MFL Blind Bidding Waiver Glitch (1 Viewer)

[Hoss_Cartwright]

This has been posted in several leagues I'm in. Not sure if it's been posted here or not.

Hey guys,

There has been a discussion in some of my leagues and I wanted to carry this over here. Here is the original post an explanation.

Go to Reports>Franchise>Previously processed waivers

Now here's where it gets interesting. Last week some one made this bid pattern for Earnest Graham:

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $5.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $10.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $15.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $20.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $25.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $30.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $35.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $40.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $45.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $50.00 and drop None

He ended up getting outbid for him anyways, but I went back in league history and discovered he did this before and was able to get the desired player for the minimum bid of $5.

I'm the commish here so it would be unethical for me to use this in a league i run, but it's definitely in the gray area of fair or unfair. Do what you like with it in your other leagues ie.. use it for yourself or make sure no one else is using it.

As for this league, I'm thinking about pulling my weight and making a rule to not allow this. We should definitely discuss this. Let's hear some thoughts down here and I'll start a poll Sunday night."

Here are some solutions provided ----

And now the ruling for our league...

Each team is allowed to make a maximum of one bid on each available player. Any team that makes more than one bid will lose the player (if they had won that player), as well as lose the bidding bucks they spent on that player.

Also, one loophole in our rule is that you can make multiple bids on the same player if you have 2 different drops.

Chuck had a good example---The bad part about this is if I want to get more than one player in the waiver process, losing specific players in a particular order. That would require me bidding on the same player more than once.

Example:

bid $5 on Barry Sanders drop Chris Brown

Bid $5 on Raymond Berry drop Chris Brown

Bid $5 on Raymond Berry drop Chris Henry

This is acceptable, even though he had multiple bids on Berry.

Some other solutions ---

I think the better solution would be either to:

(1) prohibit bidding different amounts on any one player. So a bunch of $5 on the same player would be permitted.

or

(2) prohibit bidding on a player where bids in subsequent rounds (or the same round) increase.

Here's how the WCOFF handles this matter:

"The WCOFF blind bidding process is not an auction bidding process. Though you may bid on the same player in multiple bid groups, you can only bid one amount for such player."

another one ----

This type of waiver acquisition will not be allowed in here. Previously processed waivers will be viewable by the entire league moving forward. Anyone caught using this type of BBID scheme will forfeit their entire BBID wIver allotment for the rest of the season. If more than half of an owner's BBID allocation has already been spent then the offending owner will lose 1/2 of thie BBID allotment for the following season.

EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY 9/29/10

 

[road warrior]

Interesting. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[GregR_2]

...Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $5.00 and drop NoneAdd Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $10.00 and drop NoneAdd Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $15.00 and drop NoneAdd Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $20.00 and drop NoneAdd Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $25.00 and drop NoneAdd Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $30.00 and drop NoneAdd Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $35.00 and drop NoneAdd Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $40.00 and drop NoneAdd Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $45.00 and drop NoneAdd Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $50.00 and drop None....

Did he enter 10 different waiver rounds with Graham at the top of each? If so, and it didn't give him to him for $50 then it is a problem. However, if he put those 10 entries into a single round, then it worked properly. When the bidding on Graham is processed, only the top valid bid in that round gets looked at. Which would be the $5 bid. None of the bids beneath it would be looked at. If someone else bid $6 on Graham, the other team would win Graham for $6.

 

[road warrior]

...

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $5.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $10.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $15.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $20.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $25.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $30.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $35.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $40.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $45.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $50.00 and drop None

....

Did he enter 10 different waiver rounds with Graham at the top of each? If so, and it didn't give him to him for $50 then it is a problem.

However, if he put those 10 entries into a single round, then it worked properly. When the bidding on Graham is processed, only the top valid bid in that round gets looked at. Which would be the $5 bid. None of the bids beneath it would be looked at. If someone else bid $6 on Graham, the other team would win Graham for $6.

You must be joking. That's the ways it's supposed to work?

 

[GregR_2]

...

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $5.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $10.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $15.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $20.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $25.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $30.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $35.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $40.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $45.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $50.00 and drop None

....

Did he enter 10 different waiver rounds with Graham at the top of each? If so, and it didn't give him to him for $50 then it is a problem.

However, if he put those 10 entries into a single round, then it worked properly. When the bidding on Graham is processed, only the top valid bid in that round gets looked at. Which would be the $5 bid. None of the bids beneath it would be looked at. If someone else bid $6 on Graham, the other team would win Graham for $6.

You must be joking. That's the ways it's supposed to work?

