2012 Fantasy Snooker - Now Active

[WilBert]

http://challonge.com/2012_snooker" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Shaggy365]

As in previous years (well certainly last year), it is possible to have all 4 semi-finalists in your entry. As I said last year, perhaps I should just make it so that you can pick anyone you want, without a budget. That's one to think about at a later date.

Anyway, the title is still well & truly up for grabs. There's a good selection of people at the top of the leader board that have got different combinations of semi-finalists. Sadly I don't think I can still win

[murf]

perhaps I should just make it so that you can pick anyone you want, without a budget. That's one to think about at a later date.

Please don't. I like the fact the budget is tight and you have to 'research' some cheapies rather than just pick 5 favourites.

[blahblah]

But picking 5 favourites would have left most with only 1 left? (Arguably none, as Ronnie's appeal was the price, not the draw? Ebdon, Williams and Robertson looked a difficult path - although Williams record against him is very poor. I would have had Carter, as I had a bad vibe about Trump.......)

[Tacalabala]

But picking 5 favourites would have left most with only 1 left? (Arguably none, as Ronnie's appeal was the price, not the draw? Ebdon, Williams and Robertson looked a difficult path - although Williams record against him is very poor. I would have had Carter, as I had a bad vibe about Trump.......)

But you'd end up with far too many identical selections.

Perhaps as an alternative, splitting the 32 players into different pools from which we'd have to select, for example:

Pool A - Top 8 seeds - 1 selection
Pool B - Bottom 8 (9-16) seeds - 2 selections
Pool C - 16 qualifiers - 3 selections

[murf]

Pool A - Top 8 seeds - 1 selection
Pool B - Bottom 8 (9-16) seeds - 2 selections
Pool C - 16 qualifiers - 3 selections

or

A 1
B 1
C 2
+ 1 from anywhere

Would still be similar teams as there would likely to be a favourite or two in each group.

[WilBert]

Don't mess with perfection! A side comp for the second round and onwards would keep some interest for those who've had disastrous starts may be an idea?

[Shaggy365]

Some good thoughts here.

Thinking about it I may well stick with the budget idea, but instead of setting the total spend as a strict average of all players I may up the budget by a bit.

Whatever happens, everyone will have the same entry form, and one person will win (but it won't be me).

[Moist von Lipwig]

I like it as is, the onus should be on the participant to find out the draw etc when making their picks, too much spoon feeding these days. plus it gives you the choice - do you spread them out to try and get as many through or lump on players in the same draw to guarantee getting one through to the end.

[blahblah]

Scrappy opening, with Hendry slating the table

1-0 to Maguire

[Surprised]

I like it now and the tight budget makes you think. do you go for 2 top notch players and then some cheapies pr do you go for a more evenly balanced squad? Or do you go like me and just get a mishmash of no hopers and balls it all up for another year?

[workie-ticket]

I'm another voting for "keep how it is". I like having the budget, and that introduces different strategies as surprised has said.

anyway, you don't want to do a "Barry Hearn" and start messing about with the formats of good competitions, do you?

[Shaggy365]

Had a rather non-productive day this afternoon & given this a certain amount of thought.

How about this : http://www.freewebs.com/pwhitehead/test.htm

It allows for a budget (easy or hard) depending on how low I make the total spend, and also you can have all 4 semi-finalists & still get overtaken.

Please can people have a look & give me their thoughts?

[blahblah]

So you buy players as now, then allocate the percentages?

[Moist von Lipwig]

So you buy players as now, then allocate the percentages?

no i think you buy x% of a player, everyone else can buy x% of the same player - theres not 100% of that player split between all those who bought him. but depending on the % on how many players you buy. You then score x% of that players points?

[Shaggy365]

Blah is right. You buy 26% of Ronnie, so get 26% of his points. So if Ronnie wins the World Championship & you've only got 10% of him, you'll get less points than some-one who bought 11% of him.

The total spend is only there to stop people buying 20% of each of the 5 most expensive players.

[blahblah]

I meant that you allocate 100% among all your players - although only getting a percentage of the players points depending on how many picked him is an idea.

