Head-to-Head bad way of playing FF? (1 Viewer)

[mr roboto]

An owner in our dynasty league did some research and wrote a big essay on why head-to-head matchups for FF is possibly the worst and most random way of determining the best team. Without going into his statistical analysis, his clear conclusion was that the randomness of the matchups was a larger determiner of success than anything else an owner can control.

Basically, if you score 150 pts (in our league this is somewhat common) and the opponent scores 155, you lose, but may have had the 2nd best week out of the 10 teams.

We play 117 all-play matches per year, but only 13 head-to-head matchups. So the sample size is tiny in comparison to the potential.

Is all-play or total points scored a more fair way to figure out the best FF owner?

For the record, although this analysis is factually true, most owners don't want to change. They like the head-to-head matchups for smack talking, rooting against your opponent's players, and having divisions and rivalries.

In our league though, the objective 'best' team has only won 1 of the last 5 championships.

 

[Christo]

All-play or total points is good for on-line/$$$ leagues. But H2H is much more fun for local leagues.

 

[FantasyTrader]

"Fair" is a subjective term. But we play total points in my dynasty league, where the team that scores the most points total for the year is the Champ. Hard to argue against that. FWIW, most of the owners in that league say it's the most exciting and competitive league they've ever played in. Most people THINK they won't like total points and end up LOVING it. Plus, you get the added bonus of playing FF all the way through the SB in this format. When regular leagues are crowning a champ, the playoff race in this league is just heating up.

 

[jon_mx]

All-play or total points is good for on-line/$$$ leagues. But H2H is much more fun for local leagues.

Exactly...The roller coaster ride from week to week. Watching the last play of Monday night football as your win turns to a lose on a meaningless interception at the end of the game. Every lineup choice each week can play a critical part of the outcome of the game. Total score may be the way to go to see who has the best team, but for week in and week out excitement, head to head is the only way to go.

 

[mr roboto]

It's hard to have 'fun' once the truth comes out for me.

This has really caused a bit of heated discussion in our league. Especially since the best team in the leagu has gotten screwed by the Manning/Wayne combo sitting in the FF playoffs.

 

[mr roboto]

All-play or total points is good for on-line/$$$ leagues. But H2H is much more fun for local leagues.

Exactly...The roller coaster ride from week to week. Watching the last play of Monday night football as your win turns to a lose on a meaningless interception at the end of the game. Every lineup choice each week can play a critical part of the outcome of the game. Total score may be the way to go to see who has the best team, but for week in and week out excitement, head to head is the only way to go.

What if that last-second TD on Monday night brought you from 4-5 to 6-3 in all play. Much more significant, right?

 

[jon_mx]

It's hard to have 'fun' once the truth comes out for me.This has really caused a bit of heated discussion in our league. Especially since the best team in the leagu has gotten screwed by the Manning/Wayne combo sitting in the FF playoffs.

I had Manning and Harrison when they were 14-0 and clinched home field throughout the playoffs. Yeah it sucked, but it was part of the game.

 

[mr roboto]

It's hard to have 'fun' once the truth comes out for me.This has really caused a bit of heated discussion in our league. Especially since the best team in the leagu has gotten screwed by the Manning/Wayne combo sitting in the FF playoffs.

I had Manning and Harrison when they were 14-0 and clinched home field throughout the playoffs. Yeah it sucked, but it was part of the game.

Doesn't have to be...

 

[FantasyTrader]

All-play or total points is good for on-line/$$$ leagues. But H2H is much more fun for local leagues.

Exactly...The roller coaster ride from week to week. Watching the last play of Monday night football as your win turns to a lose on a meaningless interception at the end of the game. Every lineup choice each week can play a critical part of the outcome of the game. Total score may be the way to go to see who has the best team, but for week in and week out excitement, head to head is the only way to go.

This is a common misconception about Total Points. That there's not as much on the line heading into MNF.

 

[mr roboto]

I like All-Play as a compromise. You still compete against one another.

We are also thinking about doubleheaders.

