not all that much for just one week of head to head.

This! My 10 year, ultra competitive local league has been using ALL PLAY since the start. 12 teams. First place each week goes 11-0, 2nd place 10-1, 3rd place 9-2, etc… You're head to head against 11 guys every single week. The nay sayers of this setup is that it eliminates that one head to head matchup that you talk trash with each week. I could not disagree more. Since we are all very close and competitive, we get to talk trash to 11 other guys each week. Another advantage is that it's much easier to make a comeback in this league. I was in last much of the year but have went 40-15 the past 5 weeks and now sit on the bubble. We all despise the leagues where you score the 2nd or 3rd most points in your league but just happen to be playing the guy the scores the most. You go 0-1 in those leagues. With ALL PLAY, you are appropriately awarded the 10-1 or 9-2.

ALL PLAY - by far the fairest way to go.

 

[Riversco]

The team that scored the most points during the regular season automatically gets a playoff spot AND has to lose twice in the playoffs to be eliminated. You do this by having an odd number of teams make the playoffs and seeding that team twice in the bracket. If his two bracket entries get matched up to play each other, you reseed unless its the championship game where he automatically wins.

example:

4 team bracket will be teams A, B, and C

round 1:

team A vs team B

team A vs team C

 

[scrumptrulescent]

I remember the good old days with standard scoring in fantasy. Now jack-wagons are changing the scoring in their leagues to the point where it can't even be called fantasy football anymore. Pansy commishes out there like the OP are ruining FF. stop it.

 

[Rove!]

I remember the good old days with standard scoring in fantasy. Now jack-wagons are changing the scoring in their leagues to the point where it can't even be called fantasy football anymore. Pansy commishes out there like the OP are ruining FF. stop it.

Can't get into this notion that there is something "macho" about dumb luck....

 

[MoveToSkypager]

I remember the good old days with standard scoring in fantasy. Now jack-wagons are changing the scoring in their leagues to the point where it can't even be called fantasy football anymore. Pansy commishes out there like the OP are ruining FF. stop it.

I know what you are saying. It's just another aspect of America being destroyed. I don't think many people know that softening fantasy football scoring systems was actually one of the 45 communist goals published in The Naked Communist back in 1958. This stuff is happening.

 

[Yenrub]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

With doubleheaders are you allowed to enter two different lineups?

 

[SameSongNDance]

I was like, all for victory points until I realized a week ago (in my league) that everyone's placing coincided with their points for. Maybe it's just a coincidence though.

 

[msudaisy26]

Make the head coaches of every NFL team do a 2 hour press fantasy football show every week then we will all know how the coaches plan to use all their players and their will be no sleepers and the best teams will always win.

 

[BigBlue_RI]

Doubleheaders.

My league tried these for 2 years and they kill people's playoff chances quite quickly. You basically drafted baed on those 3 weeks. I was smart enough to do that and it paid off but eventually we voted the DH schedule down.

 

[RBM]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

With doubleheaders are you allowed to enter two different lineups?

I wouldn't think so.

 

[Agent575]

Personally, I think doubleheaders suck because I like the rivalry of each week and with two opponents for me it is gone entirely.

Any league that uses doubleheaders only on certain weeks is flat out ridiculous. Why should certain weeks carry more weight than others? Don't bother cuz there is no good answer for it.

Victory points are a solution for whiners who got burned. I understand the frustration that got ya there but as someone else mentioned early in this thread, by having the 6th seed being the best all-play record (or highest points) of the teams not yet in the playoffs you eliminate the risk of just getting hosed by your schedule. From there, if you didn't win your division and you weren't one of the next best two teams based on record/points AND you weren't the best team based on all-play (or high points) of those remaining...then wtf are you complaining about? See...by going that route you can spare someone the hard luck without the pointless victory point nonsense.

Whoever said that deeper lineups helps weaker teams is completely insane. We start 22 players and if you have 7 good players and nothing but trash beyond that you are getting eatin alive. Most traditional offense only leagues that start 8 or 9 players total are "lucky" based because at any point one player can basically lock the game as a win with a big performance. I have seen multiple occasions where HUGE performances were not enough to save a team of mediocre talent because we start 21 other players so the better TEAM is much more likely to prevail.

If you combine the things above, you will get little whining from owners and my 6 years experience with these specific rules have yet to produce a playoff scenario where anyone felt that someone solely got in because they were "lucky" or that someone didn't get in because they were "unlucky" and isn't what the OP was looking to accomplish?

