What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

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

just_want_2_win

Footballguy
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.

 
in one league, we reserve the 6th playoff spot for the team with the highest scoring that didn't win their division or qualify as a wild-card.

in another league, we have team QB's and team kickers. The reasoning for team-QB is that this is such a large part of your ovrall score, if your QB goes down early in a game that's like an automatic loss, and who the hell game-plans around fragile QB's. No one was drafting Kirk Cousins because RGIII is injury prone, like you might with an injury-prone RB. We do team kickers because it's not really worth spending time thinking about kickers.

In this league, we have a pretty significant amount of prize money going to weekly high-score, survivor league, and season-long pick 'em. it's a $100 buy-in, 10 man league so $1000 total prize pool, of that $50 goes to pick 'em winner, $50 goes to survivor winner, and $10 each week goes to high-score ($140 total there) - that's roughly 1/4 of the overall prize pool that really has nothing to do with head to head match-ups.

 
in one league, we reserve the 6th playoff spot for the team with the highest scoring that didn't win their division or qualify as a wild-card.

in another league, we have team QB's and team kickers. The reasoning for team-QB is that this is such a large part of your ovrall score, if your QB goes down early in a game that's like an automatic loss, and who the hell game-plans around fragile QB's. No one was drafting Kirk Cousins because RGIII is injury prone, like you might with an injury-prone RB. We do team kickers because it's not really worth spending time thinking about kickers.

In this league, we have a pretty significant amount of prize money going to weekly high-score, survivor league, and season-long pick 'em. it's a $100 buy-in, 10 man league so $1000 total prize pool, of that $50 goes to pick 'em winner, $50 goes to survivor winner, and $10 each week goes to high-score ($140 total there) - that's roughly 1/4 of the overall prize pool that really has nothing to do with head to head match-ups.
If you have divisions, why do you bother with something like that?

 
Doubleheaders.
This is probably the answer, if you're looking to preserve the rivalries and trash talk that comes along with H2H matchups. I totally understand, because even though rationally I know they should be "better" options, victory points, all-play, and total points leagues just feel too sterile for me.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
in one league, we reserve the 6th playoff spot for the team with the highest scoring that didn't win their division or qualify as a wild-card.

in another league, we have team QB's and team kickers. The reasoning for team-QB is that this is such a large part of your ovrall score, if your QB goes down early in a game that's like an automatic loss, and who the hell game-plans around fragile QB's. No one was drafting Kirk Cousins because RGIII is injury prone, like you might with an injury-prone RB. We do team kickers because it's not really worth spending time thinking about kickers.

In this league, we have a pretty significant amount of prize money going to weekly high-score, survivor league, and season-long pick 'em. it's a $100 buy-in, 10 man league so $1000 total prize pool, of that $50 goes to pick 'em winner, $50 goes to survivor winner, and $10 each week goes to high-score ($140 total there) - that's roughly 1/4 of the overall prize pool that really has nothing to do with head to head match-ups.
If you have divisions, why do you bother with something like that?
do you mean final wild-card for high score?That's how I'm making the playoffs in that league. I'm 4-8 headed into this week, but have 4th highest scoring in the league, only a few points out of 3rd. My average opponent would be the 2nd highest scoring team in the league - I've managed to play the league high score 4x over the past 12 weeks.

This is a 12-team, three division league with 3 wild-card teams that is at least a decade old populated with mostly FBG's.

 
in one league, we reserve the 6th playoff spot for the team with the highest scoring that didn't win their division or qualify as a wild-card.

in another league, we have team QB's and team kickers. The reasoning for team-QB is that this is such a large part of your ovrall score, if your QB goes down early in a game that's like an automatic loss, and who the hell game-plans around fragile QB's. No one was drafting Kirk Cousins because RGIII is injury prone, like you might with an injury-prone RB. We do team kickers because it's not really worth spending time thinking about kickers.

In this league, we have a pretty significant amount of prize money going to weekly high-score, survivor league, and season-long pick 'em. it's a $100 buy-in, 10 man league so $1000 total prize pool, of that $50 goes to pick 'em winner, $50 goes to survivor winner, and $10 each week goes to high-score ($140 total there) - that's roughly 1/4 of the overall prize pool that really has nothing to do with head to head match-ups.
If you have divisions, why do you bother with something like that?
do you mean final wild-card for high score?That's how I'm making the playoffs in that league. I'm 4-8 headed into this week, but have 4th highest scoring in the league, only a few points out of 3rd. My average opponent would be the 2nd highest scoring team in the league - I've managed to play the league high score 4x over the past 12 weeks.