 

[shadyridr]

I play this game for fun. Not to see whos the smartest

 

[mervis]

An owner in our dynasty league did some research and wrote a big essay on why head-to-head matchups for FF is possibly the worst and most random way of determining the best team. Without going into his statistical analysis, his clear conclusion was that the randomness of the matchups was a larger determiner of success than anything else an owner can control.Basically, if you score 150 pts (in our league this is somewhat common) and the opponent scores 155, you lose, but may have had the 2nd best week out of the 10 teams.We play 117 all-play matches per year, but only 13 head-to-head matchups. So the sample size is tiny in comparison to the potential.Is all-play or total points scored a more fair way to figure out the best FF owner?For the record, although this analysis is factually true, most owners don't want to change. They like the head-to-head matchups for smack talking, rooting against your opponent's players, and having divisions and rivalries.In our league though, the objective 'best' team has only won 1 of the last 5 championships.

We give money for BOTH TP and the Super Bowl winner. Been doing it for years and the TP payout is RARELY exciting, more of a foregone conclusion 80% of the time, at the half way point, for the vast majority of years. Head to head is much more exciting, as the highest scoring team does not always win! Much like the reality of NFL football. A team that gets hot for the playoffs usually carries the day. Not such a bad thing .......My experience has been much like yours. Maybe 20% of the time the high points guy wins the super bowl. ..... keeps things exciting when the big dog goes down. Marginal Football Manager

 

[supersecretid]

To me all-play seems like a better system because you are penalized for failing to be consistent. I also enjoy the idea of building a team to peak at the right time (aka the playoffs).

Double-headers seems like a good compromise between all-play and maintaining the excitement and trash-talking of a normal head-to-head league.

 

[Mr.Underhill]

An owner in our dynasty league did some research and wrote a big essay on why head-to-head matchups for FF is possibly the worst and most random way of determining the best team.

Who's arguing that H2H determines the best team? I think your buddy spent his time arguing against a straw man. Did he also argue against exclusive rosters and a draft? Why not go with an auction system?Everyone who plays H2H more than a year or two knows that H2H has an element of risk that all-play or total points lack. That's the point of H2H, it has an element of unpredictability and risk that is attractive. It keeps the underdog in play. Part of the challenge is not only beating another owner's skill, but also beating "luck".

If fantasy football were reduced to a 100% skill determinant system, it would die. Randomness and unpredictability excite and stimulate us. That's why gambling is so addictive.

 

[supersecretid]

An owner in our dynasty league did some research and wrote a big essay on why head-to-head matchups for FF is possibly the worst and most random way of determining the best team.

Who's arguing that H2H determines the best team? I think your buddy spent his time arguing against a straw man. Did he also argue against exclusive rosters and a draft? Why not go with an auction system?Everyone who plays H2H more than a year or two knows that H2H has an element of risk that all-play or total points lack. That's the point of H2H, it has an element of unpredictability and risk that is attractive. It keeps the underdog in play. Part of the challenge is not only beating another owner's skill, but also beating "luck".

If fantasy football were reduced to a 100% skill determinant system, it would die. Randomness and unpredictability excite and stimulate us. That's why gambling is so addictive.

This is absolutely true. It's why betting on poker is popular and betting on a game of Madden never will be.

 

[FantasyTrader]

An owner in our dynasty league did some research and wrote a big essay on why head-to-head matchups for FF is possibly the worst and most random way of determining the best team.

Who's arguing that H2H determines the best team? I think your buddy spent his time arguing against a straw man. Did he also argue against exclusive rosters and a draft? Why not go with an auction system?Everyone who plays H2H more than a year or two knows that H2H has an element of risk that all-play or total points lack. That's the point of H2H, it has an element of unpredictability and risk that is attractive. It keeps the underdog in play. Part of the challenge is not only beating another owner's skill, but also beating "luck".

If fantasy football were reduced to a 100% skill determinant system, it would die. Randomness and unpredictability excite and stimulate us. That's why gambling is so addictive.

