This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I concur.Which is better???1. 90% chance making the bowl, 1% chance winning?My strategy is I don't understand how to win the contestI just picked the four teams I thought had the best shot at winning the Super Bowl and went with that. Am I correct that the only way to win this is to pick two teams and heavily load up on those players? This seems counterintuitive since your odds of even making the finals would be slim.
2. 10% chance making the bowl, 90% chance winning?
Thank you. Very interesting.I only had 7 players scoring this weekend so I should consider myself lucky. It's obvious that well over 2/3's of the entries still have no clue how this contest works. I guess since 5 of my 7 were QBs I did gain some advantage, but I'll probably target 8 scores in round 2 next year.
Not sure if you'll be able to do this, but when this contest is over, it would be interesting to see where the top 10 fall on these two charts.
I'm 100068 for $161, but no Gronk kills that...this weekend coulda been super exciting if Gronk hadn't gotten re-injured.
Feel for you JB. I was strongly considering Gronk but honestly felt it was too soon and too easy to injure that arm again and went with Hernandez. I am 101136 and also hoping for a NE-SF bowl to make my day interesting. Still plenty of ball left here and keeping my fingers crossed.'JB Breakfast Club said:
I've had days like this too.
Damn mobile postings!! Good catch...
118 for me. One player going next week.
Ummm...why would it matter?
Are you trying to be sarcastic? Last year's Week 3 cutoff was 66.5 pts, so my score, while seemingly low, is in the realm of possibility.
PLAYERS ENTRIES13 112 011 110 09 28 27 76 215 444 1233 2042 3241 1980 78
Ig, I scored about 124 this week and have no players in the SB. Team 102268
Oops, my query dropped off all the teams with 0 players in the SB. You're actally one of 78 teams in that boat. I'll edit the post, thanks for the heads up.
Great info here. With only 6 guys going myself, I could see myself jumping over some of these teams with 7 and 8 players.
No. If your score was that low this week, you aren't carrying enough players for next week to matter.
I'm assuming this is his entry (it's the only one I have that was still alive in week 3 and scored exactly 50.9 points). If that's right, then yeah, with only three players going he wouldn't have much of a shot in the finals. At the very least he'd be out of the running for the grand prize since 101016 has all three of those players plus ten others.
PLAYERS ENTRIES13 112 011 110 09 28 27 56 125 134 303 102 01 00 0TOT 76Survival rate by number of kickers:Good points/$, like I stated in the quote you posted, but they still don't have enough upside to count for the SuperBowl teams that you choose 5-6 players from. Maybe a 1% chance Prater scores enough to be counted over Thomas, Decker, Manning, Moreno, etc. in the first few weeks, which makes him (along with other kickers) a waste for the most part.Disagree.Kickers offer the best pts per $ spent.Graham was the 3rd leading scorer on his team tonite topping the QB and AJ. Brown was a push with Green and beat out everyone else. These FBG contests use such roided up scoring for kickersTo me this is the 18-20 man rosters in the regular season contest. Sure, the PK and DEF in the SB will help, but they are so expensive that you're giving up too much to get there.
PK ALL ALIVE SURV0 1590 470 29.6%1 1178 221 18.8%2 1848 257 13.9%3 298 43 14.4%4 60 8 13.3%5 16 4 25.0%6 13 1 7.7%7 3 1 33.3%8 1 0 0.0%9 1 0 0.0%10 0 0 0.0%11 4 0 0.0%TOT 5012 1005 20.1%
Survival rate by number of kickers:Good points/$, like I stated in the quote you posted, but they still don't have enough upside to count for the SuperBowl teams that you choose 5-6 players from. Maybe a 1% chance Prater scores enough to be counted over Thomas, Decker, Manning, Moreno, etc. in the first few weeks, which makes him (along with other kickers) a waste for the most part.Disagree.Kickers offer the best pts per $ spent.Graham was the 3rd leading scorer on his team tonite topping the QB and AJ. Brown was a push with Green and beat out everyone else. These FBG contests use such roided up scoring for kickersCode:PK ALL ALIVE SURV0 1590 470 29.6%1 1178 221 18.8%2 1848 257 13.9%3 298 43 14.4%4 60 8 13.3%5 16 4 25.0%6 13 1 7.7%7 3 1 33.3%8 1 0 0.0%9 1 0 0.0%10 0 0 0.0%11 4 0 0.0%TOT 5012 1005 20.1%
Someone didn't read the rules.
Why do you say that?
It seems the discrepancy is in some of the defensive scoring. For example, I have the 49ers defense with 3 points (1 sack and 1 INT), while FBG has them getting 5 points. Am I missing something? Anyone want to double-check my work to see if I'm missing 2 points the 49ers defense should be credited with?If it turns out I'm right and FBG scoring is off, there are seven teams that are currently alive that should have been eliminated this week, and 12 teams that were eliminated this week that should still be alive. Almost all of them have no shot at the money anyway, so it probably doesn't matter, although with six players in the Super Bowl this guy may like to have the cutline corrected. I don't care enough to email the staff but if you just missed the cut this week you may want to ask them to verify the defensive scoring.