This is a 12-team, three division league with 3 wild-card teams that is at least a decade old populated with mostly FBG's.
Yeah. It seems to me like having divisions makes things more arbitrary in the first place and then you go back to try to balance it out more.

I play in 2 HtH leagues, 1 with divisions and I don't like either. Trying to move for changes in at least 1 (all-play). 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.

 
in one league, we reserve the 6th playoff spot for the team with the highest scoring that didn't win their division or qualify as a wild-card.

in another league, we have team QB's and team kickers. The reasoning for team-QB is that this is such a large part of your ovrall score, if your QB goes down early in a game that's like an automatic loss, and who the hell game-plans around fragile QB's. No one was drafting Kirk Cousins because RGIII is injury prone, like you might with an injury-prone RB. We do team kickers because it's not really worth spending time thinking about kickers.

In this league, we have a pretty significant amount of prize money going to weekly high-score, survivor league, and season-long pick 'em. it's a $100 buy-in, 10 man league so $1000 total prize pool, of that $50 goes to pick 'em winner, $50 goes to survivor winner, and $10 each week goes to high-score ($140 total there) - that's roughly 1/4 of the overall prize pool that really has nothing to do with head to head match-ups.
If you have divisions, why do you bother with something like that?
do you mean final wild-card for high score?That's how I'm making the playoffs in that league. I'm 4-8 headed into this week, but have 4th highest scoring in the league, only a few points out of 3rd. My average opponent would be the 2nd highest scoring team in the league - I've managed to play the league high score 4x over the past 12 weeks.

This is a 12-team, three division league with 3 wild-card teams that is at least a decade old populated with mostly FBG's.
Yeah. It seems to me like having divisions makes things more arbitrary in the first place and then you go back to try to balance it out more.

I play in 2 HtH leagues, 1 with divisions and I don't like either. Trying to move for changes in at least 1 (all-play). 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.
You need to get out of Fantasy football then.

I play in a league or two with doubleheaders, an all-play system for playoffs, awarding the final playoff spot to the team with the most points among the remaining teams, victory points during the playoffs...basically, everything that has been mentioned in this thread as a good thing, I have all wrapped up in one league and they are BY FAR the best leagues I am in in regards to minimalizing luck.

HOWEVER, even with all that plus rewarding the top seeds with advantages and things, you still can't analyze and prepare your way to a title because no matter how much you know and drop and add and "play the matchups", there really isn't anything you can do when your stud that got you there sits in the title game or some random DE has four sacks in an IDP league or a kicker kicks 5 FGs, or that one day that Daniel Thomas scores 3 tds...

It is a crap shoot, AT BEST.

 
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.

 
Yeah Dumb Luck sucks in the playoffs - people who just sneak in can afford to take a swing for the fence.

Personally what I am gong to do is make sure I have a little "crazy" in my lineup to counter my opponent's "crazy"

I feel the rest of my lineup is pretty strong that I can take a chance at my flex or WR3

 
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 . . . .?

 
Victory Points = ??
We get 2 points for winning your H2H match and then the top 4 scoring teams get 2 more points, the middle 4 teams get 1 point and the lowest 4 scoring teams in the week get 0 points. So in any given week you could get 0-4 points. Right now we have a team that is 6-6 that is ahead of a team that is 7-5 due to VP's. He has scored about 100 more points and has had about 100 more against him. This is our first year trying VP's and we love it.

 
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 . . . .?
Fixed.

 
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 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?

 
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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
in one league, we reserve the 6th playoff spot for the team with the highest scoring that didn't win their division or qualify as a wild-card.

in another league, we have team QB's and team kickers. The reasoning for team-QB is that this is such a large part of your ovrall score, if your QB goes down early in a game that's like an automatic loss, and who the hell game-plans around fragile QB's. No one was drafting Kirk Cousins because RGIII is injury prone, like you might with an injury-prone RB. We do team kickers because it's not really worth spending time thinking about kickers.