This is absolutely true. It's why betting on poker is popular and betting on a game of Madden never will be.

I think there's plenty of people out there who play the game to determine who the best team, "smartest" owner or skilled roster manager is. And I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Some people play the game for fun, some people play it for money and the competition. Neither reason is right or wrong.

 

[ceo3west]

We have a good compromise in our league that usually rewards the best team and keeps it fun & interesting. Head to head each week against another team, plus another win finishing top 7 out of 14, or a loss finishing bottom 7. Top 6 teams on record get in the playoffs with top 2 on bye. First week playoffs, 4 teams - top 2 scoring teams advance. Same for semi round, then final game.

 

[Woogie Lee]

All-play or total points is good for on-line/$$$ leagues. But H2H is much more fun for local leagues.

inject double headers and total points prizes (weekly + season) to reward good teams that get screwed by bad beats.

 

[mr roboto]

We give money for BOTH TP and the Super Bowl winner. Been doing it for years and the TP payout is RARELY exciting, more of a foregone conclusion 80% of the time, at the half way point, for the vast majority of years. Head to head is much more exciting, as the highest scoring team does not always win! Much like the reality of NFL football. A team that gets hot for the playoffs usually carries the day.

Actually, the highest scoring team always wins... each week.True, the highest scoring team in the NFL over 16 games is not necessarily the best. Defense is part of the game too.

This is where the NFL/FF analogy breaks down. In the NFL you actually have the opportunity to impact your opponent. You game plan, call plays, hit them in the mouth...

In FF, the only thing you are trying to do is forecast and pick the best performing players. Period.

The way you determine the 'best' at anything is to match the assessment with the basic premise. Unless you can find a way to influence the way the other owner plays his players in head-to-head, it's nothing like the NFL.

And why is 'playing for fun' a good reason not to look into the way we keep score? It's definitely no fun if you have the best team and aren't rewarded for it.

 

[Woogie Lee]

We give money for BOTH TP and the Super Bowl winner. Been doing it for years and the TP payout is RARELY exciting, more of a foregone conclusion 80% of the time, at the half way point, for the vast majority of years. Head to head is much more exciting, as the highest scoring team does not always win! Much like the reality of NFL football. A team that gets hot for the playoffs usually carries the day.

Actually, the highest scoring team always wins... each week.True, the highest scoring team in the NFL over 16 games is not necessarily the best. Defense is part of the game too.

This is where the NFL/FF analogy breaks down. In the NFL you actually have the opportunity to impact your opponent. You game plan, call plays, hit them in the mouth...

In FF, the only thing you are trying to do is forecast and pick the best performing players. Period.

bingo

 

[mr roboto]

I play this game for fun. Not to see whos the smartest

It's both. Luck is obviously involved in injuries, injuries to related players, retirements and unretirements blah blah blahBut, why spend money on a site like this if you aren't trying to be smarter than others? Auto-draft, and have 'fun' like playing roulette.I play golf. Decently well. And I play for fun. But it's more fun to succeed. If I wanted to have nothing but entertainment I'd take balls and my driver to an abandoned warehouse and break windows. No tee times, green's fees, and pure, uncomplicated fun!!!

 

[BobbyLayne]

I play this game for fun. Not to see whos the smartest

It's both. Luck is obviously involved in injuries, injuries to related players, retirements and unretirements blah blah blahBut, why spend money on a site like this if you aren't trying to be smarter than others? Auto-draft, and have 'fun' like playing roulette.

I don't think I'm alone when I say All-Play or total points prolly is better indicator of the best FF team, and yet I still prefer H2H.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

I play in both. They're both fun for different reasons. I will say that winning a total points league feels like more of an accomplishment than winning a h2h league. It's hard to argue that a total points champ lucked their way to a title or wasn't the best team.

And there's plenty of trash-talking in total points leagues.

 

[Mr.Underhill]

An owner in our dynasty league did some research and wrote a big essay on why head-to-head matchups for FF is possibly the worst and most random way of determining the best team.

