Another FBG subscriber contest (1 Viewer)

[QuizGuy66]

Not sure how I missed this.I've made my choices but I have a question...do I have to enter comments supporting my picks or is that just optional?

1 point per comment Naah just kiddin' - comments are totally optional. -QG

 

[apalmer]

Not sure how I missed this.I've made my choices but I have a question...do I have to enter comments supporting my picks or is that just optional?

Optional

 

[Warrior]

I won!

Do I need to contact someone about the prize?

 

[kardplayer]

Top 12 ("in the money") through 3 weeks

Player	         Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreMatt Vereb	 73.97 	 64.29 	 61.76 	 412.25 magicbench	 72.86 	 65.28 	 56.52 	 405.66 Nepalism	 71.43 	 60.56 	 57.50 	 392.91 JamesFFB	 68.29 	 62.50 	 57.38 	 387.25 Capitalist Pigs	 70.15 	 60.87 	 49.18 	 381.37 Jamais Vu	 67.80 	 62.71 	 52.46 	 381.28 Cubs Suck	 65.31 	 62.63 	 58.00 	 379.19 The Merkins	 64.95 	 61.96 	 60.22 	 378.99 NeGaTiViSm	 69.70 	 61.54 	 43.82 	 376.00 kardplayer	 68.18 	 61.76 	 47.83 	 375.89 QuizGuy66	 64.65 	 62.67 	 56.12 	 375.41 njdevil	         64.00 	 62.50 	 58.06 	 375.06

 

[QuizGuy66]

Top 12 ("in the money") through 3 weeks

Player	         Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreMatt Vereb	 73.97 	 64.29 	 61.76 	 412.25 magicbench	 72.86 	 65.28 	 56.52 	 405.66 Nepalism	 71.43 	 60.56 	 57.50 	 392.91 JamesFFB	 68.29 	 62.50 	 57.38 	 387.25 Capitalist Pigs	 70.15 	 60.87 	 49.18 	 381.37 Jamais Vu	 67.80 	 62.71 	 52.46 	 381.28 Cubs Suck	 65.31 	 62.63 	 58.00 	 379.19 The Merkins	 64.95 	 61.96 	 60.22 	 378.99 NeGaTiViSm	 69.70 	 61.54 	 43.82 	 376.00 kardplayer	 68.18 	 61.76 	 47.83 	 375.89 QuizGuy66	 64.65 	 62.67 	 56.12 	 375.41 <----- <img src='http://forumimages.footballguys.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/pickles.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':pickle:' />njdevil	         64.00 	 62.50 	 58.06 	 375.06

-QG

 

[kardplayer]

Top 12 with 2 scores only through 3 weeks

Player	         Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreThe Wood	 70.27 	 54.08 		 318.97 chihawk	         64.86 	 62.16 		 318.90 iknowbutiforgot	 65.71 	 58.06 		 313.25 eyyoitsmejerry	 68.06 	 53.76 		 311.70 BG Falcons	 66.15 	 55.00 		 308.45 Aloha Jim	 64.00 	 57.53 		 307.06 Seth Warren	 65.28 	 55.41 		 306.66 2Mannings1Cup	 63.64 	 57.14 		 305.20 TWax21	         65.75 	 53.61 		 304.47 BORNIE	         69.86 	 47.30 		 304.18 BoomBoom	 71.21 	 45.00 		 303.63 TheGrimReaper	 62.50 	 57.35 		 302.20

 

[kardplayer]

Top 12 ("in the money") through 3 weeks

Player	         Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreMatt Vereb	 73.97 	 64.29 	 61.76 	 412.25 magicbench	 72.86 	 65.28 	 56.52 	 405.66 Nepalism	 71.43 	 60.56 	 57.50 	 392.91 JamesFFB	 68.29 	 62.50 	 57.38 	 387.25 Capitalist Pigs	 70.15 	 60.87 	 49.18 	 381.37 Jamais Vu	 67.80 	 62.71 	 52.46 	 381.28 Cubs Suck	 65.31 	 62.63 	 58.00 	 379.19 The Merkins	 64.95 	 61.96 	 60.22 	 378.99 NeGaTiViSm	 69.70 	 61.54 	 43.82 	 376.00 kardplayer	 68.18 	 61.76 	 47.83 	 375.89 QuizGuy66	 64.65 	 62.67 	 56.12 	 375.41 <----- <img src='http://forumimages.footballguys.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/pickles.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':pickle:' />njdevil	         64.00 	 62.50 	 58.06 	 375.06

-QG

Hang on tight - only 13 weeks to go!

