League Rules that minimize luck and maximize skill (1 Viewer)

[Dr. No]

If I hypothetically wanted to create a league that absolutely minimized the luck factor and that was my ONLY goal, what kind of rules would you have?

some of my thoughts

1) I think it would need to be auction not draft, blind bid on the waivers

2) No Trades allowed

3) no head-to-head matchups - roto style only. No playoffs, winner take all in a points only format

4) 12 team league. More thins the talent, less makes teams too stacked.

5) fairly deep starting lineups. 1 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE (1 flex), 1 K, 1 Def.

6) minimized points for touchdowns. We'd need to devalue touchdowns since they are a more random act... too many times there's a goal line specialist RB, or a WR gets it down to the 5 after a big catch and then some RB comes in and scoops the TD.

Maybe like 2 pt. Passing TD's and 4 point Rushing/Receiving TD's

Can't think of anything else right now. Obviously injuries and performance/human issues will keep things from being completely skill based, but this should minimize things.

Now, sure, not very many people are going to actually want to play in this league, but I'm just hypothetically trying to create the ultimate skill contest.

 

[Touchdown Syndrome]

#3 would be the biggest factor, imo.

H2H doesn't result in the best, most well-managed team being the winner.

I'm sure we all have tales of a high-scoring, superior team missing out on the playoffs because of a fluky, unlucky schedule.

 

[Ace08]

By simply eliminating playoffs.....you are removing a large amount of the "luck" factor. There are merits to all the points you listed above but I think like everything else in life you want to find some balance between "fun" and accuracy.

What I have done in all 4 of my leagues is keep the head to head aspect but eliminate playoffs. Best record wins the league. I also give out prizes for highest scoring team as well as a small pot (like $50 a week) for the highest scoring individual team for each week down the stretch...this keeps teams that are out of the running for first interested in their teams with something to shoot for.

One more thing we do.....we stop the league in week 16. Week 17 is usually garbage in real life NFL by this time due to all the clinching scenarios going on with respect to the playoffs.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

total points league can be quite boring.

H2H match ups and playoffs are alot of the fun.

I would say eliminate setting lineups and go bestball.

 

[BroadwayG]

The California Hold'Em of fantasy? Hmmmm....

 

[Touchdown Syndrome]

total points league can be quite boring.H2H match ups and playoffs are alot of the fun. I would say eliminate setting lineups and go bestball.

Right on.This is why, despite the enormous luck factor in the typical H@H+playoffs league, my longtime keeper league will never change the format.H2H is fun and keeps everyone's competitive juices flowing from week to week.In 9 years Ive been the high-scorer 5 times...yet I have 1 championship to show for it. I'm like the damn Colts of the league, but everyone always has fun.

 

[renesauz]

2 K and 2 DST in a 12 teamer with no trades is inherantly unfair.

 

[TheWick]

head to head with VICTORY POINTS is the only way to go

 

[JHuber77]

umm, Salary Cap Football?

 

[OnThInIcE911]

Forced to start 2 TE's.... Sounds like a lot of luck trying to find a 2nd TE worth starting every week.

 

[Dr. No]

ok - good point

I'll eliminate the 2K, 2 TE

Go back to 1.

Any other modifications that would put an absolute ceiling on skill

 

[Dr. No]

total points league can be quite boring.H2H match ups and playoffs are alot of the fun. I would say eliminate setting lineups and go bestball.

Right, I established in the post that total points is completely boring.our goal isn't to make an interesting league, or one anyone would want to play in, merely the one where the most knowledgeable player/hardest worker would most often be rewarded with a high finish.And realistically the bottom 3-4 teams probably would quit submitting a lineup after week 10 or so because they would be so far out of it, so that sucks too, but there's always a terrible 2 or 3 teams within the H2H format that essentially quit after week 10 also.

 

[dmac37]

head to head with VICTORY POINTS is the only way to go

ThisI created a league that has the following settings:HTH Victory Points- score between 0-8 points per week depending on wins and total points each weekDoubleheaders- helps reward the high scoring teams getting a least one win for the weekAuctionBlind BidNo playoffsNo trades- too many teams luck out raping another team1QB, 2RB, 2WR, 1TE, 1PK, 1DST, 2 flex RB,WR,TE- this gives more roster flexibilityDecimal Scoring$$$ to the top 3 teams after 16 weeksI would like to eliminate the PK (pure luck) but was voted downOne rule I would also try to implement is the ability to have 1 bench player replace 1 starting player to award a team with a good bench- good GM but bad starting lineup coach

 

[shader]

Total points, no playoffs, bestball, and 4 point TD's are the four things that really mitigate the luck factor to a large degree.