Who's arguing that H2H determines the best team? I think your buddy spent his time arguing against a straw man. Did he also argue against exclusive rosters and a draft? Why not go with an auction system?Everyone who plays H2H more than a year or two knows that H2H has an element of risk that all-play or total points lack. That's the point of H2H, it has an element of unpredictability and risk that is attractive. It keeps the underdog in play. Part of the challenge is not only beating another owner's skill, but also beating "luck".

If fantasy football were reduced to a 100% skill determinant system, it would die. Randomness and unpredictability excite and stimulate us. That's why gambling is so addictive.

This is absolutely true. It's why betting on poker is popular and betting on a game of Madden never will be.

I think there's plenty of people out there who play the game to determine who the best team, "smartest" owner or skilled roster manager is. And I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Some people play the game for fun, some people play it for money and the competition. Neither reason is right or wrong.

I'm not sure you are understanding the fullness of our point.If you are playing fantasy footall, there is NO system that proves which owner was the best or smartest. Luck, which is really nothing more than our inability to predict outcomes, is in play in all fantasy football systems.

How many all-play or total points teams did Chris Johnson help last year? In my main league, Johnson outscored Rice by a margin of almost 26%. To put it another way, there was a 20% drop-off from the #1 RB to the #2 RB last year. How much skill or smarts were involved in starting off with a 26+% advantage over your opponent with one pick? And how does luck not play a significant role when random order likely determined who got to draft him?

I say thinking you have a system that allows the smartest or best owner to win is an illusion. Luck still plays a huge part in total-points and all-play systems. I'm not convinced it so significantly reduces the impact of luck that's it's worth taking the excitement of H2H out of the game.

If you want to compete in a system that objectively proves skill and smarts, go play chess. But don't pretend that all-play or total points reduce fantasy football to a skill contest. You're simply fooling yourself if you think that's possible.

 

[GridironMenace]

The easy solution is Victory Points. The only way to incorporate H2H and total points. At some point all leagues will do away with W-L record and use victory points. http://www.antsports.com/info/h2hvp.asp

 

[mr roboto]

I don't look down on anyone for enjoying H2H. I see the appeal.

I guess it's more a matter of personality. I have a hard time when I see a systemic problem or inconsistency in any area of life (like how people drive) and just letting it go.

Once I know there is a 'problem' I like to fix it.

Others don't have this level of concern. They like the trash talking and the competition of H2H. Which is great.

It's just hard to spend time and money on something where the reward (either bragging rights or $ or both) don't go to the obvious best.

 

[mr roboto]

If you want to compete in a system that objectively proves skill and smarts, go play chess. But don't pretend that all-play or total points reduce fantasy football to a skill contest. You're simply fooling yourself if you think that's possible.

You're absolutely right. So there's no point in reducing luck?That's an all-or-nothing argument.

'We can't totally keep people from drunk driving, so...'

A bit extreme I admit, but incremental progress isn't a worthless goal.

 

[TommyGilmore]

Head to head is more fun on a weekly basis. It's just not a good way to break ties for the playoffs.

If my league switched to All-Play or Total Points, I know for certain that several guys would quit.

 

[mr roboto]

Everyone who plays H2H more than a year or two knows that H2H has an element of risk that all-play or total points lack. That's the point of H2H, it has an element of unpredictability and risk that is attractive. It keeps the underdog in play. Part of the challenge is not only beating another owner's skill, but also beating "luck".

You can't beat luck. Good luck with that.

 

[Mr.Underhill]

I play this game for fun. Not to see whos the smartest

It's both. Luck is obviously involved in injuries, injuries to related players, retirements and unretirements blah blah blahBut, why spend money on a site like this if you aren't trying to be smarter than others? Auto-draft, and have 'fun' like playing roulette.

I don't think I'm alone when I say All-Play or total points prolly is better indicator of the best FF team, and yet I still prefer H2H.