 

[pocketducks]

Top 12 ("in the money") through 3 weeks

Player	         Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreMatt Vereb	 73.97 	 64.29 	 61.76 	 412.25 magicbench	 72.86 	 65.28 	 56.52 	 405.66 Nepalism	 71.43 	 60.56 	 57.50 	 392.91 JamesFFB	 68.29 	 62.50 	 57.38 	 387.25 Capitalist Pigs	 70.15 	 60.87 	 49.18 	 381.37 Jamais Vu	 67.80 	 62.71 	 52.46 	 381.28 Cubs Suck	 65.31 	 62.63 	 58.00 	 379.19 The Merkins	 64.95 	 61.96 	 60.22 	 378.99 NeGaTiViSm	 69.70 	 61.54 	 43.82 	 376.00 kardplayer	 68.18 	 61.76 	 47.83 	 375.89 QuizGuy66	 64.65 	 62.67 	 56.12 	 375.41 njdevil	         64.00 	 62.50 	 58.06 	 375.06

Woo hoo! Even after a bad third week. Any ideas on what final overall contest score would get you in the top 12? 400? Maybe higher say 425? For example 408 would be 3x 68% scores while 3x 70% scores would be 420.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Top 12 ("in the money") through 3 weeks

Player	         Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreMatt Vereb	 73.97 	 64.29 	 61.76 	 412.25 magicbench	 72.86 	 65.28 	 56.52 	 405.66 Nepalism	 71.43 	 60.56 	 57.50 	 392.91 JamesFFB	 68.29 	 62.50 	 57.38 	 387.25 Capitalist Pigs	 70.15 	 60.87 	 49.18 	 381.37 Jamais Vu	 67.80 	 62.71 	 52.46 	 381.28 Cubs Suck	 65.31 	 62.63 	 58.00 	 379.19 The Merkins	 64.95 	 61.96 	 60.22 	 378.99 NeGaTiViSm	 69.70 	 61.54 	 43.82 	 376.00 kardplayer	 68.18 	 61.76 	 47.83 	 375.89 QuizGuy66	 64.65 	 62.67 	 56.12 	 375.41 njdevil	         64.00 	 62.50 	 58.06 	 375.06

The scoring format is really interesting. It should make the final weeks exciting I bet a lot of people could make big jumps if things go right. It's also interesting how it makes it more difficult for the top people to improve their score (relative to everyone else).I'll take a guess that the winner will have some sort of mix like 78% 74% 70% which would be a score of 452.-QG

 

[Jayrod]

Top 12 ("in the money") through 3 weeks

Player	         Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreMatt Vereb	 73.97 	 64.29 	 61.76 	 412.25 magicbench	 72.86 	 65.28 	 56.52 	 405.66 Nepalism	 71.43 	 60.56 	 57.50 	 392.91 JamesFFB	 68.29 	 62.50 	 57.38 	 387.25 Capitalist Pigs	 70.15 	 60.87 	 49.18 	 381.37 Jamais Vu	 67.80 	 62.71 	 52.46 	 381.28 Cubs Suck	 65.31 	 62.63 	 58.00 	 379.19 The Merkins	 64.95 	 61.96 	 60.22 	 378.99 NeGaTiViSm	 69.70 	 61.54 	 43.82 	 376.00 kardplayer	 68.18 	 61.76 	 47.83 	 375.89 QuizGuy66	 64.65 	 62.67 	 56.12 	 375.41 njdevil	         64.00 	 62.50 	 58.06 	 375.06

The scoring format is really interesting. It should make the final weeks exciting I bet a lot of people could make big jumps if things go right. It's also interesting how it makes it more difficult for the top people to improve their score (relative to everyone else).I'll take a guess that the winner will have some sort of mix like 78% 74% 70% which would be a score of 452.-QG

I'm thinking there is a lot more luck involved and thus getting three scores over 70 will be nigh impossible.

 

[mvereb]

I think we'll definitely see someone over 430-440. Stay tuned.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

One crazy divergent opinion. The crowd has James Jones ranked 64 spots higher than the expert (dodds).

 

[Warrior]

I won! Do I need to contact someone about the prize?

Anyone?I haven't received any emails and I don't see any instructions for the payouts on the rules page. I also spoke with a previous week's winner and he hasn't received any emails, etc. either.A little clarification from someone involved in this contest would be much appreciated.