 

[ImTheScientist]

League Rules that minimize luck and maximize skill, create a league that would have the least luck.

See the NFFC.

 

[Jason Wood]

Head to head and playoffs are certainly where luck comes into play, but then again it's also those factors which best reflect the spirit of competition analogous to the underlying sport.

 

[zoobird]

League Rules that minimize luck and maximize skill, create a league that would have the least luck.

See the NFFC.

That's far from a 'no luck' format.As some people in here have said, salary cap + total points formats reduce luck to a great degree. The impact is so great that in baseball, with daily transactions, the better player will win about 99% of the time. If you don't believe me, look at the ESPN Baseball Challenge - the same guy comes in 1st or 2nd out of 50,000+ people every year. The impact in football isn't as great because the season is shorter, but it still leads to the better player winning the vast majority of the time.Deeper rosters and a accurate player pricing (for the salary cap) will reduce luck still further.

 

[Mr. Mojo]

1. Total points

Head to head is fun for rivalries but having the whole season come down to 1-2 weeks is silly. At the end of a total points league, the best team is on top.

2. Start more players (2 QBs, 3 RBs and 3 WRs)

Almost anyone can pick the stars but choosing a 3rd tier RB or WR takes more research and skill.

 

[andrew11]

Man...I'll take my "luck" league and at at least have fun with it. This league sounds boring as hell. The best part of FF is having fun each week. not knowing i'm the most knowledable FF player in the league. And of course there is no way to 100% eliminate luck...so why even try.

keep it simple and fun.

 

[Dr. No]

head to head with VICTORY POINTS is the only way to go

ThisI created a league that has the following settings:HTH Victory Points- score between 0-8 points per week depending on wins and total points each weekDoubleheaders- helps reward the high scoring teams getting a least one win for the weekAuctionBlind BidNo playoffsNo trades- too many teams luck out raping another team1QB, 2RB, 2WR, 1TE, 1PK, 1DST, 2 flex RB,WR,TE- this gives more roster flexibilityDecimal Scoring$$$ to the top 3 teams after 16 weeksI would like to eliminate the PK (pure luck) but was voted downOne rule I would also try to implement is the ability to have 1 bench player replace 1 starting player to award a team with a good bench- good GM but bad starting lineup coach

interesting thoughts on roster flexibility.and eliminating kicker is probably a good choice.maybe 1 QB, 1 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE - 3 flex at any spots but max 3 RB's or 4 WR's or 3 TE

 

[dmac37]

head to head with VICTORY POINTS is the only way to go

ThisI created a league that has the following settings:HTH Victory Points- score between 0-8 points per week depending on wins and total points each weekDoubleheaders- helps reward the high scoring teams getting a least one win for the weekAuctionBlind BidNo playoffsNo trades- too many teams luck out raping another team1QB, 2RB, 2WR, 1TE, 1PK, 1DST, 2 flex RB,WR,TE- this gives more roster flexibilityDecimal Scoring$$$ to the top 3 teams after 16 weeksI would like to eliminate the PK (pure luck) but was voted downOne rule I would also try to implement is the ability to have 1 bench player replace 1 starting player to award a team with a good bench- good GM but bad starting lineup coach

interesting thoughts on roster flexibility.and eliminating kicker is probably a good choice.maybe 1 QB, 1 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE - 3 flex at any spots but max 3 RB's or 4 WR's or 3 TE

I should have specified- max 3RB, 4WR, 2TEMain issue for me is the option to have 3RB, 2WR, 2TE another league allows 2TE but you must still have 3WR, never understood this

 

[RushHour]

I kind of like the total points idea, but the suggestion of no trades? First of all, trading is one of the most fun things about fantasy sports, and also, there is usually plenty of skill involved in constructing and negotiating a deal.