But does having the best team in all-play or total-points prove the best owner?I believe that's the underlying false premise of all-play and total points leagues. We compete to see who is the best at some skill. We set criteria for this competition which theoretically objectively defines or determines who is the best at this skill. In effect, all we do is establish a competition to see who best comforms to the criteria. So we must ask if the criteria actually distill out influences other than the skill we are attempting to evaluate.

One chef has a can of Spam and a sprig of parsley. Another has a beef tenderloin and an herb garden outside his back door. Odds are that the latter is going to assemble a "better" entree'. But does that prove he is the better chef?

 

[Kai's Hero]

Total Points is the best barometer of who is the BEST team but IMO you should use a combination of both. Generally speaking our league rewards the Total Point Champion with approximately 80% of the payout while the head-to-head champ gets about 25%. The total points champion is recognized as our league champion.

 

[mr roboto]

I play this game for fun. Not to see whos the smartest

It's both. Luck is obviously involved in injuries, injuries to related players, retirements and unretirements blah blah blahBut, why spend money on a site like this if you aren't trying to be smarter than others? Auto-draft, and have 'fun' like playing roulette.

I don't think I'm alone when I say All-Play or total points prolly is better indicator of the best FF team, and yet I still prefer H2H.

But does having the best team in all-play or total-points prove the best owner?I believe that's the underlying false premise of all-play and total points leagues. We compete to see who is the best at some skill. We set criteria for this competition which theoretically objectively defines or determines who is the best at this skill. In effect, all we do is establish a competition to see who best comforms to the criteria. So we must ask if the criteria actually distill out influences other than the skill we are attempting to evaluate.

One chef has a can of Spam and a sprig of parsley. Another has a beef tenderloin and an herb garden outside his back door. Odds are that the latter is going to assemble a "better" entree'. But does that prove he is the better chef?

Couldn't have said it better. We have to match the assessment with the intended goal.We build teams that will be comprised of players who will score points. And we want as many points as possible. That's the skill. Then the criteria should AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE match the skill we are attempting to assess.

And the chef analogy is bad because at the beginning of the year (for redraft) we all go out and pick our favorite herbs. Or we get to grow our own garden (dynasty/keeper). We aren't dropped into the Iron Chef competition with spam. Unless you are taking over a terrible dynasty team. That just sucks.

 

[videoguy505]

One isn't necessarily "better" or "worse" than the other. They are different games with different rules. The strategy for each should be different as well. It's like comparing the game of simple backgammon to backgammon with the doubling cube. Or comparing standard Monopoly to Monopoly + Free Parking rules. Some prefer one version to the other, naturally. But it doesn't mean one is "better".

 

[mr roboto]

Total Points is the best barometer of who is the BEST team but IMO you should use a combination of both. Generally speaking our league rewards the Total Point Champion with approximately 80% of the payout while the head-to-head champ gets about 25%. The total points champion is recognized as our league champion.

So is the H2H champ considered the 2nd best owner?How often are these the same person?

 

[Christo]

"Fair" is a subjective term. But we play total points in my dynasty league, where the team that scores the most points total for the year is the Champ. Hard to argue against that. FWIW, most of the owners in that league say it's the most exciting and competitive league they've ever played in. Most people THINK they won't like total points and end up LOVING it. Plus, you get the added bonus of playing FF all the way through the SB in this format. When regular leagues are crowning a champ, the playoff race in this league is just heating up.

In one of my dynasties, we play through the SB H2H.

 

[mr roboto]

The strategy for each should be different as well.

How? How often do you change your starting lineup in reaction to your H2H opponent?Would you start a guy who you thought would get less points because of a decision the H2H opponent made?

 

[Mr.Underhill]

If you want to compete in a system that objectively proves skill and smarts, go play chess. But don't pretend that all-play or total points reduce fantasy football to a skill contest. You're simply fooling yourself if you think that's possible.

You're absolutely right. So there's no point in reducing luck?That's an all-or-nothing argument.

'We can't totally keep people from drunk driving, so...'

A bit extreme I admit, but incremental progress isn't a worthless goal.