 

[apalmer]

I won! Do I need to contact someone about the prize?

Anyone?I haven't received any emails and I don't see any instructions for the payouts on the rules page. I also spoke with a previous week's winner and he hasn't received any emails, etc. either.A little clarification from someone involved in this contest would be much appreciated.

A previous post from Drinen said that winners' email addresses were forwarded to Dodds for payment. FWIW, I haven't heard anything yet from Week 1.

 

[Doug Drinen]

A previous post from Drinen said that winners' email addresses were forwarded to Dodds for payment. FWIW, I haven't heard anything yet from Week 1.

Correct. This is Dodds' domain. I'll ping him again.Sorry for the delay.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Doug, any chance these could be submitted to the post-season group that ranks the rankers? Would be very interested to see how they stack up to Dodds's and other sites' rankings.

 

[Jayrod]

So I did some preliminary analysis on my picks this week and come up with the following results pre Monday night (this was all done by hand, so could be off some):

Sat picks - 14-5-3 = 73.7%

Fri picks - 6-3-3 = 66.7%

Thu picks - 6-6-4 = 50.0%

Wed picks - 4-6-0 = 40.0% (I actually still have Knox to play, but assumed he would beat Deckers -4 yards)

Total - 30-20-10 = 60.0%

60% would be my best week so far. Kevin Kolb cost me 3 losses (didn't realized I picked him so much until I ran these numbers, but I had picked him over Dalton, Painter & Hasselbeck).

 

[kardplayer]

Unofficial of course... I found a glitch in last week's spreadsheet, but think I have it right now.

Top 12 after Week 5Player	Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreMatt Vereb	 73.97 	 64.29 	 61.76 	 412.25 magicbench	 72.86 	 65.28 	 56.52 	 405.66 NeGaTiViSm	 69.70 	 63.33 	 61.54 	 397.30 Mike Lasko	 69.33 	 65.33 	 58.06 	 396.71 Nepalism	 71.43 	 60.56 	 57.50 	 392.91 Crippler450	 71.67 	 59.70 	 54.84 	 389.25 JamesFFB	 68.29 	 62.50 	 59.26 	 389.13 wisertime	 71.23 	 60.00 	 54.93 	 388.62 Mr Pickles	 67.12 	 62.89 	 57.00 	 384.14 kardplayer	 68.18 	 61.76 	 55.22 	 383.28 Capitalist Pigs	 70.15 	 60.87 	 50.00 	 382.19 Jamais Vu	 67.80 	 62.71 	 52.46 	 381.28

 

[kardplayer]

Quick stats:

Played at least 3 weeks 215

Played at least 2 weeks 380

Played at least 1 week 713

At least one 60% week 214

At least two 60% week 34

three 60% weeks 4

 

[Jayrod]

All I know is that I'm really good at picking kickers. 100% this week (4-0-1) and averaging 78.9% since week 2.

Herman's job is in jeopardy.

 

[eaglezzz]

Is there an overall standings anywhere?

 

[mvereb]

A previous post from Drinen said that winners' email addresses were forwarded to Dodds for payment. FWIW, I haven't heard anything yet from Week 1.

Correct. This is Dodds' domain. I'll ping him again.Sorry for the delay.

Doug,I changed my e-mail address on file a few weeks back. Will Dodds have this change? My older e-mail account was deactivated.

 

[JoeSteeler]

Is there an overall standings anywhere?

Was going to ask the same thing

 

[kardplayer]

PM me and I can send the spreadsheet with full standings

 

[kardplayer]

For those that want to estimate their spot:

25th place = 371.37

50th place = 361.57

75th place = 353.81

100th place = 344.82

 

[QuizGuy66]

I'm still at 375.41 as I was turrible this week. Like 48% or something.