 

[AcerFC]

Dot

 

[Dr. No]

I kind of like the total points idea, but the suggestion of no trades? First of all, trading is one of the most fun things about fantasy sports, and also, there is usually plenty of skill involved in constructing and negotiating a deal.

Son, we're not here to have fun, we're here to determine a champion by total skill and luck minimization.And trades, however skillful they may be, open the door for collusion, especially in a league where after about 1/2 the season or less there's going to be some teams virtually out of it.Luck will still play a role.. a big role due to injury and the inconsistencies in players.

 

[Dr. No]

What do you guys think about drafting a Team's running game rather than individual RB's?

We'd have to recalibrate the points... maybe 1 point per 15 rushing, but with the wild inconsistency in RB's, this might minimize luck.

 

[Dr. No]

If you don't believe me, look at the ESPN Baseball Challenge - the same guy comes in 1st or 2nd out of 50,000+ people every year.

someone really wins the espn baseball challenge every year? that's crazy

 

[Jason Wood]

One way we handle this in a lot of my leagues is to reward division winners playoff spots but then all wild card spots go by total points scored rather than W-L. It's not perfect but it usually assures the "best" regular season teams, even if unlucky, get a shot at redemption in the playoffs.

 

[Sabertooth]

Yardage only - touchdowns are too volatile.

Eliminate K, TE, D.

 

[Dr. No]

Yardage only - touchdowns are too volatile. Eliminate K, TE, D.

I agree about TD's.. i was looking to minimize them.But eliminating TE is just not something that makes sense.Eliminating defense is probably a good choice.

 

[Sabertooth]

Also, get rid of divisions especially if you are going to have playoffs.

 

[thriftyrocker]

3) No playoffs, winner take all in a points only format

A one-week-per-round playoff maximizes luck. But making it no playoffs changes the game completely. Part of FF is building a team throughout the year so it is best at the end of the year.I would rather have a one 4-week playoff round or 2 2-week rounds.

 

[Dr. No]

Also, get rid of divisions especially if you are going to have playoffs.

we're not doing playoffs or records here, but this is a good idea overall

 

[Dr. No]

3) No playoffs, winner take all in a points only format

A one-week-per-round playoff maximizes luck. But making it no playoffs changes the game completely. Part of FF is building a team throughout the year so it is best at the end of the year.I would rather have a one 4-week playoff round or 2 2-week rounds.

can you explain your 4 week playoff round or 2 2 week rounds?

 

[One]

We give bonus points in the 1st 2 rounds of playoffs to higher seeds. (ie: +6 to 1st seed, +4 to 2nd seed, +2 to 3rd seed)

Another idea would be to give another point bonus to top point scorers during regular season.

 

[coolnerd]

What about all-play versus total points

 

[videoguy505]

Eliminate individual players. Instead of Tom Brady, you get NE QB. Instead of Adrian Peterson, you get MIN RB. Etc.

 

[Dr. No]

Eliminate individual players. Instead of Tom Brady, you get NE QB. Instead of Adrian Peterson, you get MIN RB. Etc.

I think it works for QB's and RB'sbut I'm not so sure on TE's or WR's

 

[TWP]

What about all-play versus total points

All play is better than H2H but still pales in comparison to total points. Your team isn't playing any other team H2H, so why should any other team's point totals have an impact on your team's measure of performance? In all play, losing by 1 point to a guy is still the same as losing by 100 points. That one loss counts for less than if it were H2H, but still, why should those two losses count the same? Obviously losing by 1 point is pure luck whereas losing by 100 is not.

 

[Wrigley]

It's been proposed in my H2H league that we get a W for a the win, but we also get a W/L based on overall scoring each week

ie: the top 6 scoring teams get W's while the bottom scoring get L's.

 

[Dr. No]

What about all-play versus total points

Not bad.This would reward the more consistent team who scored 105, 103 more than the team that scored 170, 59Total points still rewards the player who predicted the best end of year stats for a set of players the best though.

 

[The Jerk]

3) No playoffs, winner take all in a points only format

A one-week-per-round playoff maximizes luck. But making it no playoffs changes the game completely. Part of FF is building a team throughout the year so it is best at the end of the year.I would rather have a one 4-week playoff round or 2 2-week rounds.

can you explain your 4 week playoff round or 2 2 week rounds?