No, there's no point to it. It's simply a matter of taste. The goal of fantasy football is to enjoy the experience. My point is that the variables involved in any fantasy footall system, which we call luck, so color the outcome that you can't draw any real conclusion as to the quaility of the particpant who wins. All you can do is conclude that a particular participant recorded the best score according to whatever criteria you found more palatable.

So you started this thread to debate a matter of taste?

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but when you take a better or worse position in a matter of taste, you're off track from the first step.

 

[mr roboto]

If you want to compete in a system that objectively proves skill and smarts, go play chess. But don't pretend that all-play or total points reduce fantasy football to a skill contest. You're simply fooling yourself if you think that's possible.

You're absolutely right. So there's no point in reducing luck?That's an all-or-nothing argument.

'We can't totally keep people from drunk driving, so...'

A bit extreme I admit, but incremental progress isn't a worthless goal.

No, there's no point to it. It's simply a matter of taste. The goal of fantasy football is to enjoy the experience. My point is that the variables involved in any fantasy footall system, which we call luck, so color the outcome that you can't draw any real conclusion as to the quaility of the particpant who wins. All you can do is conclude that a particular participant recorded the best score according to whatever criteria you found more palatable.

So you started this thread to debate a matter of taste?

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but when you take a better or worse position in a matter of taste, you're off track from the first step.

No. I don't really want to debate taste. I actually think there is a better or worse system.But it doesn't really matter. I do love to debate. Probably more than I should.

I guess I just wanted to see the arguments for/against/'i don't care'

No offense to those who like H2H. I don't think you are stupid or ignorant. I would just find the league more enjoyable if it was rewarding performance the best possible way it could be determined.

 

[videoguy505]

The strategy for each should be different as well.

How? How often do you change your starting lineup in reaction to your H2H opponent?Would you start a guy who you thought would get less points because of a decision the H2H opponent made?

I meant that in H2H, you have to pay a little more attention to bye week issues and weekly matchups. Even on draft day. On both sides--yours and, if you know your schedule in advance, your opponents... I remember last season having an opponent who I knew had more guys with a week 9 bye than bench spots. I was his week 9 opponent, so I knew on draft day if it came down to a decision between two similar guys at the same position, I'd rather have the guy with the week 9 bye because I was going to win that week no matter what.In total points, everyone has a bye once. Doesn't matter as much where they fall in the year. That's just one strategy difference offhand. I did not mean that one would adjust a lineup for the week based on what their opponent does (except in certain specific instances).

 

[mervis]

Total Points is the best barometer of who is the BEST team but IMO you should use a combination of both. Generally speaking our league rewards the Total Point Champion with approximately 80% of the payout while the head-to-head champ gets about 25%. The total points champion is recognized as our league champion.

The problem with doing this is that it makes the playoffs and super bowl winner a YAWN. (not reflective of the NFL) IMO, best to keep the league appeal going as long as you can. We give out 30% money to total points, 40 % to Super Bowl winner, 20% to Super bowl runner up. Third place playoff winner gets his money back. Whatever keeps the most people actively involved in the league the longest seems the best. MFM

 

[Mr.Underhill]

I play this game for fun. Not to see whos the smartest

It's both. Luck is obviously involved in injuries, injuries to related players, retirements and unretirements blah blah blahBut, why spend money on a site like this if you aren't trying to be smarter than others? Auto-draft, and have 'fun' like playing roulette.

I don't think I'm alone when I say All-Play or total points prolly is better indicator of the best FF team, and yet I still prefer H2H.

But does having the best team in all-play or total-points prove the best owner?I believe that's the underlying false premise of all-play and total points leagues. We compete to see who is the best at some skill. We set criteria for this competition which theoretically objectively defines or determines who is the best at this skill. In effect, all we do is establish a competition to see who best comforms to the criteria. So we must ask if the criteria actually distill out influences other than the skill we are attempting to evaluate.

One chef has a can of Spam and a sprig of parsley. Another has a beef tenderloin and an herb garden outside his back door. Odds are that the latter is going to assemble a "better" entree'. But does that prove he is the better chef?