In this league, we have a pretty significant amount of prize money going to weekly high-score, survivor league, and season-long pick 'em. it's a $100 buy-in, 10 man league so $1000 total prize pool, of that $50 goes to pick 'em winner, $50 goes to survivor winner, and $10 each week goes to high-score ($140 total there) - that's roughly 1/4 of the overall prize pool that really has nothing to do with head to head match-ups.
If you have divisions, why do you bother with something like that?
do you mean final wild-card for high score?That's how I'm making the playoffs in that league. I'm 4-8 headed into this week, but have 4th highest scoring in the league, only a few points out of 3rd. My average opponent would be the 2nd highest scoring team in the league - I've managed to play the league high score 4x over the past 12 weeks.

This is a 12-team, three division league with 3 wild-card teams that is at least a decade old populated with mostly FBG's.
Yeah. It seems to me like having divisions makes things more arbitrary in the first place and then you go back to try to balance it out more.

I play in 2 HtH leagues, 1 with divisions and I don't like either. Trying to move for changes in at least 1 (all-play). 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.
You need to get out of Fantasy football then.

I play in a league or two with doubleheaders, an all-play system for playoffs, awarding the final playoff spot to the team with the most points among the remaining teams, victory points during the playoffs...basically, everything that has been mentioned in this thread as a good thing, I have all wrapped up in one league and they are BY FAR the best leagues I am in in regards to minimalizing luck.

HOWEVER, even with all that plus rewarding the top seeds with advantages and things, you still can't analyze and prepare your way to a title because no matter how much you know and drop and add and "play the matchups", there really isn't anything you can do when your stud that got you there sits in the title game or some random DE has four sacks in an IDP league or a kicker kicks 5 FGs, or that one day that Daniel Thomas scores 3 tds...

It is a crap shoot, AT BEST.
As I said, there is of course still a lot luck involved. Especially on a week-to-week basis.

That's why I said "as best as possible". I want to minimize luck as much as possible. I don't think that it is a crapshoot. I think that you can get to like 60% skill maybe. That's what Dodds and the other top prognosticators seem to hit. If you want to say that that is just random as well, then ok, but I don't know that I believe that.

 
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.

 
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.

 
1. Victory points.

2. Play multiple teams per week (we play three games a week in our local league).

The advantage of both of those systems is the ability to get multiple wins or vic points every week, so most teams are still in it for most of the season.

 
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 one of my leagues, we start 2RB, 3WR and 2Flx. This format ends up favoring the teams with the most depth and the managers that are super active on the WW. In most matchups, at least one of the staters will have a dud performance but you can still win that week if your other starters play well. I don't think that this minimizes luck. Between bye week players and injuries, this turns out to be a "start 'em if you got 'em" situation. Very few lineup decisions each week.

In another league, we start 1RB 1WR and 2Flx. This league is a lot easier to draft in and easier to maintain your roster, but the weekly line up decisions become very difficult and there is a lot of importance to start the right player. Each week, I have to decide between players like VJax or Andre Brown? Woodhead or Keenan Allen?

 
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.

 
in one league, we reserve the 6th playoff spot for the team with the highest scoring that didn't win their division or qualify as a wild-card.

in another league, we have team QB's and team kickers. The reasoning for team-QB is that this is such a large part of your ovrall score, if your QB goes down early in a game that's like an automatic loss, and who the hell game-plans around fragile QB's. No one was drafting Kirk Cousins because RGIII is injury prone, like you might with an injury-prone RB. We do team kickers because it's not really worth spending time thinking about kickers.

In this league, we have a pretty significant amount of prize money going to weekly high-score, survivor league, and season-long pick 'em. it's a $100 buy-in, 10 man league so $1000 total prize pool, of that $50 goes to pick 'em winner, $50 goes to survivor winner, and $10 each week goes to high-score ($140 total there) - that's roughly 1/4 of the overall prize pool that really has nothing to do with head to head match-ups.
If you have divisions, why do you bother with something like that?
do you mean final wild-card for high score?That's how I'm making the playoffs in that league. I'm 4-8 headed into this week, but have 4th highest scoring in the league, only a few points out of 3rd. My average opponent would be the 2nd highest scoring team in the league - I've managed to play the league high score 4x over the past 12 weeks.

This is a 12-team, three division league with 3 wild-card teams that is at least a decade old populated with mostly FBG's.
Yeah. It seems to me like having divisions makes things more arbitrary in the first place and then you go back to try to balance it out more.

I play in 2 HtH leagues, 1 with divisions and I don't like either. Trying to move for changes in at least 1 (all-play). 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.
You need to get out of Fantasy football then.