[Moist von Lipwig]

ah, from your first post blah I thought you were thinking if 8 people by trump then they all score 12.5% of his points, but you wouldn't know what % you had until everyone had made their picks.

[Shaggy365]

Yes, you allocate your 100% between however many players you want. So you might want to buy 3 cheapies @ 10% (just in case they do well), and then say 2 @ 15% and 2 @ 20%.

As I said, almost an infinte different possible entries (or at least a very big number).

[Moist von Lipwig]

Yes, you allocate your 100% between however many players you want. So you might want to buy 3 cheapies @ 10% (just in case they do well), and then say 2 @ 15% and 2 @ 20%.

As I said, almost an infinte different possible entries (or at least a very big number).

interesting, is there something coming up you could use as a test event?

[murf]

interesting, is there something coming up you could use as a test event?

French Open tennis?

[Surprised]

looks interesting. How difficult will the scoring be for you shaggy? At the moment it is fairly straightforward but this add complexity.
But, I like it as it add another strategic element to the game.
Maybe when the snooker is over you (or anyone in fact to help you out) could recreate the game by randomly assigning percentages to players that the people who took part picked (or a sample) and see how it pans out?

[bluenosey]

I like it as it is.

All this percentage talk is too much for my tiny brain

The QFs are over already. Another update beckons but not tonight. Kris @ FISO looking strong.

[Shaggy365]

interesting, is there something coming up you could use as a test event?

French Open tennis?

Could do the French Open tennis, taking the points from Tennisforfree.com and generate a load of completely random entries going from 20% of 5 decent players down to 10% of 10 not-so-decent players.

Or, when this is all over, I can generate 100 random entries using the snooker points and compare with how the winners would have done using a straight 20% split for each player.

As for the scoring, it's only slightly different to what I do now. It'll just mean a bit of a tweak to my formula.

Maybe something to play with later.

[workie-ticket]

I have to say I wouldn't be a fan of this change.

You either have a player or you don't in my book. All this talk of percentages adds added complexity which is unnecessary IMHO.

If enough people fancy it by all means give it a test-run though.

[blahblah]

interesting, is there something coming up you could use as a test event?

French Open tennis?

Could do the French Open tennis, taking the points from Tennisforfree.com and generate a load of completely random entries going from 20% of 5 decent players down to 10% of 10 not-so-decent players.

Or, when this is all over, I can generate 100 random entries using the snooker points and compare with how the winners would have done using a straight 20% split for each player.

As for the scoring, it's only slightly different to what I do now. It'll just mean a bit of a tweak to my formula.

Maybe something to play with later.

And you can win a tennis match by winning less games

The Euros could work using each match reuslt, with 1 goal each added for each round past the Group stages?

The key points are:
1, Player with most frames wins
2, There are more Frames the further a player gets....

I quite like the idea that you buy a share of a player and each share in a player gets the same %age of his points - but all points would probably need to be multiplied to keep the points vaguely sensible. It is pretty and much like how the Tote works?

[Grant]

I'm another on the 'leave as is' vote - I like the simplicity and really tough pricing. Adds interest to the tournament without making it too involved!

[murf]

I vote 'leave alone' too.

The complex %age thing sounds like a good concept for an 'alternative' game is something more mass market (like FF).

My only problem with the snooker comp (and many others like Velogames cycling and the Tennis For Free ones) is that you are powerless to do anything once the comp has started. If limited transfers (windows) could be brought in then I would approve.

[Tacalabala]

I have to agree with the majority, leave it alone.

[Shaggy365]

Consider it 'left alone'.

While it's nice to be able to run your own competition and set the rules & regulations, there comes a point at which you have to decide on the balance between simplicity and generating enough interest to make people want to enter.

Considering I only had 5 days this year to get everything set up and try and get as many entries in as I could, I think it's proabably best that I don't try tweaking anything. It's relatively easy to enter (as proved by the fact Jnr can enter with the help of a calculator), and the scoring is simple enough that most people can grasp it. Maybe if there was 3-4 weeks to get entries in, then I could think about changes, but in the cold light of day it's probably best as it is.

I may run a fantasy Euro 2012 based on the % idea though, since I want to see if it really would work.