Home Games With Chip Leads

[WKTSWAY 0]

4 games vs division rivals (12)1 game vs other conference teams (12)

Won't this make it so people who are not in your conference will not be able to play you? I thought that was one of the things we were trying to get to so at least every 3 years each team would play each team.I do not like the idea of a chip advantage either. We don't really need a home team except for setting up the matches in my opinion.

[Bizzle 0]

winning the division doesn't guarantee you winning the playoff series. It makes you about a 70/30 favorite. If it goes to a 1 game lead in a 7 game series it drops to about 65/35. That doesn't seem all that unfair to me.Shouldn't the team with the best regular season get a significant advantage? Isn't that the point to the regular season? About 40% of the prize pool goes to the two teams that meet in the championship. Shouldn't the teams that were the best through the regular season get a much better shot at that money than the team that got in as the #6 seed?I think so, and that's coming from a guy that has to play the Cheap Thieves one game down next round.

I think I love you.

[sleuthis 0]

We already have more problems than expected (confusion over game times, defaults, posting results etc), but wait till we have to start chip dumping at the beginning of a match. Frankly, I think the idea is impractical unless it's done by the programmers.Also, what happens if someone doesn't chip dump? I think we may be asking for trouble.

I agree. If it can be done by the programmers, then fine, I am all in favour of it.In my experience, the less you have to rely on participants to do something other than simply play the better.We had instances this season where a 3rd or 4th member of a team playing their first game several weeks into the season and did not know the prodedures. Situations such as that will end up having a player not dump off the necessary chips. I believe it will happen way too often and will cause too much distress in the league.Personally, I really dont think the league needs much in the way of changes. I have suggested allowing teams to schedule their own games and thats about it. Perhaps expanding the playoffs to 7 games series to make the 1 game lead less of an advantage. I do like the one game lead, it makes the higher seed worth fighting for. (ya I know so does the money) - but a one game lead is the only real TRUE advantage a team gets by finishing higher in the standings, and it doesnt apply to the championship round.I would like to see the schedule changes I suggested, playoffs moved to 7 game series and more teams. (yes more teams).Ideally, say a 64 team league with a 30 game schedule - (2 games per week), game 1 played between tuesday and friday and game 2 played on the weekend.As for the other changes - I dont see much need for them. This league ran pretty well and I think everyone enjoyed it. I will tweak the tiebreaking system a little more - just to make it clearer and easier to follow.of course this is all just my opinion.sleuth

[Zeatrix 0]

I'm not in the league so my opinion doesn't matter, but:I don't see the point of it, why does the home team have to have an advantage, why does the higher ranked team need an advantage? As I see it, what you gain by having a good season result is the advantage to play at team that didn't play so well during the regular season therefore giving you an advantage. That's the only advantage you get in regular sports in a playoff situation so why get more here?And I agree with cfinn, adding these chip dumping things will only complicate things and will result in problems to start games...

[sleuthis 0]

I'm not in the league so my opinion doesn't matter, but:I don't see the point of it, why does the home team have to have an advantage, why does the higher ranked team need an advantage? As I see it, what you gain by having a good season result is the advantage to play at team that didn't play so well during the regular season therefore giving you an advantage. That's the only advantage you get in regular sports in a playoff situation so why get more here?And I agree with cfinn, adding these chip dumping things will only complicate things and will result in problems to start games...

actually having to play a lower seed is not the only advantage you have in regular sports. You also get home field - which in the sports world is huge.

[zimmer4141 0]

actually having to play a lower seed is not the only advantage you have in regular sports. You also get home field - which in the sports world is huge.

And, as I've said before, this isn't sports, where if the 1 seed played the 8 seed 100 times, the one seed would probably win 70 times. Here, most teams playing each other 100 times would be close to 50/50. Therefore an advantage is needed in a short term series.

[Randy Reed 0]

Again, I guess I'm beating a dead horse with a stick but oh well.Schedule- I've run fantasy football leagues for 15 years. Inevitably the teams that are out of it towards the end quit participating when they are out of the money. They don't change lineups, make player moves and sometimes drop out all together. Now with the default rule it will help since they can't get back in, but if they decide they are going to drop out anyway vs. paying the extra money or if they default the 2nd year and know they can't get back in they won't participate. So by going to 24 games this will happen. Let alone the weekday scheduling conflicts that will arise or multiple weekend games. It probably won't be a huge issue, but it will end up being one.The past season there were very few teams out of it even up until the last week of play which kept it exciting till the end. Expanding from 15 to 16 and implenting the new tiebreaker scenario will keep it competitive and close till the end. It's still a 5 month season including playoffs and one game a week keeps it simple for all.Home field advantage- I understand that in football there is a homefield advantage and there isn't in poker. In football they play one playoff game not a best of 7 like basketball and baseball, but even then there is 4 home vs 3 home so it is the slightest advantage. A one game lead is way more than a slight home court advantage. If it was a one game playoff with a 1600-1400 lead then that would be about right and somewhat fair, though obviously I don't think even that is necessary, but a way better and more fair solution than the one game lead. Or a best of 5 with a rotating chip dump starting with the home team would be about right as well.Expansion- I think this is where you might get the most objections and I also wonder if you could get another 32 teams to pony up $500 but I suppose it's possible. I have thoughts on this but I suppose this will be debated at a much later date and ultimately probably not that big of a deal. If Daniel wants more teams then I'm sure he will look into the possibility of it.And finally, if I seem a tad disruptive and whiny, i'm sorry. I really like this league, hell loved it and want to see it's continued success or I wouldn't be expressing my opinions and putting them out there for discussion. Thanks, Randy

[fleung22 1]

actually having to play a lower seed is not the only advantage you have in regular sports. You also get home field - which in the sports world is huge.

It's not even ONLY home field advantage in real life sports. If captains are the equivalent to real life owners they get the revenue that is generated by having extra home games. As owners, that's a lot of cash in the pocket.

[copernicus 0]

Ugggh. I dislike the 1600-1400 home team advantage during the regular season. It isnt necessary, its a bit of a hassle, it balances out against teams you play an even number of times etc.I hate the 1600-1400 edge in the playoffs. I dont think its enough of a reward for the regular season. It gives the higher seed a 56:44 edge in a 5 game series if the teams are equally matched...in a holdem race thats close enough to be considered a cointoss. (57:43 edge in a 7 game series).If a full game lead in a 5 or 7 game series is thought to be too big an edge then I think something between the two is more appropriate. One kludgy way to get in the middle would be to keep the one game lead for the higher seed but give the lower seed a 1600-1400 advantage. That would drop the higher seeds edge from 69:31 in a 5 gamer to 64:36, or from 66:34 to 59:41 in a 7 gamer.Another alternative would be a half-game advantage...a "coin flip" gives the higher seed either a 1 game lead or they start out even. The coin flip could be a game that the lower seed can only lose or "tie", meaning a new best 3 of 5 with no lead for the higher seed. (That would be better than a pure random coinflip imo, since it gives the better team a little it more of an edge).