-QG

 

[Jayrod]

Top 12 ("in the money") through 3 weeks

Player	         Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreMatt Vereb	 73.97 	 64.29 	 61.76 	 412.25 magicbench	 72.86 	 65.28 	 56.52 	 405.66 Nepalism	 71.43 	 60.56 	 57.50 	 392.91 JamesFFB	 68.29 	 62.50 	 57.38 	 387.25 Capitalist Pigs	 70.15 	 60.87 	 49.18 	 381.37 Jamais Vu	 67.80 	 62.71 	 52.46 	 381.28 Cubs Suck	 65.31 	 62.63 	 58.00 	 379.19 The Merkins	 64.95 	 61.96 	 60.22 	 378.99 NeGaTiViSm	 69.70 	 61.54 	 43.82 	 376.00 kardplayer	 68.18 	 61.76 	 47.83 	 375.89 QuizGuy66	 64.65 	 62.67 	 56.12 	 375.41 njdevil	         64.00 	 62.50 	 58.06 	 375.06

The scoring format is really interesting. It should make the final weeks exciting I bet a lot of people could make big jumps if things go right. It's also interesting how it makes it more difficult for the top people to improve their score (relative to everyone else).I'll take a guess that the winner will have some sort of mix like 78% 74% 70% which would be a score of 452.-QG

I'm thinking there is a lot more luck involved and thus getting three scores over 70 will be nigh impossible.

After week 5 had zero people break 70%, there are a total of 13 scores over 70% in the 4 eligible weeks and no one has done it more than once.I just don't see anyone breaking 70 three times and once is quite a feat.

 

[kardplayer]

I agree - 70 three times is unlikely.

I'm going with an over under of 425 for the champion. That would be 75, 68, 64... difficult, but not impossible. And it's only one person that has to do it.

 

[pocketducks]

I agree - 70 three times is unlikely.I'm going with an over under of 425 for the champion. That would be 75, 68, 64... difficult, but not impossible. And it's only one person that has to do it.

I agree but what do you think the "in the money" cutoff line would be? Something as low as 400 pts? I think 410 should be good enough to make top 12.

 

[kardplayer]

Gut guess is 390-405. That's three 65's.

So far, the median is 54.55, with a standard deviation of 6.14.

Based on that, I'm going to pretend to do math (and really just pull something from the air) and go with 398 - That's 67, 66, 65 - essentially three scores right around two standard deviations from the mean.

Interestingly, as a group we're getting dumber (or the questions are getting harder):

Week	         2	3	4	5Mean	         55.70 	 55.07 	 54.19 	 52.44 Median	         55.41 	 55.42 	 54.00 	 52.78 Standard Dev	 6.25 	 6.17 	 5.89 	 5.79

 

[kardplayer]

Also, nice for the early adopters that they were able to put #'s up early. Will be interesting to see which weeks count for most folks once we've got a few more weeks under our belts.

 

[Novice2]

Unofficial of course... I found a glitch in last week's spreadsheet, but think I have it right now.

Top 12 after Week 5Player	Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreMatt Vereb	 73.97 	 64.29 	 61.76 	 412.25 magicbench	 72.86 	 65.28 	 56.52 	 405.66 NeGaTiViSm	 69.70 	 63.33 	 61.54 	 397.30 Mike Lasko	 69.33 	 65.33 	 58.06 	 396.71 Nepalism	 71.43 	 60.56 	 57.50 	 392.91 Crippler450	 71.67 	 59.70 	 54.84 	 389.25 JamesFFB	 68.29 	 62.50 	 59.26 	 389.13 wisertime	 71.23 	 60.00 	 54.93 	 388.62 Mr Pickles	 67.12 	 62.89 	 57.00 	 384.14 kardplayer	 68.18 	 61.76 	 55.22 	 383.28 Capitalist Pigs	 70.15 	 60.87 	 50.00 	 382.19 Jamais Vu	 67.80 	 62.71 	 52.46 	 381.28

Is there a footballguys link to overall standings or are you doing this on your own?

 

[kardplayer]

Unofficial of course... I found a glitch in last week's spreadsheet, but think I have it right now.

Top 12 after Week 5Player	Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreMatt Vereb	 73.97 	 64.29 	 61.76 	 412.25 magicbench	 72.86 	 65.28 	 56.52 	 405.66 NeGaTiViSm	 69.70 	 63.33 	 61.54 	 397.30 Mike Lasko	 69.33 	 65.33 	 58.06 	 396.71 Nepalism	 71.43 	 60.56 	 57.50 	 392.91 Crippler450	 71.67 	 59.70 	 54.84 	 389.25 JamesFFB	 68.29 	 62.50 	 59.26 	 389.13 wisertime	 71.23 	 60.00 	 54.93 	 388.62 Mr Pickles	 67.12 	 62.89 	 57.00 	 384.14 kardplayer	 68.18 	 61.76 	 55.22 	 383.28 Capitalist Pigs	 70.15 	 60.87 	 50.00 	 382.19 Jamais Vu	 67.80 	 62.71 	 52.46 	 381.28

Is there a footballguys link to overall standings or are you doing this on your own?