Couldn't have said it better. We have to match the assessment with the intended goal.We build teams that will be comprised of players who will score points. And we want as many points as possible. That's the skill. Then the criteria should AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE match the skill we are attempting to assess.

And the chef analogy is bad because at the beginning of the year (for redraft) we all go out and pick our favorite herbs. Or we get to grow our own garden (dynasty/keeper). We aren't dropped into the Iron Chef competition with spam. Unless you are taking over a terrible dynasty team. That just sucks.

No, that's the outcome. There's a difference.I'd respectfully suggest that the skill we test in fantasy football is who best predicts performance. Only we call this "football knowledge" or some other such gibberish.

And no, in a draft we don't go out and pick our favorite herbs. We choose from among what's left when our pick rolls around or what we can afford based upon some arbitrary monetary system.

And then we have to hope that our herbs don't get wiped out by japanese beetles before we're done cooking when we can do nothing to protect the herbs.

I exaggerated the extremes to drive home the point that randomness in the selection process is still a significant variable. If randomness is a bad thing, why not eliminate it as much as possible?

What I see here is someone saying they don't like wasabi when what they mean is they simply like a little less than someone else. Again, a matter of taste. Not something that needs to be thought of as a better or worse comparative.

 

[mr roboto]

I may be confused.

By total points, I'm under the assumption you still have to pick starters and who to sit.

Is this how it works, or do total points leagues literally just add all the players' points on each team?

 

[mr roboto]

No, that's the outcome. There's a difference.I'd respectfully suggest that the skill we test in fantasy football is who best predicts performance. Only we call this "football knowledge" or some other such gibberish.

You're right. The skill is the predicting. Which, if regardless of what kind of criteria we use to crown someone, is less important than luck, or which herbs get picked before us, then we are not actually measuring anything. Is that what we are doing?

 

[Mr.Underhill]

If you want to compete in a system that objectively proves skill and smarts, go play chess. But don't pretend that all-play or total points reduce fantasy football to a skill contest. You're simply fooling yourself if you think that's possible.

You're absolutely right. So there's no point in reducing luck?That's an all-or-nothing argument.

'We can't totally keep people from drunk driving, so...'

A bit extreme I admit, but incremental progress isn't a worthless goal.

No, there's no point to it. It's simply a matter of taste. The goal of fantasy football is to enjoy the experience. My point is that the variables involved in any fantasy footall system, which we call luck, so color the outcome that you can't draw any real conclusion as to the quaility of the particpant who wins. All you can do is conclude that a particular participant recorded the best score according to whatever criteria you found more palatable.

So you started this thread to debate a matter of taste?

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but when you take a better or worse position in a matter of taste, you're off track from the first step.

No. I don't really want to debate taste. I actually think there is a better or worse system.But it doesn't really matter. I do love to debate. Probably more than I should.

I guess I just wanted to see the arguments for/against/'i don't care'

No offense to those who like H2H. I don't think you are stupid or ignorant. I would just find the league more enjoyable if it was rewarding performance the best possible way it could be determined.

Then start aleague where you compile total points and you can choose any player from the complete player pool in any given week. You eliminate most of the randomness in the selection process. You don't get any benefit from having Peyton Manning this week when everyone and their mother thinks Manning will be the highest scoring QB. You also don't get the detriment of not being able to start Chris Johnson against a poor run D. You just call your shot compared to every other owner.The mistake is when you think the benefits and detriments will equal 0 for all participants at season's end. They won't. The odds at the beginning of the season in terms of predictive performance may be 0, but the final outsome won't. Some teams will be hurt worse by injury than others despite the fact that no certain owner will have greater odds of being hampered by injury than any other when the draft starts (assuming Westbrook isn't in the league anymore).

This is my point. Deciding to follow an all-play or total-points format isn't doing all that I think you think it is doing. Look at all aspects of your set-up and eliminate all instances of randomness that you can. Until then, all you are arguing is the superiority of how much is too much or too little.

