Lombardi: Planning the NCAA pool

[Guynemer]

In; no bonus.

[Jon Miller]

pick whole tourney in advance

more point for champoinship

Jon Miller

[reismark]

Actually, I had no idea what kind of bonus to implement, and was going to turn to you guys for suggestions, but since most of you have voiced your objections to having a bonus, I guess it's a moot point...

[Berzerker]

The main problem I have is the disparity in points awarded for each round, you can kick butt in the first 2 rounds and still lose if you are average over the remaining rounds and lose the championship. On the other hand, people shouldn't get a bunch of points for picking 1 and 2 seeds over 15 and 16 seeds, lol. Oh well, maybe the point disparity isn't so bad.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

What are the stakes?

[reismark]

Berzerker: Here are the point possibilities based on rounds:

Round 1 (66 points)
Round 2 (64 points)
Sweet 16 (72 points)
Elite 8 (48 points)
Final 4 (30 points)
Championship (20 points)

I don't see much of a disparity...

Six-Thousand: Bragging rights, as usual

[Berzerker]

The disparity I'm talking about is getting one game of the final 4 correctly worth more than getting 7 first round games correctly. Actually, that system really isn't too different than the one I was thinking of ironically, I was thinking 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 which equals 66, 64, 48, 32, 20, and 12. But as you know, I'm flexible.

[H Tower]

Originally posted by reismark
Six-Thousand: Bragging rights, as usual

Speaking of which....

[reismark]

Berzerker: I just wanted the scoring to be based on a round number. Plus, this puts greater emphasis on the middle rounds, especially on the Sweet 16 round (which, in every - and I mean *every* - pool I've either run or played in, has been the round that's separated the men from the boys, IYKWIM).

Are there any other objections to this scoring system (2, 4, 9, 12, 15, 20; no bonuses)?

H Tower: Just remember that you still have to defend it (like Adam Smith managed to do) and that your title is still tainted by the cardinal bracketing sin you committed in picking all four #1 seeds into the last two rounds...

[H Tower]

Originally posted by reismark
H Tower: Just remember that you still have to defend it (like Adam Smith managed to do) and that your title is still tainted by the cardinal bracketing sin you committed in picking all four #1 seeds into the last two rounds...

It helped me win didn't it?

If I had chosen differently I quite probably would have lost.

[Ming]

I woud like to see 4 - 6 - 9 for the early rounds. Makes them worth something.

[reismark]

Ming: I think 4-6-9 would put too much emphasis on the first two rounds. As it stands, the maximum possibles for the first two sets of two rounds are 130 and 120. What you're suggesting would make it 228 and 120. I think that's too much weight. Just my opinion, though. Let's see what everyone else's is...

Compare these two systems, guys:

2-4-9-12-15-20
4-6-9-12-16-20

Which looks better to you?

[ColdWizard]

2-4-9-12-15-20 looks good to me

[Berzerker]

4-6-9 but i'm not picky
How about 3-6-9? The disparity you cite is because of more games.

[Jon Miller]

2-4-9-12-15-20

deffinitely, if not weghted more to the end

Jon Miller