On my own.

 

[bro1ncos]

Unofficial of course... I found a glitch in last week's spreadsheet, but think I have it right now.

Top 12 after Week 5Player	Max	2nd Max	3rd Max	ScoreMatt Vereb	 73.97 	 64.29 	 61.76 	 412.25 magicbench	 72.86 	 65.28 	 56.52 	 405.66 NeGaTiViSm	 69.70 	 63.33 	 61.54 	 397.30 Mike Lasko	 69.33 	 65.33 	 58.06 	 396.71 Nepalism	 71.43 	 60.56 	 57.50 	 392.91 Crippler450	 71.67 	 59.70 	 54.84 	 389.25 JamesFFB	 68.29 	 62.50 	 59.26 	 389.13 wisertime	 71.23 	 60.00 	 54.93 	 388.62 Mr Pickles	 67.12 	 62.89 	 57.00 	 384.14 kardplayer	 68.18 	 61.76 	 55.22 	 383.28 Capitalist Pigs	 70.15 	 60.87 	 50.00 	 382.19 Jamais Vu	 67.80 	 62.71 	 52.46 	 381.28

Is there a footballguys link to overall standings or are you doing this on your own?

On my own.

Do you have the full list of standings that you could post? It would be great to see where my 368.32 ranks.

 

[pocketducks]

Do you have the full list of standings that you could post? It would be great to see where my 368.32 ranks.

For those that want to estimate their spot:25th place = 371.3750th place = 361.5775th place = 353.81100th place = 344.82

Between 50-25th place. See above posts by Kardplayer to get spreadsheet. And many thanks to Kardplayer keeping up with the rankings!

 

[JoeSteeler]

Unofficial of course... I found a glitch in last week's spreadsheet, but think I have it right now.

Top 12 after Week 5Player    Max    2nd Max    3rd Max    ScoreMatt Vereb     73.97      64.29      61.76      412.25 magicbench     72.86      65.28      56.52      405.66 NeGaTiViSm     69.70      63.33      61.54      397.30 Mike Lasko     69.33      65.33      58.06      396.71 Nepalism     71.43      60.56      57.50      392.91 Crippler450     71.67      59.70      54.84      389.25 JamesFFB     68.29      62.50      59.26      389.13 wisertime     71.23      60.00      54.93      388.62 Mr Pickles     67.12      62.89      57.00      384.14 kardplayer     68.18      61.76      55.22      383.28 Capitalist Pigs     70.15      60.87      50.00      382.19 Jamais Vu     67.80      62.71      52.46      381.28

Is there a footballguys link to overall standings or are you doing this on your own?

On my own.

Do you have the full list of standings that you could post? It would be great to see where my 368.32 ranks.

see post #224

 

[Modog814]

Gut guess is 390-405. That's three 65's.So far, the median is 54.55, with a standard deviation of 6.14.Based on that, I'm going to pretend to do math (and really just pull something from the air) and go with 398 - That's 67, 66, 65 - essentially three scores right around two standard deviations from the mean.Interestingly, as a group we're getting dumber (or the questions are getting harder):

Week	         2	3	4	5Mean	         55.70 	 55.07 	 54.19 	 52.44 Median	         55.41 	 55.42 	 54.00 	 52.78 Standard Dev	 6.25 	 6.17 	 5.89 	 5.79

If these numbers are correct, theres only a 3.2% of any individual getting 3 scores > 65 (assuming randomness) over the course of the season. Not sure if randomness is a good assumption or not though. Not sure how many people are in this, but you could expect roughly 3 for every 100 to finish with 3 scores above 65. Of course, as we see with the player in 11th place, you don't really need 3 good scores to get into the top 12.

 

[pocketducks]

Gut guess is 390-405. That's three 65's.So far, the median is 54.55, with a standard deviation of 6.14.Based on that, I'm going to pretend to do math (and really just pull something from the air) and go with 398 - That's 67, 66, 65 - essentially three scores right around two standard deviations from the mean.Interestingly, as a group we're getting dumber (or the questions are getting harder):

Week	         2	3	4	5Mean	         55.70 	 55.07 	 54.19 	 52.44 Median	         55.41 	 55.42 	 54.00 	 52.78 Standard Dev	 6.25 	 6.17 	 5.89 	 5.79

If these numbers are correct, theres only a 3.2% of any individual getting 3 scores > 65 (assuming randomness) over the course of the season. Not sure if randomness is a good assumption or not though. Not sure how many people are in this, but you could expect roughly 3 for every 100 to finish with 3 scores above 65. Of course, as we see with the player in 11th place, you don't really need 3 good scores to get into the top 12.