I'm not thriftyrocker but the idea of multiple week playoff rounds (2, 3, 4, you name it) is to minimize the luck factor that can occur on any given week, as we all know. So if playoffs start week 13 wit four teams, then the total combined score for each team in weeks 13 and 14 would combine to determine the championship game participants, and the same combined score approach would determine the champion in weeks 15 and 16.From the "find a league with the least possible luck" standpoint, playoffs would probably never be used. However, if trying to strike some balance of minimizing luck while emulating the NFL and introducing at least some fun, multiple week playoff games are perhaps the best way to go.

 

[onionsack]

Take whatever league you're in and replace the Team D with a minimum of 9 IDP slots. Voila!

 

[Hoart Petterson]

All-play and deep starting line-up requirements (2-3-4). All leagues should start 2 QB's. More fun and more strategy involved. These 1-2-3 leagues, every team is fairly loaded. Just need to get that one guy who has a huge year and you have a good chance of winning.

 

[Dr. No]

Take whatever league you're in and replace the Team D with a minimum of 9 IDP slots. Voila!

from what i understand IDP is highly unpredictable and doesn't even reward the best players with the way it is scored.So... no.

 

[The Jerk]

Total points still rewards the player who predicted the best end of year stats for a set of players the best though.

Possibly yes, but possibly no. Lineup decisions can be a big factor. In 2008 I left 184 more points on my bench than the team with the most total points. I can't say I was the better team. I was the better GM, but by far a worse "coach" in terms of my lineup.In this line of thinking, I suppose best ball lessens luck, but that assumes that lineup decisions are totally random as opposed to informed guesses. I lean toward best ball but it takes away a big part of the game and makes managing your team fairly uninteresting.It seems like the farther we get in terms of eliminating luck, the less interesting/captivating the league becomes.

 

[The Jerk]

doesn't even reward the best players with the way it is scored.

This is often true of offensive FF players, too.

 

[The Jerk]

What about all-play versus total points

Not bad.This would reward the more consistent team who scored 105, 103 more than the team that scored 170, 59

You've got this right. I disagree with TWP that all play "pales" compared to total points. Total points can be skewed by one or two monster weeks. If Team A beats Team B 13 of 16 weeks, but Team B blows up for three HUGE weeks, it's hard to say Team B is better when head-to-head with Team A they're 3-13.In reality, the same teams that are at the top in total points will be at the top in all play, but the order might be shuffled a little. The bottom line is both methods have their merits, and reward slightly different ideas of what it means to be the best team, but clearly both involve less luck than H2H.There's probably a way to combine both total points and all play that would be the absolute lowest luck quotient, as it would account both for consistency and explosiveness. When forced to choose between which represents least luck, I'd suggest consistency, and therefore all play, comes out the winner.

 

[The Jerk]

It's been proposed in my H2H league that we get a W for a the win, but we also get a W/L based on overall scoring each weekie: the top 6 scoring teams get W's while the bottom scoring get L's.

This is on the path to all play. It's better than nothing as far as mitigating matchup luck, but it still doesn't account for everything. Team A could score 1st five times and 7th four times, while Team B could score 6th six times and 7th three times. No one would think Team B is better than Team A, but Team B would receive one more "scoring win" than Team A.

 

[TWP]

I probably spoke too strongly. All play is certainly not bad. And yes, maybe something like all play with additional 'wins' for end of season total points is actually the least luck...

 

[Dr. No]

doesn't even reward the best players with the way it is scored.

This is often true of offensive FF players, too.

Well this is a good point.Ultimately in fantasy football the only way to measure a player's success is with stats.But for instance with an offensive player, maybe the best WR is on a team so good they really don't need to throw the ball that often, and was able to pull their starters early.the team never played from behind, so stats were never garnered. But in terms of skill, most D Backs would say he had no rival.Whereas another WR's team went 0-16 and had to throw early and often.. so he gets monster stats.Who's better?Same thing with IDP and Revis.. Shut down corners.. not many stats.So maybe the solution isn't using points at all, we should use voting BCS style to determine what people think of the teams and who should win, and go off of that.Because allowing play on the field certainly ramps up the luck factor... weather, injuries, etc.Using simulators and 1000's of seasons worth of hypothetical stats from a game like Madden.. maybe that's the best way to go to really get things done.