| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| leumas |
Posted - 07/28/2007 : 11:20:29
Hi
I've already posted this under Hockey Pools and Fantasy Hockey. I'm not sure if the admins read all the posts so I'll try here too. 
I want to run the pool right here at Pickuphockey. (Which is the best! IMHO)
The pool will be a straight points type pool with trades.
Teams will have 18 players.
12 players on the Pro Team
6 players on the Farm Team
I want to use the Bias Rule to do this. Basically ignore the bottom six guys points and they automatically become the Farm team.
I also want to have positional requirements.
9 Forwards (6 Pro team, 3 Farm)
6 D-men (4 Pro team, 2 Farm)
3 Goalies (2 Pro team, 1 Farm)
I notice that the Hockey Pool Manager on this site has a new feature this year. The Positional Bias Rule. Basically you can pick a position and choose to ignore the bottom guys. Which seems great however.....
I can't seem to figure out how this Positional Bias Rule will work in regards to trades?? If I trade a Forward for a Goalie won't this mess up the system?
For example:
I set the Positional Bias rule to ignore
Bottom 3 Forwards
Bottom 2 D-men
Bottom 1 Goalie
My goal with the Bias rule is to only count the Top Guys from each position. Correct?
If I trade one of my 9 Forwards for a Goalie, I now only have 8 Forwards but I have selected to ignore the bottom 3. Does this mean I only count points from 5 Forwards now?? Does this mean that I can only trade Forwards for Forwards?
I think that the Bias Rule is kind of backwards.
If the goal is to only count the Top Guys from each position then shouldn't the rule be written "Only use Top 6 Forwards" rather than "Ignore Bottom 3"???
This would give a team the flexibility to carry seven, eight, or even ten Forwards and still achieve the desired effect the Positional Bias rule is designed for.
You wouldn't be forced to trade Forwards for Forwards, Goalies for Goailes, etc. Your team could carry more depth in a certain position if needed and less in others.
I'm not trying to be critical of the Positional Bias rule or the website.
Maybe I'm wrong and just don't understand the rule in the first place.
I just think it would make the rosters more flexible and the hockey pool way more fun for everyone if the Bias rules were written differently.
Any thoughts or comments?
Leumas
|
| 5 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| admin |
Posted - 07/30/2007 : 16:08:27
Hi Leumas, No problem at all, I didn't take any offense what-so-ever. It was a very constructive post which is always appreciated.
You are totally correct, pools can be done in a zillion different formats. We've developed ours over the last 5 years to accomodate as many of those as we could. Of course we obviously haven't gotten to them all 
I'll put your suggestion into our wish list and see where it goes. It's really very good and it may be integrated sometime this season but it won't be there for the beginning unfortunately. 
Glad to hear that you guys have enjoyed the software. There are a lot of pool options out there and we're glad that you and your pals have decided to use ours! We'll keep you posted.
Thanks!
|
| leumas |
Posted - 07/29/2007 : 22:55:11
Hey Admin!
Thanks very much for the response. I was beginning to worry that maybe my original post may have been taken the wrong way. I didn't mean to be critical about the rules or the great system you guys have going here. Hopefully no offense taken.
I've been researching the heck out of hockey pool formats lately and I'm quite surprised how many different ways you can set these things up. Some guys REALLY get involved.
I really appreciate what you have to say regarding the Bias Rules. Its crazy how changing one rule can affect so many different areas of the pool format. Lots of things to consider!
With all the different ways to run a hockey pool I figured the "way" I proposed would be quite common.
As a poolie it would be really cool to have your primary line-up as well as spares and the flexibility to trade whoever regardless of position. Your Pro team could stay full and you would be free to add and drop players from your Spares list without affecting the scoring system. It would also be neat if you could view each poolie's team and see his players and spares all on one page. I also really like the idea of being able to load up on extra Forwards if your Defence or Goaltending were really solid. (for example)
As the commish (or the guy entering the trades) it would be alot easier too. You wouldn't have to worry about poolies keeping their line-ups full with guys in the right positions. As well each team's best lineup would always be on the "Pro" team. No moving guys back and forth from the spares list. The Bias rule could do all of these things automatically.
Anyways, like I said your website is really great the way it is now. Our pool was registered with OfficePools last year (my buddies idea) but I decided to take the information and run it on your site as well. About a month into the season everyone in the pool was coming to me and saying how much better Pickuphockey is. "I told you so dummies!" 
Once again thanks so much for your time. Keep up the great work.
Leumas |
| admin |
Posted - 07/29/2007 : 17:52:58
Hi Leumas, Thanks for the compliment on the pools!
Man oh man you can write a complicated post! hahah!
Got to be honest here, the Positional Bias Rule was designed to ignore the top x or bottom x players in each position. It was not designed to be used to spare (so to speak) players. This throws another layer of complication into it. That is what the trades function is built for.
If your pool involves limits on the number of players per position then it is important that when trading players you have to trade for a player in the same position. Therefore you shouldn't trade a forward for a goalie. That wouldn't be fair based on your own rules. Having said that, it is based on the way the system is designed right now...not the way you proposed it, which is a good suggestion (but not available at this time)
If we were to do it the way you were suggesting ie: just count the top x players then you are correct, it would give you the flexibility you need. Unfortunately it is too late to have this functionality available for this coming season as the upgrades are already decided. You should know that the bias rule (and the trades) is the most complicated part of the system and when we make changes to it, it has to be extremely well planned out. So if we do something like this it would likely not be until next playoffs.
On a side note: The OLD bias rule will also be in effect for the upcoming regular season. You will not just be able to ignore the top or bottom x players per position, but you will be able to ignore (omit) the top and bottom x players OVERALL. |
| leumas |
Posted - 07/28/2007 : 16:51:24
quote:
Don't make contradictory rules. Pick one or the other and save yourself some headaches. I'd say stick with the positional requirements and have the pool entrants maintain the 9F, 6D, and 3G at ALL times.
Hey OilinOntario thanks for responding!
I'm not trying to make contradictory rules. I guess what I was trying to say was that I really only want:
6 Forwards
4 D-men
2 Goalies
I want the other 5 guys to be spares so to speak. I would like them to be any position. I guess I didn't explain it very clearly. Sorry.
Can you think of any other way I can do this with this system?
I've thought of maybe listing all the Pro Teams (12 guys) and the Farm Teams (6 guys) separately. For the Farm teams maybe just put an asterix beside the name to show that its the farm team.
Then if people want to move players back and forth I can just use the Trade function. Its just more work I guess.
I know that some of you pool junkies have formats where the teams keep spares. How do you do it?
Thanks again.
|
| OILINONTARIO |
Posted - 07/28/2007 : 13:27:37
quote:
Originally posted by leumas
I also want to have positional requirements.
9 Forwards (6 Pro team, 3 Farm)
6 D-men (4 Pro team, 2 Farm)
3 Goalies (2 Pro team, 1 Farm)
You wouldn't be forced to trade Forwards for Forwards, Goalies for Goailes, etc. Your team could carry more depth in a certain position if needed and less in others.
Any thoughts or comments?
Leumas
Don't make contradictory rules. Pick one or the other and save yourself some headaches. I'd say stick with the positional requirements and have the pool entrants maintain the 9F, 6D, and 3G at ALL times. |
|
|