The number of total number of qualifiers the last four weeks: 285, 425, 351, 327 for weeks 2-5 respectively for an average of 347 qualifiers per week. 3.2% of 347 is 11.1 people so that kind of works out. Also interesting to see the number of qualifiers are decreasing the last 3 weeks.

 

[Warrior]

Gut guess is 390-405. That's three 65's.

So far, the median is 54.55, with a standard deviation of 6.14.

Based on that, I'm going to pretend to do math (and really just pull something from the air) and go with 398 - That's 67, 66, 65 - essentially three scores right around two standard deviations from the mean.

Interestingly, as a group we're getting dumber (or the questions are getting harder):

Week 2 3 4 5Mean 55.70 55.07 54.19 52.44 Median 55.41 55.42 54.00 52.78 Standard Dev 6.25 6.17 5.89 5.79

If these numbers are correct, theres only a 3.2% of any individual getting 3 scores > 65 (assuming randomness) over the course of the season. Not sure if randomness is a good assumption or not though. Not sure how many people are in this, but you could expect roughly 3 for every 100 to finish with 3 scores above 65.

Of course, as we see with the player in 11th place, you don't really need 3 good scores to get into the top 12.

The number of total number of qualifiers the last four weeks: 285, 425, 351, 327 for weeks 2-5 respectively for an average of 347 qualifiers per week. 3.2% of 347 is 11.1 people so that kind of works out.



Also interesting to see the number of qualifiers are decreasing the last 3 weeks.

Maybe they have visited this thread and saw that nobody is being contacted or being paid yet when they win the weekly contest Seriously, though...it would be nice to have some sort of clarity. An email, a response to PMs, have it listed somewhere, even a "We'll get back to you"...anything.

I have no doubt they're good for it , it's just a downer when you go from "Woooo! I won a prize!" to ::crickets:: for a few weeks in a row.

 

[Novice2]

Gut guess is 390-405. That's three 65's.

So far, the median is 54.55, with a standard deviation of 6.14.

Based on that, I'm going to pretend to do math (and really just pull something from the air) and go with 398 - That's 67, 66, 65 - essentially three scores right around two standard deviations from the mean.

Interestingly, as a group we're getting dumber (or the questions are getting harder):

Week 2 3 4 5Mean 55.70 55.07 54.19 52.44 Median 55.41 55.42 54.00 52.78 Standard Dev 6.25 6.17 5.89 5.79

If these numbers are correct, theres only a 3.2% of any individual getting 3 scores > 65 (assuming randomness) over the course of the season. Not sure if randomness is a good assumption or not though. Not sure how many people are in this, but you could expect roughly 3 for every 100 to finish with 3 scores above 65.

Of course, as we see with the player in 11th place, you don't really need 3 good scores to get into the top 12.

The number of total number of qualifiers the last four weeks: 285, 425, 351, 327 for weeks 2-5 respectively for an average of 347 qualifiers per week. 3.2% of 347 is 11.1 people so that kind of works out.



Also interesting to see the number of qualifiers are decreasing the last 3 weeks.

Maybe they have visited this thread and saw that nobody is being contacted or being paid yet when they win the weekly contest Seriously, though...it would be nice to have some sort of clarity. An email, a response to PMs, have it listed somewhere, even a "We'll get back to you"...anything.

I have no doubt they're good for it , it's just a downer when you go from "Woooo! I won a prize!" to ::crickets:: for a few weeks in a row.

Really? Wasn't aware that there was a problem with that. That is really messed up.

 

[kardplayer]

Some more data to chew on... Here's the breakdown of when folks qualified (e.g. if it says "2 and 5" that means the player qualified in week 2 and week 5, but not in weeks 3 and 4).

2 only	883 only	1214 only	615 only	622 and 3	372 and 4	82 and 5	73 and 4	393 and 5	244 and 5	472,3,4	322,3,5	232,4,5	153,4,5	74all 4	75

 

[apalmer]

Gut guess is 390-405. That's three 65's.

So far, the median is 54.55, with a standard deviation of 6.14.