From there, some of the H2H luckiness is why it's fun to play the game each week so eliminating it entirely is a flawed mission IMO.

 

[Agent575]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

With doubleheaders are you allowed to enter two different lineups?

So you want to start the lineup that you think will score the most points....and...err....one that might win the science fair portion of the contest? Not the first time I have heard this question but seriously, what would be the point?

 

[Rove!]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

With doubleheaders are you allowed to enter two different lineups?

So you want to start the lineup that you think will score the most points....and...err....one that might win the science fair portion of the contest? Not the first time I have heard this question but seriously, what would be the point?

hedging

 

[dmac37]

A combo of the following has worked great to lessen the luck factor but still have fun competition:

Victory Points- awards both hth wins and points scored

Doubleheaders- all weeks are doubleheaders or just the first week without doubleheaders depending on number of weeks

Auction draft- every player available to every team, roster not decided by draft position

Playoffs:

A) no playoffs. rather than the season decided by the best team for 2-3 weeks, decide the best team by results from the entire year

B) have a playoff but pay out more money for the top teams during the regular season

 

[Yenrub]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

With doubleheaders are you allowed to enter two different lineups?

So you want to start the lineup that you think will score the most points....and...err....one that might win the science fair portion of the contest? Not the first time I have heard this question but seriously, what would be the point?

hedging

Yeah I’m not so sure what’s so hard to understand

For example if an owner is having tough time choosing a 3rd WR form pair of similar WR on their roster say TY Hilton and Kendall Wright

In a double header situation the owner may want to start Hilton in one game and Wright in the other

 

[Ballstein]

Just A thought, you could do this for every week.

example...week 1

you play 3 games against the same team, and set 3 lineups. Winner best 2 out of 3.

 

[blake]

Doubleheaders.

My league tried these for 2 years and they kill people's playoff chances quite quickly. You basically drafted baed on those 3 weeks. I was smart enough to do that and it paid off but eventually we voted the DH schedule down.

Was contemplating taking the doubleheader idea to my league in the offseason for a vote...but was waffling. Your experience just convinced me to scrap that thought.

 

[GregR]

Doubleheaders.

My league tried these for 2 years and they kill people's playoff chances quite quickly. You basically drafted baed on those 3 weeks. I was smart enough to do that and it paid off but eventually we voted the DH schedule down.

Was contemplating taking the doubleheader idea to my league in the offseason for a vote...but was waffling. Your experience just convinced me to scrap that thought.

Used doubleheaders for a few years but didn't like not having a schedule that had all the elements we wanted... same number of games every week, play division more than out of division, finishing week 12 so 3 week play can be done before teams start sitting players, etc.

Instead we went to triple headers, worked out perfectly. Three divisions of 4 teams. Each week you play one division team and two out of division teams. By week 12 you've played division teams 4 times, out of division teams 3 times. Results tend to reflect the all play record even better than double headers since you have more games. I also like that you loop through your division every 3 weeks so if you have, say, a player injured for the first 3 weeks of the season, it isn't like you're without him for 50% of your division games like it is with single H2H games.

 

[blake]

Wow, if I can't get on board with doubleheaders, I certainly couldn't with tripleheaders, but I applaud the ingenuity with the different idea.

My league does not use victory points and we just go by wins-losses and season points for seeding tiebreakers. What makes me even more disinterested in doubleheaders, but slightly more interested in victory points, is that I just did the victory points from Weeks 1-12 and the seedings are largely unchanged, though with a bit of volatility.

It is obvious that the victory points are more accurate than just wins-losses. Meaning, the weakest playoff team right now in my league happens to be a division leader with a 7-5 record, and thus has the #3 seed. With victory points, they'd be barely clinging to the #6 seed, but still on the inside track to the playoffs. Same with another team that's had some tough luck, but has put up a ton of points all year and probably has the best team. They aren't winning their division, but have a playoff spot right now with the #4 seed. With victory points, they'd vault to the #1 seed.

Granted, this does lessen the win-loss record a bit though as winning a division based on record is taken away. I'm not sure I can manually edit the standings on ESPN (I'm pretty sure I can), so there is that awkwardness to work through. For leagues that use victory points, how do you manage this with the win-loss standings if your league is on ESPN or Yahoo?

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Doubleheaders.

My league tried these for 2 years and they kill people's playoff chances quite quickly. You basically drafted baed on those 3 weeks. I was smart enough to do that and it paid off but eventually we voted the DH schedule down.

