ahhh that make complete sense! Thanks R363

As of 22.00 on CTC it states that Rooney is at around 18% towards a drop where the figure is actually more like 95%. Will probably drop tomorrow rather than tonight though.

I think both CTC and FT are wrong

CTC has put his drop target as -4*T, FT has it at -1*T, when it should in fact be -2*T (I think! - because he's heading for a second fall of the gameweek) - which would put Rooney at around 40%.

(where T is the standard rise target of around 21k)

what's FT?

http://www.fantasytools.co.uk/

And I concur with reds363 I have Rooney currently at 47% towards a drop

someone kindly remind me if the Villa players will be red flagged for missing GWs 28 and 29. ta.

Rooney dropped, CTC inaccurate again.

See reds363 comment not 4 posts up.

Clearly wrong though, unless you think Rooney rose from 40% to 100% in a few hours.

Is it too much to ask to have helpful information posted on this thread, rather than having to wade through petty point-scoring?

Was that not useful for you?

It would be useful for someone concerned about Rooney's price, yes. The succeeding comments weren't. Constructive criticism is helpful. Simple criticism isn't.

A few hours? Don't you mean more like 14 hours?

Do I think Rooney (given he's not playing this GW) could go from 47% to 100% in over half a day this close to a deadline? Absolutely.

It is constructive. No-one posted about the falls section being incorrect, i just used Rooney as an example. Hopefully one of the developers sees this and can make adjustments accordingly.

I'm sorry but I don't see comments such as

as being constructive. A conversation had already taken place not a few posts above yours already detailing the inaccurate figure for Rooney on CTC. If it's already been mentioned and discussed what was your post adding?
If you've identified anyone else who's figure you think is incorrect, or you've got a suggestion as to how you think an incorrect figure can be corrected feel free to say so. As it is there appears to be a worrying trend for people to mearly post on here to point out the instances when CTC is wrong, forgetting the fact that it states to use the site as a guide only.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if D+ decided not to bother with CTC next season.

Nobody posted that Rooney had dropped, therefor i thought i would inform the forum, just incase anyone didnt see it.

Valencia and Rooney both dropped again tonight, second night in a row for both.

Valencia had had one rise and one drop previously this week, and today had an NTI of approx -20k

Rooney had had one rise and two drops previously this week, and today had an NTI of approx -45k

So a new theory seems to present itself: that one rise and one drop in a single week cancel each other out, and the next drop target (2nd drop after a rise, for a net 0.1 drop) is still -1*T, with the subsequent one (3rd drop after a rise, ie a net 0.2 gw drop) being -2*T.


(This would mean that in fact, in what we were discussing a couple of days back, FT was actually right after all in putting Rooney on 90% to a drop on Wednesday night)

Good spot, I'll have to look at changing my software for the start of next season based on this - I think it's too late now and I don't have the time to make the change.

will milner and collins drop again before gw30? any hope theyr will maybe drop again after that the way things are going

i'm 0.1 short at present

thx

Milner dropped! Collins didn't.
N'Zogbia went up!

[quote="Ironfist"]Milner dropped! /quote]

For a second there I thought you knew the Carling Cup teams...

This is awesome!!

Thanks a mill posters/developers! Another great thread

Is Lampard likely to go down (in price) this GW? Think he has 1 days protection left?

If he was indeed protected, given the unpredictability of the protection especially in the second half of the season I'd watch out for Lampard dropping sooner than expected.

I have him down as having a NTI count of -11177 since his red flag was removed on the 22/02/10 which is around 50% of the way to a drop.
So whilst CTC has him down as having received protection FT doesn't and so I'd keep an eye on there as well to make sure.

Strange things afoot on the FT site. CTC has had Lampard down as being protected as per the normal rules however FT didn’t and had him approaching 60% towards a drop yesterday.
However having looked today Lampard is now 3% towards a drop! So does that site either protect players or not?

Working off my own figures I have Lamps as currently 66% towards a drop should no protection have been applied. It’d be nice to know the logic that FT applies or whether it just makes it up as it goes along.

FT assumes no protection from the beginning, but if no price change has happened when the 'possible' protection period is up, it copies CTC's figures (and therefore immediately assumes protection was applied)

Fixed that for you. Murder1 is right over at FT they just assume everyone is unprotected so that a rise/fall deosnt sneak up on you.

A pointless excercise I think. As discussed on here in the past, it might be worthwhile detailing the count with and without protection until the next price change - FT currently only covers for the scenario that the player drops within the expected protection period, but resetting at the point makes no sense.

As it stands this morning I think Lamps is 77% towards a drop should no protection have been applied, FT has lost that information.

Cheers, my bad!

I agree that if possible, keeping two counts after a flag would be good, if it wouldn't be too complicated to do.