I don't think they have anything like that. I built my own database of all the entries to look up stuff like that.
You think that lineup ever had more than a 0.01% chance of finishing in the money?
Probably not, but at this point that's more personal philosophy than hard fact. He'd have seven players going in a DEN-GB Super Bowl. Probably not enough but it doesn't suggest to me that he didn't understand the rules. On the contrary, having no more than two players from all of the other teams suggests he understood the rules just fine, he just had a different opinion of what it would take to finish in the money, and/or a different risk tolerance or goal altogether. There are clearly a lot of entrants that misunderstand the rules but this doesn't look like one of them.'BassNBrew said:
Disclaimer: In general it's a tricky question to ask, "If I would have survived week 1..." What do you mean? Like, if Ray Rice would've scored one or two more points? Well, in that case, everyone else with Ray Rice would've also gotten one or two more points, which might've changed the cutline, would've allowed other teams to also survive week 1, which would've potentially changed the cutline for subsequent weeks, etc. So no sense losing sleep over it, as it's somewhat a bit of the "fallacy of the predetermined outcome," as Michael Kay likes to say. If you had survived week 1, things might not have turned out the way they are now. But yes, you would've easily survived weeks 2 and 3 and with 12 players going in the Super Bowl, you'd have the second-most active players out of all the live entries, including both QBs and several of the other top-producing players on each team. You'd have a very good chance of finishing high in the money if you could magically erase the fact that you were eliminated two weeks ago. But that's the whole trick to the contest. If it wasn't so hard to survive the first three weeks, then your competition in the finals would likely be much tougher. You take the good with the bad.
Interestingly enough, had the erroneous cutline that was originally posted stayed in effect, this entry would have squeaked through, I think. But counting on 3 guys in week 1 just doesn't seem like enough to survive and advance. But it was close!
It's definately one of the top two teams in Iggy's list above. One had Jones and Q the other Raven D and VD.
I finished 77th out of 5001.For TRR, for those of you who know my body of work, that is a guldarn BAGOOOOSH!!!!!!!LOOK WHAT I CAN DO!!!!!!PeaceIt's definately one of the top two teams in Iggy's list above. One had Jones and Q the other Raven D and VD.
Surprise, surprise...the top two ran away with it. Also, if the second place team had selected Akers over any of SF D, Rice, or T. Smith they when this contest.
Updated to include where they finished in the finals. Team 102250 came in 8th place with 6 players, and 102368 came in 10th place, also with 6 players. Team 104767 would've won in the finals if he hadn't been eliminated in week 2.
He would've scored 166.85 in the Super Bowl, good for 3rd place, if he hadn't been booted week 1.
I think he meant that if that guy fully understood the rules then he'd have used a different strategy. So he either didn't understand the rules or is just an awful strategist.
Shhh. This will get much tougher if people take note of this advice. Right now you pretty much only have to fairly accurately fill out a playoff bracket, pick 2 players each from 2-3 teams you predict to advance but not to the super bowl, and pick a lot of players from the super bowl teams. If everyone adopts this then you'll actually have to get lucky with who you pick in the super bowl, whereas this time the guy with the most players won and the guy with the second most got 2nd place. I actually just thought about this contest and wanted to confirm that a Baltimore homer won. I didn't figure anyone else would've selected more than 2, maybe 3 Ravens. And in this case this guy had to get pretty lucky in week 2 to make it to the finals. I feel like you need 8-10 guys in week 2 (week 19) to have a realistic shot at advancing. If you're only rolling 6-7 then you are pretty much banking on a Kaepernick-like performance to get you through. Not a necessary risk if you successfully predict the super bowl teams.
How is he an "awful strategist?" He had seven players in a DEN-GB Super Bowl. Half of the teams that finished in the money this year had seven or fewer players on the Super Bowl teams. I fail to see any indication that the guy being discussed didn't understand the rules or employed an awful strategy.
Not sure if that applies. Five might have won under a Cinny/Min Super Bowl. Seven or fewer wouldn't have finished in the money if GB/DEN had gone IMO. I'd be interested in the numbers if you want to crunch them.
Seven wouldn't have been enough in a DEN-GB Super Bowl, but I only know that because I know how many entries there are, how many of them took players from DEN and GB, etc. Prior to week one I couldn't know that - as it was I grossly overestimated the total number of entries I expected to be in the contest. In any case, I already said that I personally wouldn't construct my team like he did, but this idea that he either didn't know the rules or employed a terrible strategy is ridiculous. He obviously understood the rules, and while I personally agree with you that seven SB players is too low to win, it's not like that's some proven fact.