Was contemplating taking the doubleheader idea to my league in the offseason for a vote...but was waffling. Your experience just convinced me to scrap that thought.

Seriously?

 

[Rove!]

No website software would support this, and you'd probably need non-casual owners in your league, but here's a wacky idea.

The idea is "stretch games"

Along with the weekly H2H, you have a matchup with another owner that stretches over a couple of weeks. You could design this so that total score over two weeks gets a W, or, even better, pick one of the matchups for each player in your starting lineup over the stretch period and count the points from that game. I think this reduces luck, adds skill, and doesn't take too much away from the entertainment factor. The downside is that casual owners just wouldn't "get" it.

 

[Agent575]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

With doubleheaders are you allowed to enter two different lineups?

So you want to start the lineup that you think will score the most points....and...err....one that might win the science fair portion of the contest? Not the first time I have heard this question but seriously, what would be the point?

hedging

Yeah Im not so sure whats so hard to understandFor example if an owner is having tough time choosing a 3rd WR form pair of similar WR on their roster say TY Hilton and Kendall Wright

In a double header situation the owner may want to start Hilton in one game and Wright in the other

Under the assumption that one results in a win and one a loss, why would not give yourself a chance to win both by having the stones to make a decision? The day I play scared is the day I quit. I am ok with being wrong versus getting cute with my lineup for the sake of ensuring that I was right hen in fact you werent actually able to take a real stance. Man up. Haha.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

With doubleheaders are you allowed to enter two different lineups?

So you want to start the lineup that you think will score the most points....and...err....one that might win the science fair portion of the contest? Not the first time I have heard this question but seriously, what would be the point?

hedging

Comparing borderline/bench players is not a good method of hedging. If you really want to hedge and see which team is best head to head, make them play every week, with the winner of the series winning the matchup. Set up the league so it's an all-play every week, and track the individual series W/L records, and assign records according to that. This eliminates not only week to week variability of scores, but also bye week challenges some teams face.

 

[IHEARTFF]

If there weren't a lot of luck involved, way fewer people would play ff.

 

[msudaisy26]

If there weren't a lot of luck involved, way fewer people would play ff.

True, and 95 percent of people think they are better at fantasy football then they actually are!

 

[Dizzy]

I know a lot of people like the so-called competition and I know that there is a lot of luck anyway, but I would prefer systems that reward analysis and preparation as best as possible.

This is how we do it. "Luck" is pretty much the difference between what is expected to happen, and what actually happens. So we eliminate one of those entirely--what actually happens. We draft, do waiver pickups, set lineups, etc., but, we score the games based on a mathematical average of expert predictions from a variety of websites...MFL, Yahoo, ESPN, CBS, FBG, etc., and total up the points that way. That way if your guy is "expected" to score an average of 30 points but gets hurt the first play of the game, you get your 30. Next week you have to deal with the injury because he'll be projected to score less, but, there's no dumb luck involved.

this is either a troll comment or your league is ridiculous waste of time. Using this method, you could basically announce your "results" sometime on Wednesday night of each week . . . .?

Some sites update projections on the weekends. So we only know the results for Thursday games on Wednesday nights.

My league is hardcore difficult. Guppy like you would get swallowed whole.

I presume you also pat yourself on the back whenver you buy a stock that is projeted by "experts" to return 20% even after it tanks?

Keep laughing, but it's a vicious league. Too much money on the line to leave it to chance. $4000 entry fee. 32 teams. 22 starters on the roster including IDP. PPFDR (octal/base 8). Triple-reverse double-down-Dynasty mirror league. We only have the best of the best. It's brutal.

I've only ever seen that dive executed once!

 

[dkp993]

We use double headers and 5th & 6th place for the playoffs are points scored not record. Done this for the past 2 yrs and the best six teams really have made the playoffs. It's refreshing honestly. We made the change after a team with the 3rd least amount of points scored grabbed a 4th seed due to year long lucky matchups. Was brutal.

 

[Yenrub]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

With doubleheaders are you allowed to enter two different lineups?

So you want to start the lineup that you think will score the most points....and...err....one that might win the science fair portion of the contest? Not the first time I have heard this question but seriously, what would be the point?

hedging

Yeah Im not so sure whats so hard to understandFor example if an owner is having tough time choosing a 3rd WR form pair of similar WR on their roster say TY Hilton and Kendall Wright

In a double header situation the owner may want to start Hilton in one game and Wright in the other

Under the assumption that one results in a win and one a loss, why would not give yourself a chance to win both by having the stones to make a decision? The day I play scared is the day I quit. I am ok with being wrong versus getting cute with my lineup for the sake of ensuring that I was right hen in fact you werent actually able to take a real stance. Man up. Haha.

