Pick Em 2023 - PRE SEASON DISCUSSION THREAD

[SteveM]

Yeah getting player participation up would be brilliant and any ideas which could reduce player attrition throughout the year would be gratefully considered. Same every year - we'll start with maybe 35 - 40 regualarish pickers and end the year with about 20.

I will run up a quick recruitment thread today, hopefully get a few more players in and I'll do my usual rounds of just flat out asking posters I think might enjoy it if the want to join in, but it'd also be great if the current regular polayers took the initiative in inviting other posters who they click with to join in too.

I may have to put away my ego and go cap in hand to BPP about the possibility of secondary prizes at the halfway point but like you say I'd be imagining it might be a case of showing the site mangement that they're getting an ROI in terms of poster engagement and clicks - bit of a chicken and egg situation.

The scoring balance is a tricky one and we got some strong opinions on both sides... I'm a bit wary of weighting it too heavy on method and detail - and even if we do move in that direction I'd be inclined to do it incrementally to see how it effects play balance rather than going the whole hog in one go. My inclination - if we do it at all - would be to start at 10/10/10 (W/M/D) for 2023 and then to see how it effects the game before taking it any further.

The multiplier thing is one in which thankfully there ain't much controversy - pretty much everyone seems on board with the idea that multipliers should not be playable on heavy favourites - the only real question is just where to draw the cut-off and I'd invite further input on thaT topic from anyone who might be interested too.

I'd do it on betting odds Koba - say if the non favourite is less than -200 or whatever everyone thinks. What was Crawford in his latest fight - pretty sure nobody picked Avanesyan so putting doubles and triples on Bud to win is redundant - and there are multiple dozens of fights like that. Tank vs Hector Garcia is what? Pretty sure Tank is favoured but personally I could see a way for Hector to win if he boxes his ass off - but even that is probably a fight that +2s and +3s shouldn't be used on favourite but when Ortiz fights Stanionis - yeah, that I can see multipliers on the favourite.

[Citizen Koba]

I'd have to give up updating the standings in that case

I hear ya man... I'd love for the game to get that many players but the updating would become truly daunting and I'd have no choice but to increase the level of automation somehow. I'm already thinking I'm just going to ditch the winning streak and longest streak tabulation to reduce the workload anyway but it'd take more than that to make it managable with those numbers..

[PICK EM CREW]

Just to make a note of the suggestion by RJJ-94-02=GOAT and SteveM that we set the threshold for the use of multpliers at -200 or above ie no multipliers on favourites wider than 1/2 (UK odds) or 1.5 (continental odds).

My initial thought had been to set the cut off on the underdog odds making it either that multipliers could only be played on the bookies underdog (ie +100 or higher) or alternatively that multipliers could only be played on the favourite if the underdog was below +300 but I can see how there could be value in being able to bet on close favourites and the +300 cut-off would result in being able to put multipliers on favourites as wide as around -500 which is probably too wide.

We'll make a final decison over the next week or so and pin it to one or the other if that's the route we decide to go. Maybe I'll post a poll once we've given time for a few more opinions to come in.

Just from a game mechanics point of view and for consitency and ease of use I don't want to be setting the cut-off point at a different level for different multipliers, so wherever we decide to set the threshold for x2s and x3s will also be where we set the threshold for x5s although this year each player will only have 1 (or possibly 2 max) x5 so even if we do decide to make em playable on close favourites the overall impact shouldn't be too unbalancing.

[PICK EM CREW]

Oh yeah... and I'll also moot the idea about CLOSE DECISION picks receiving a low points reward in the event of a fight ending in a DRAW that I bring up every year. I reckon 10 points each for method and detail sounds right and zero points for picking the correct winner if that makes sense to anyone except me?

So the full proposal would be that in the event of a fight ending in a DRAW any player that picked a DRAW result would receive 150 points but also any players who picked DEC CLOSE for EITHER fighter would also receive 20 points.

Let me know your thoughts gents.

K

[SteveM]

Just to make a note of the suggestion by RJJ-94-02=GOAT and SteveM that we set the threshold for the use of multpliers at -200 or above ie no multipliers on favourites wider than 1/2 (UK odds) or 1.5 (continental odds).