I play in a league or two with doubleheaders, an all-play system for playoffs, awarding the final playoff spot to the team with the most points among the remaining teams, victory points during the playoffs...basically, everything that has been mentioned in this thread as a good thing, I have all wrapped up in one league and they are BY FAR the best leagues I am in in regards to minimalizing luck.

HOWEVER, even with all that plus rewarding the top seeds with advantages and things, you still can't analyze and prepare your way to a title because no matter how much you know and drop and add and "play the matchups", there really isn't anything you can do when your stud that got you there sits in the title game or some random DE has four sacks in an IDP league or a kicker kicks 5 FGs, or that one day that Daniel Thomas scores 3 tds...

It is a crap shoot, AT BEST.
As I said, there is of course still a lot luck involved. Especially on a week-to-week basis.

That's why I said "as best as possible". I want to minimize luck as much as possible. I don't think that it is a crapshoot. I think that you can get to like 60% skill maybe. That's what Dodds and the other top prognosticators seem to hit. If you want to say that that is just random as well, then ok, but I don't know that I believe that.
I won't argue with your intention but for a hobby/interest that tends to command so much time from people (especially people who would actually take the time to post and respond on a topic like this), 60% skill is woefully unacceptable in eliminating luck. When I am talking in terms of eliminating luck, I am talking about "once in a blue moon silliness pops its head up", not every week people literally have a story to tell which tends to be the case all the time.

I wish it was based on the abilities of the people playing and that, if i won a league, i could proudly pat myself on the back, eat a cookie, and crank up queen's "We are the champions" but i've played this game long enough to know that the reality is "I was better than about 2/3rds of my league in being able to get into the playoffs and I drew the good straw this time. It's simply nothing more than that. I've had and heard of too many dominant teams that fell flat and too many so-so teams that pulled a rabbit out of its hat and won to think otherwise.

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

 
We give the last playoff spot to the team otherwise missing the playoffs but with best all-play record.

 
What's the best free site that offers double headers? This option has intrigued me for awhile but my leagues are all on Yahoo and ESPN which don't offer this.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Extra points if the team your player plays for wins.

Adds a whole different element to your picks and lineup submissions.

 
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.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
None. It's bad luck and that's what is both fun (and annoying) with H2H. If you want the "best team" to win, then you'll need a different league format (play all format, etc).

The only thing I can think of is that you can (1) start and bench 1-2 players on the other person's roster and (2) maybe X amount of players are considered "unbenchable." EXAMPLE: So before the week starts I'd list X amount of players (maybe 75% of the roster that cannot be benched, and the other 25% is benchable by your opponent). This would then require you to have a backup and be able to start someone else to replace a player on your roster that was benched by your opponent.

This would make it "feel" like you are responsible for your outcome and it would require teams to be have depth (to replace the player that your opponent benched).

Another example would be where your opponent would select the 1-2 players (of the "nonbenchables") and you'd only count 80% (random, pick whatever you'd like) of their points scored. So, if I selected your WR #3 as the affected player and he got 20pts, then he'd only really get 16 pts. As a result, before the game, I could choose to start my "affected" WR #3 or start a bench player who would offer me 100% of his points scored. Adds a different dimension.

However, these two examples do not eliminate bad luck, but it feels like you were more involved in your opponent's roster, and thus played defense.

Hey, you did say "clever." ;) .

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've noticed that because of the way the football is shaped, when there is a fumble, the ball can bounce any which way, and the team that comes up with it does so as a matter of luck. Isn't there a way to shape the ball so that the bounce is truer, and to make it sticky so that the first person to touch the ball gets to keep it?

 
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.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
:confused: That's exactly what victory points are.

 
head to head is fun so we play that all season. 2 wild cards are given based on points and then the playoffs are 2 weeks, all-play and everyone starts with 25% of their season-long point total. a good compromise between the luck and thrills of the head-to-head system and the fairness/boringness of the total points system. makes those final 2 weeks extremely exciting

 
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.
:confused: 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.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Extra points if the team your player plays for wins.

Adds a whole different element to your picks and lineup submissions.
How does that mitigate luck?
Doesn't take much luck in guessing who would win out of Seattle and Jacksonville, does it?
How does that mitigate luck among head-to-head matchups?
Are you on loop right now?
You don't know the answer to his question.

 
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.
:confused: 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.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
in one league, we reserve the 6th playoff spot for the team with the highest scoring that didn't win their division or qualify as a wild-card.
I'm in a league that does this, except it's all-play, not total points. I love it. It's basically a playoff spot reserved for a "hard luck" team.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top