Man up playing magic football..if you say so tough guy

Isn’t the whole idea behind doubleheaders about hedging or protecting against the so called bad beat?

If you are going to play two games in the same week I don’t see why you wouldn’t allow a guy to put in two separate lineups

 

[GregR]

I think the better argument for why you'd want to allow multiple lineups would be so you can customize your lineup based on the opponent. So if you feel you have the better lineup overall and want to make sure Calvin going off for 5 touchdowns doesn't beat you, then you might start Stafford even if you have some other QB that you think is a half PPG better.

Though I also don't think not being able to do that is enough reason to not use multiple games per week.

 

[Tchula]

Oh I thought this thread was about how Andrew Luck has been playing lately.

 

[identikit]

Oh I thought this thread was about how Andrew Luck has been playing lately.

:golfclap:

 

[Agent575]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

With doubleheaders are you allowed to enter two different lineups?

So you want to start the lineup that you think will score the most points....and...err....one that might win the science fair portion of the contest? Not the first time I have heard this question but seriously, what would be the point?

hedging

Yeah Im not so sure whats so hard to understandFor example if an owner is having tough time choosing a 3rd WR form pair of similar WR on their roster say TY Hilton and Kendall Wright

In a double header situation the owner may want to start Hilton in one game and Wright in the other

Under the assumption that one results in a win and one a loss, why would not give yourself a chance to win both by having the stones to make a decision? The day I play scared is the day I quit. I am ok with being wrong versus getting cute with my lineup for the sake of ensuring that I was right hen in fact you werent actually able to take a real stance. Man up. Haha.

Man up playing magic football..if you say so tough guy

Isn’t the whole idea behind doubleheaders about hedging or protecting against the so called bad beat?

If you are going to play two games in the same week I don’t see why you wouldn’t allow a guy to put in two separate lineups

Not about being tough. Isn't the entire idea behind fantasy football to "call it". You draft guys you think will do the best. You trade trying to get better players on your team. You set your lineup to score the most points each week.

You don't hedge your bet like a little girl because you are afraid to make a decision. That is why we join multiple leagues if anything. Hedging my bet on Draftstreet or Fanduel is one thing but to hedge your bet within the same season long league is being a sissy.

If you can get a service to provide the feature, all the power to you. I hope every opponent I face has that much trouble making a decision on something so simple. As for the example used when this started, let me give you the free advice to take Wright over Hilton. See...that was easy. LOL

 

[Rove!]

Doubleheaders.

Been pushing this for my dynasty, but can't get anybody on board.

With doubleheaders are you allowed to enter two different lineups?

So you want to start the lineup that you think will score the most points....and...err....one that might win the science fair portion of the contest? Not the first time I have heard this question but seriously, what would be the point?

hedging

Yeah Im not so sure whats so hard to understandFor example if an owner is having tough time choosing a 3rd WR form pair of similar WR on their roster say TY Hilton and Kendall Wright

In a double header situation the owner may want to start Hilton in one game and Wright in the other

Under the assumption that one results in a win and one a loss, why would not give yourself a chance to win both by having the stones to make a decision? The day I play scared is the day I quit. I am ok with being wrong versus getting cute with my lineup for the sake of ensuring that I was right hen in fact you werent actually able to take a real stance. Man up. Haha.

Man up playing magic football..if you say so tough guy

Isn’t the whole idea behind doubleheaders about hedging or protecting against the so called bad beat?

If you are going to play two games in the same week I don’t see why you wouldn’t allow a guy to put in two separate lineups

Not about being tough. Isn't the entire idea behind fantasy football to "call it". You draft guys you think will do the best. You trade trying to get better players on your team. You set your lineup to score the most points each week.

You don't hedge your bet like a little girl because you are afraid to make a decision. That is why we join multiple leagues if anything. Hedging my bet on Draftstreet or Fanduel is one thing but to hedge your bet within the same season long league is being a sissy.

If you can get a service to provide the feature, all the power to you. I hope every opponent I face has that much trouble making a decision on something so simple. As for the example used when this started, let me give you the free advice to take Wright over Hilton. See...that was easy. LOL

if I have to win one game out of two to make te playoffs and i have a doubleheader, I'm going to hedge. It's the smart thing to do. Are you saying it's womanly to be smart and logical and manly to be more emotional and less rational?