If you're finding fault with it, I think you're misunderstanding something. How are you saying it should work?

 

[GregR_2]

Hoss, I just made an MFL test league and everything works as it should under conditional blind bidding.

I put in the following bids for Team 1 (all bids are drop None):

Round 1: Addai $5

Round 2: Addai $10

Round 3: Addai $15

Round 4: Addai $20

The winning bid was Addai to Team 1 for $20. The lower bids did not do him any good, all of his bids were considered since they were at the top of a round, and the maximum he bid is the price he got him for.

Then I did the following:

Team 1:

Round 1:

Addai $5

Addai $10

Addai $20

Addai $30

Team 2:

Round 1:

Addai $6.

Team 2 won Addai for $6, exactly how it should. Putting a bunch of additional bids for Addai in the same round didn't accomplish anything either. Only his first valid bid in the round, which was $5 for Addai, was looked at. The only way the bids beneath that would get looked at is if Addai isn't available or if the player you are dropping is no longer on your roster. If Addai isn't available, all of the bids beneath the top one are also moot. So there is no way under the scenario you describe that someone can benefit in conditional blind bidding. Incidentally what you're referring to is called Ladder Bidding.

 

[dirtyhalos]

stacking bids came up in two of the leagues i commish, it was presented to the league whether to allow or disallow it

it was voted to not allow it, as commish i check weekly to make sure it wasn't violated, any violations is a reversal of violated bids

it was deemed to just be poor form and against the spirit of the league

as commish its kind of a pain to monitor, but for the most part the owners in the leagues are not the types to be trying to manipulate the rules

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

It's not a glitch. Bidding like that won't work.

ETA: Seems like GregR has this one wrapped up.

 

[greeklightnin]

"The WCOFF blind bidding process is not an auction bidding process. Though you may bid on the same player in multiple bid groups, you can only bid one amount for such player." another one ----This type of waiver acquisition will not be allowed in here. Previously processed waivers will be viewable by the entire league moving forward. Anyone caught using this type of BBID scheme will forfeit their entire BBID wIver allotment for the rest of the season. If more than half of an owner's BBID allocation has already been spent then the offending owner will lose 1/2 of thie BBID allotment for the following season.EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY 9/29/10

Interesting, this migrated to the WCOFF and they actually had to make a ruling on it?

 

[road warrior]

...

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $5.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $10.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $15.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $20.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $25.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $30.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $35.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $40.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $45.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $50.00 and drop None

....

Did he enter 10 different waiver rounds with Graham at the top of each? If so, and it didn't give him to him for $50 then it is a problem.

However, if he put those 10 entries into a single round, then it worked properly. When the bidding on Graham is processed, only the top valid bid in that round gets looked at. Which would be the $5 bid. None of the bids beneath it would be looked at. If someone else bid $6 on Graham, the other team would win Graham for $6.

You must be joking. That's the ways it's supposed to work?

If you're finding fault with it, I think you're misunderstanding something. How are you saying it should work?

I'm saying that if it's 'blind' bidding, then this tactic is a way around the system. Hey, if that's the way it's supposed to work, I'm better for it. Had no idea. Originally thought you put in 1 bid and high bid wins. This way, you can pretty much get the player you want (if you have the money).

 

[BeTheMatch]

...

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $5.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $10.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $15.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $20.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $25.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $30.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $35.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $40.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $45.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $50.00 and drop None

....

Did he enter 10 different waiver rounds with Graham at the top of each? If so, and it didn't give him to him for $50 then it is a problem.

However, if he put those 10 entries into a single round, then it worked properly. When the bidding on Graham is processed, only the top valid bid in that round gets looked at. Which would be the $5 bid. None of the bids beneath it would be looked at. If someone else bid $6 on Graham, the other team would win Graham for $6.

You must be joking. That's the ways it's supposed to work?

If you're finding fault with it, I think you're misunderstanding something. How are you saying it should work?

I'm saying that if it's 'blind' bidding, then this tactic is a way around the system. Hey, if that's the way it's supposed to work, I'm better for it. Had no idea. Originally thought you put in 1 bid and high bid wins. This way, you can pretty much get the player you want (if you have the money).

But it doesn't sound like it does work that way. In the example above, the guy who bid $6 on Graham got him, not the guy who bid $10, $15, etc. in subsequent bids in the same round.

 

[GregR_2]

...

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $5.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $10.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $15.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $20.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $25.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $30.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $35.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $40.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $45.00 and drop None

Add Graham, Earnest TBB RB for $50.00 and drop None

....

Did he enter 10 different waiver rounds with Graham at the top of each? If so, and it didn't give him to him for $50 then it is a problem.