My initial thought had been to set the cut off on the underdog odds making it either that multipliers could only be played on the bookies underdog (ie +100 or higher) or alternatively that multipliers could only be played on the favourite if the underdog was below +300 but I can see how there could be value in being able to bet on close favourites and the +300 cut-off would result in being able to put multipliers on favourites as wide as around -500 which is probably too wide.

We'll make a final decison over the next week or so and pin it to one or the other if that's the route we decide to go. Maybe I'll post a poll once we've given time for a few more opinions to come in.

Just from a game mechanics point of view and for consitency and ease of use I don't want to be setting the cut-off point at a different level for different multipliers, so wherever we decide to set the threshold for x2s and x3s will also be where we set the threshold for x5s although this year each player will only have 1 (or possibly 2 max) x5 so even if we do decide to make em playable on close favourites the overall impact shouldn't be too unbalancing.

You better hurry up that decision - Tatabanya likes to use all his X5s in the first 2 weeks :-)

[SteveM]

Oh yeah... and I'll also moot the idea about CLOSE DECISION picks receiving a low points reward in the event of a fight ending in a DRAW that I bring up every year. I reckon 10 points each for method and detail sounds right and zero points for picking the correct winner if that makes sense to anyone except me?

So the full proposal would be that in the event of a fight ending in a DRAW any player that picked a DRAW result would receive 150 points but also any players who picked DEC CLOSE for EITHER fighter would also receive 20 points.

Let me know your thoughts gents.

K

sounds ok to me

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Oh yeah... and I'll also moot the idea about CLOSE DECISION picks receiving a low points reward in the event of a fight ending in a DRAW that I bring up every year. I reckon 10 points each for method and detail sounds right and zero points for picking the correct winner if that makes sense to anyone except me?

So the full proposal would be that in the event of a fight ending in a DRAW any player that picked a DRAW result would receive 150 points but also any players who picked DEC CLOSE for EITHER fighter would also receive 20 points.

Let me know your thoughts gents.

K

So you’d only get 20 points for a correct pick? 10 for method and 10 for detail, or have I misread that?

I think it’s definitely fair to compensate Dec Close if the fight ends in a Draw. It possibly creates a slight tactical advantage of picking Dec Close as you have an extra opportunity to gain points but Draw’s are so rare I doubt it would create any unbalance.

[Citizen Koba]

So you’d only get 20 points for a correct pick? 10 for method and 10 for detail, or have I misread that?

I think it’s definitely fair to compensate Dec Close if the fight ends in a Draw. It possibly creates a slight tactical advantage of picking Dec Close as you have an extra opportunity to gain points but Draw’s are so rare I doubt it would create any unbalance.

Yeah that's my thinking.... reward it moderately. The 20 points seems like a reasonable amount and it's possible to kinda rationalise it under the existing system, after all it is a DECISION result and it is CLOSE. It's just always seemed to me that draws are usually so random and arbitrary in boxing anyway that it made sense to reward people somewhat for identifying that the fight would likely be very tight. My thinking anyway.

Of course we'd still retain the DRAW pick which would net 150 but you get no credit if you picked a DRAW and got it wrong.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

I'd do it on betting odds Koba - say if the non favourite is less than -200 or whatever everyone thinks. What was Crawford in his latest fight - pretty sure nobody picked Avanesyan so putting doubles and triples on Bud to win is redundant - and there are multiple dozens of fights like that. Tank vs Hector Garcia is what? Pretty sure Tank is favoured but personally I could see a way for Hector to win if he boxes his ass off - but even that is probably a fight that +2s and +3s shouldn't be used on favourite but when Ortiz fights Stanionis - yeah, that I can see multipliers on the favourite.

I agree with this. Think they should be applicable for a close favourite but not for clear favourites. I also think the cut off point should be around -200. (1/2 UK)

[ruedboy]

I like stats but it's a heavy workload and hard to keep them up to date. Tatabanya's running tally of points was a great addition last year. A running tally of points and multipliers (the two most important stats) is still a lot of work but easier to keep up to date than the present system.