Based on that, I'm going to pretend to do math (and really just pull something from the air) and go with 398 - That's 67, 66, 65 - essentially three scores right around two standard deviations from the mean.

Interestingly, as a group we're getting dumber (or the questions are getting harder):

Week 2 3 4 5Mean 55.70 55.07 54.19 52.44 Median 55.41 55.42 54.00 52.78 Standard Dev 6.25 6.17 5.89 5.79

If these numbers are correct, theres only a 3.2% of any individual getting 3 scores > 65 (assuming randomness) over the course of the season. Not sure if randomness is a good assumption or not though. Not sure how many people are in this, but you could expect roughly 3 for every 100 to finish with 3 scores above 65.

Of course, as we see with the player in 11th place, you don't really need 3 good scores to get into the top 12.

The number of total number of qualifiers the last four weeks: 285, 425, 351, 327 for weeks 2-5 respectively for an average of 347 qualifiers per week. 3.2% of 347 is 11.1 people so that kind of works out.



Also interesting to see the number of qualifiers are decreasing the last 3 weeks.

Maybe they have visited this thread and saw that nobody is being contacted or being paid yet when they win the weekly contest Seriously, though...it would be nice to have some sort of clarity. An email, a response to PMs, have it listed somewhere, even a "We'll get back to you"...anything.

I have no doubt they're good for it , it's just a downer when you go from "Woooo! I won a prize!" to ::crickets:: for a few weeks in a row.

Really? Wasn't aware that there was a problem with that. That is really messed up.

It's been taken care of. Got an email from Dodds asking for a mailing address so they can send my Week 1 prize. I'm guessing that getting things ramped up for the first few weeks just delayed things a little.

 

[Warrior]

Gut guess is 390-405. That's three 65's.

So far, the median is 54.55, with a standard deviation of 6.14.

Based on that, I'm going to pretend to do math (and really just pull something from the air) and go with 398 - That's 67, 66, 65 - essentially three scores right around two standard deviations from the mean.

Interestingly, as a group we're getting dumber (or the questions are getting harder):

Week 2 3 4 5Mean 55.70 55.07 54.19 52.44 Median 55.41 55.42 54.00 52.78 Standard Dev 6.25 6.17 5.89 5.79

If these numbers are correct, theres only a 3.2% of any individual getting 3 scores > 65 (assuming randomness) over the course of the season. Not sure if randomness is a good assumption or not though. Not sure how many people are in this, but you could expect roughly 3 for every 100 to finish with 3 scores above 65.

Of course, as we see with the player in 11th place, you don't really need 3 good scores to get into the top 12.

The number of total number of qualifiers the last four weeks: 285, 425, 351, 327 for weeks 2-5 respectively for an average of 347 qualifiers per week. 3.2% of 347 is 11.1 people so that kind of works out.



Also interesting to see the number of qualifiers are decreasing the last 3 weeks.

Maybe they have visited this thread and saw that nobody is being contacted or being paid yet when they win the weekly contest Seriously, though...it would be nice to have some sort of clarity. An email, a response to PMs, have it listed somewhere, even a "We'll get back to you"...anything.

I have no doubt they're good for it , it's just a downer when you go from "Woooo! I won a prize!" to ::crickets:: for a few weeks in a row.

Really? Wasn't aware that there was a problem with that. That is really messed up.

It's been taken care of. Got an email from Dodds asking for a mailing address so they can send my Week 1 prize. I'm guessing that getting things ramped up for the first few weeks just delayed things a little.

Awesome, just got my email as well

 

[Jayrod]

Just a quick PSA, if you are only answering 60 questions, be careful that one of them doesn't involve a player on a bye.

Today I submitted 16 answers, but one of them was disallowed because it included Allen Bradford who was waived by the Bucs this week, then picked up by Seattle who is on a bye. I thought I had been given a free one, but it turned out to be invalid and now I have only made 59 picks this week, not qualifying for the week.

I PM'd Doug asking for a reset, but just thought I'd let everyone know so you can avoid this scenario.

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

It's silly that you can't go back and change any of your picks at any time before Sunday, let alone anytime the same day.

 

[pocketducks]

It's silly that you can't go back and change any of your picks at any time before Sunday, let alone anytime the same day.

I think not being able to change your picks is kind of the point. You have to make a call on a certain player early in the week and you might not know their injury status beforehand. I also think that the questions have been getting harder every week as there is more information and clarity on what role each player will perform for his team. So there is a lot less surprises.