However, if he put those 10 entries into a single round, then it worked properly. When the bidding on Graham is processed, only the top valid bid in that round gets looked at. Which would be the $5 bid. None of the bids beneath it would be looked at. If someone else bid $6 on Graham, the other team would win Graham for $6.

You must be joking. That's the ways it's supposed to work?

If you're finding fault with it, I think you're misunderstanding something. How are you saying it should work?

I'm saying that if it's 'blind' bidding, then this tactic is a way around the system. Hey, if that's the way it's supposed to work, I'm better for it. Had no idea. Originally thought you put in 1 bid and high bid wins. This way, you can pretty much get the player you want (if you have the money).

No, it's not a way around the system. If you submit multiple bids for the same player at the top OF DIFFERENT WAIVER ROUNDS then only your highest bid for the player matters. You accomplish nothing that you wouldn't by just bidding on him once for the max $50 amount you said. In the end all you accomplished was a single $50 bid.If you submit multiple bids for the same player at the top OF A SINGLE WAIVER ROUND, then only the first one in the list matters. You accomplish nothing that you wouldn't have just putting the single $5 bid at the top of the round. Nothing below it will be considered so long as the conditions (player to acquire, player to drop, and you have the amount of money being bid) are all valid. In the end all you accomplished was a single $5 bid.

 

[road warrior]

Hey, thanks for the tip. I do (finally) understand what you're saying. Just never thought that outside the box.

 

[flranger]

I like blind bidding, but I've always thought that the winner should only have to pay $1 more than the next highest bid. More of an "up to" amount.

 

[stugnut]

I tested this out in the preseason in a "test" league I setup specifically to test ladder bidding. I did multiple permutations with known bids amongst several teams, using conditional bidding (ie, multiple rounds). Never once did an owner get a player for the lowest bid, unless no one else bid on that player.

So, if in round one he did a bid like this,

Drop Player A and,

Add Player B for $1

Add Player B for $2

Add Player B for $3

Only the $1 bid is considered. I confirmed this, including with our tiebreaker of earliest bid, and if another owner submitted a bid of $2, the $2 bid would win. The only time that owner won with the $1 bid was when no other owner bid on that player. So if using ladder bidding in one round, only the highest priority bid is considered.

However, if trying to ladder bid using multiple rounds, like this:

Drop Player A and,

Round 1: Add Player B for $1

Round 2: Add Player B for $2

Round 3: Add Player B for $3

Only the highest bid is considered. So if another owner bid $2, the ladder bidding owner would win at $3. So, after testing my conclusions were:

1. If the ladder bids are placed in one round only the highest priority bid is considered

2. If the ladder bids are placed in separate rounds only the highest bid is considered

There is no glitch in MFL blind bidding. I would bet that when the owner you mentioned getting the bid for $5, one of two things happened:

1) No one else bid on that player so he got that player for $5 because it was his highest priority bid in that round, or

2) Other owners may have bid on that player, but the bids were rejected because if they won that bid it would have given them an illegal roster

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

I tested this out in the preseason in a "test" league I setup specifically to test ladder bidding. I did multiple permutations with known bids amongst several teams, using conditional bidding (ie, multiple rounds). Never once did an owner get a player for the lowest bid, unless no one else bid on that player.

So, if in round one he did a bid like this,

Drop Player A and,

Add Player B for $1

Add Player B for $2

Add Player B for $3

Only the $1 bid is considered. I confirmed this, including with our tiebreaker of earliest bid, and if another owner submitted a bid of $2, the $2 bid would win. The only time that owner won with the $1 bid was when no other owner bid on that player. So if using ladder bidding in one round, only the highest priority bid is considered.

However, if trying to ladder bid using multiple rounds, like this:

Drop Player A and,

Round 1: Add Player B for $1

Round 2: Add Player B for $2

Round 3: Add Player B for $3

Only the highest bid is considered. So if another owner bid $2, the ladder bidding owner would win at $3. So, after testing my conclusions were:

1. If the ladder bids are placed in one round only the highest priority bid is considered

2. If the ladder bids are placed in separate rounds only the highest bid is considered

There is no glitch in MFL blind bidding. I would bet that when the owner you mentioned getting the bid for $5, one of two things happened:

1) No one else bid on that player so he got that player for $5 because it was his highest priority bid in that round, or

2) Other owners may have bid on that player, but the bids were rejected because if they won that bid it would have given them an illegal roster

Sounds reasonable to me. Thanks for doing this test. I'm putting it to bed now unless someone proves to me otherwise.