 

[FantasyTrader]

If you want to compete in a system that objectively proves skill and smarts, go play chess. But don't pretend that all-play or total points reduce fantasy football to a skill contest. You're simply fooling yourself if you think that's possible.

You're absolutely right. So there's no point in reducing luck?That's an all-or-nothing argument.

'We can't totally keep people from drunk driving, so...'

A bit extreme I admit, but incremental progress isn't a worthless goal.

No, there's no point to it. It's simply a matter of taste. The goal of fantasy football is to enjoy the experience. My point is that the variables involved in any fantasy footall system, which we call luck, so color the outcome that you can't draw any real conclusion as to the quaility of the particpant who wins. All you can do is conclude that a particular participant recorded the best score according to whatever criteria you found more palatable.

So you started this thread to debate a matter of taste?

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but when you take a better or worse position in a matter of taste, you're off track from the first step.

I would disagree with the bold. Perhaps over the coarse of any given season, your statement is correct. But if you give me 5 years worth of data on any league, I'll bet we could agree on the quality of the participants.

 

[mr roboto]

Then start aleague where you compile total points and you can choose any player from the complete player pool in any given week. You eliminate most of the randomness in the selection process. You don't get any benefit from having Peyton Manning this week when everyone and their mother thinks Manning will be the highest scoring QB. You also don't get the detriment of not being able to start Chris Johnson against a poor run D. You just call your shot compared to every other owner.

I see what you are saying.

That doesn't sound like as much 'fun.' Which makes my argument totally inconsistent.

But you really think that there is no difference in determining skill between H2H and total points?

 

[Tickle Monster]

While we're at it, why not make this all-play league a best ball one too. That will show who the the best drafter/WW miner is.

 

[mr roboto]

If you want to compete in a system that objectively proves skill and smarts, go play chess. But don't pretend that all-play or total points reduce fantasy football to a skill contest. You're simply fooling yourself if you think that's possible.

You're absolutely right. So there's no point in reducing luck?That's an all-or-nothing argument.

'We can't totally keep people from drunk driving, so...'

A bit extreme I admit, but incremental progress isn't a worthless goal.

No, there's no point to it. It's simply a matter of taste. The goal of fantasy football is to enjoy the experience. My point is that the variables involved in any fantasy footall system, which we call luck, so color the outcome that you can't draw any real conclusion as to the quaility of the particpant who wins. All you can do is conclude that a particular participant recorded the best score according to whatever criteria you found more palatable.

So you started this thread to debate a matter of taste?

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but when you take a better or worse position in a matter of taste, you're off track from the first step.

I would disagree with the bold. Perhaps over the coarse of any given season, your statement is correct. But if you give me 5 years worth of data on any league, I'll bet we could agree on the quality of the participants.

 

[Air Coryell]

A few years ago we looked at the impact of H2H vs. all play. The take home was clear that H2H schedule played could swing your winning % by about 2 games either way. However the league voted to keep with H2H since they liked the idea of rivalries between owners. We stayed with H2H due to a fun factor. I disagree with that, but that's the way it goes. If you want to reduce some of the luck factor switch to All-play.

 

[mervis]

It's hard to have 'fun' once the truth comes out for me.This has really caused a bit of heated discussion in our league. Especially since the best team in the leagu has gotten screwed by the Manning/Wayne combo sitting in the FF playoffs.

If you go into the draft knowing that it is head to head league, why is someone getting screwed for drafting Manning / Wayne? It has been a bit of a trend that these guys clinch and then sit. Just one more thing to consider when you are drafting. IF ignored, it is ignored ..... maybe it should not be ignored. The bottom line is that this is a GAME and if you go into the game / league ignoring the rules of the game and THEN complain that you have been "screwed", what then of the GAME? I like head to head, but conceed that it may not always be the best indicator of the best team. LUCK / injuries and such always plays. However, a "pure" total points structure is not without fault either. If one is looking for a full-proof format to DECLARE ONES FANTASY DOMINANCE, good luck. Not so easy ..... we are all rolling the dice here. Marginal Football Manager