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

It's silly that you can't go back and change any of your picks at any time before Sunday, let alone anytime the same day.

I think not being able to change your picks is kind of the point. You have to make a call on a certain player early in the week and you might not know their injury status beforehand. I also think that the questions have been getting harder every week as there is more information and clarity on what role each player will perform for his team. So there is a lot less surprises.

If I make my picks at 9am and some injury news breaks out, all the people making their picks after me have a huge advantage. It's stupid. At the very least, allow for changes to be made at any time that same day.

 

[QuizGuy66]

It's silly that you can't go back and change any of your picks at any time before Sunday, let alone anytime the same day.

I think not being able to change your picks is kind of the point. You have to make a call on a certain player early in the week and you might not know their injury status beforehand. I also think that the questions have been getting harder every week as there is more information and clarity on what role each player will perform for his team. So there is a lot less surprises.

If I make my picks at 9am and some injury news breaks out, all the people making their picks after me have a huge advantage. It's stupid. At the very least, allow for changes to be made at any time that same day.

As I understand it, there's a tiebreaker advantage to doing picks earlier in the day. But frankly there's ample warning that you've only got one shot per day to hit enter on your picks. I'm liking the contest -QG

 

[Novice2]

Gut guess is 390-405. That's three 65's.

So far, the median is 54.55, with a standard deviation of 6.14.

Based on that, I'm going to pretend to do math (and really just pull something from the air) and go with 398 - That's 67, 66, 65 - essentially three scores right around two standard deviations from the mean.

Interestingly, as a group we're getting dumber (or the questions are getting harder):

Week 2 3 4 5Mean 55.70 55.07 54.19 52.44 Median 55.41 55.42 54.00 52.78 Standard Dev 6.25 6.17 5.89 5.79

If these numbers are correct, theres only a 3.2% of any individual getting 3 scores > 65 (assuming randomness) over the course of the season. Not sure if randomness is a good assumption or not though. Not sure how many people are in this, but you could expect roughly 3 for every 100 to finish with 3 scores above 65.

Of course, as we see with the player in 11th place, you don't really need 3 good scores to get into the top 12.

The number of total number of qualifiers the last four weeks: 285, 425, 351, 327 for weeks 2-5 respectively for an average of 347 qualifiers per week. 3.2% of 347 is 11.1 people so that kind of works out.



Also interesting to see the number of qualifiers are decreasing the last 3 weeks.

Maybe they have visited this thread and saw that nobody is being contacted or being paid yet when they win the weekly contest Seriously, though...it would be nice to have some sort of clarity. An email, a response to PMs, have it listed somewhere, even a "We'll get back to you"...anything.

I have no doubt they're good for it , it's just a downer when you go from "Woooo! I won a prize!" to ::crickets:: for a few weeks in a row.

Really? Wasn't aware that there was a problem with that. That is really messed up.

It's been taken care of. Got an email from Dodds asking for a mailing address so they can send my Week 1 prize. I'm guessing that getting things ramped up for the first few weeks just delayed things a little.

Awesome, just got my email as well

Good to know.

 

[ItsOnlytheRiver]

It's silly that you can't go back and change any of your picks at any time before Sunday, let alone anytime the same day.

I think not being able to change your picks is kind of the point. You have to make a call on a certain player early in the week and you might not know their injury status beforehand. I also think that the questions have been getting harder every week as there is more information and clarity on what role each player will perform for his team. So there is a lot less surprises.

If I make my picks at 9am and some injury news breaks out, all the people making their picks after me have a huge advantage. It's stupid. At the very least, allow for changes to be made at any time that same day.

I get that most of the people who are doing this are in it trying to win the contest, but I think you guys are missing the point (or maybe I am?). The contest is to encourage participation. The true beauty of this thing is the community rankings and the WDIS tool, both of which I love using for a second or third opinion.That's why I think that allowing users to change picks is not a good solution. The data would constantly be changing all the time. I do, however, think that if a player is ruled out before a game any picks made involving that player should be dropped from player's overall score. I wouldn't be surprised to find out a lot of people won't pick a guy who is listed as questionable solely hoping that he'll be out and it's an easy win. This is, again, missing the point of what this project is supposed to be. When I ask a WDIS question I want to know that the info is based solely on IF the player played he would be a better or worse option than someone else. Not information that is muddled because while a lot of people would start Hightower over Delone Carter, they didn't pick him because he might not play.