|
Run-Down Forums
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Dan Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999 Posts: 9334 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2003 6:49 pm Post subject: thoughts for next year |
|
|
Might as well get the ball rolling for ideas and suggestions for next year's contest...
One that I thought of today is a scaled athlete cost based on event. For instance, this year's contest through 8 events has the following total scores per event (summing the scores of all athletes participating in the event who were in last year's IAAF rankings):
Men's 110h: 6972.29 - GL
Men's 800m: 6889.47 - GL
Men's 100m: 6541.96 - GL
Women's 100m: 6075.13 - GL
Women's 800m: 5847.08 - GL
Women's HJ: 5051.87 - GL
Men's 5k 4709.59 - GL
Men's PV: 4509.15 - GL
Women's 1500m: 3397.01
Women's 400m: 1991.39
edit: 2003 GL events:
Men: 100m, 800m, 3000/5000m, 110 Hurdles, Pole Vault, Javelin Throw
Women: 100m, 800m, 1500m, 400 Hurdles, High Jump, Triple Jump
So, assuming the same events were used next year (and GL event status remained unchanged), the women's 400m athlete costs would get a 1x multiplier and at the top of the scale the men's 110h would get a 3.5x multiplier (3.5x the number of points scored). You still would have to choose wisely within each event, but at least it would level the playing field (or royally screw it up ) to some degree.
I could also look up those numbers for last year's contest and see if they're somewhat consistent...
Dan _________________ phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])
Last edited by Dan on Sat Aug 30, 2003 9:11 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Conway Olympic Medalist
Joined: 25 Aug 2001 Posts: 3570 Location: Northen California
|
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2003 8:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That would be interesting ... Could really enhance a pick ... Or put it in the toilet ... But would be worth a shot though ... Would change the nature of choosing your team ... _________________ Conway
Speed Thrills |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dan Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999 Posts: 9334 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2003 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My fear is that before long, everyone will pick their teams from just the few events that are contested regularly by the big guns, resulting in very few differences between teams. I've tried tweaking the purchase prices between ranges of athletes, but they still have to compete to score, and only about a dozen of people per event really get that chance... So, it seems attacking the valuation of the events might be the better approach.
We'll know a bit more after meet #10...
For comparison's sake, here's the final numbers from last year:
Men's 1500m: 8171.19 - GL
Men's 100m: 7553.25 - GL
Women's 400m: 6478.83 - GL
Women's 1500m: 5683.68 - GL
Women's 100m: 5422.47 - GL
Men's PV: 5237.47 - GL
Men's 5k: 4737.48 - GL*
Women's 800m: 3510.85
Men's 110h: 3341.43
Women's 3k 3323.39 - GL*
Men's 200m: 2120.48
Women's HJ: 1637.35
Women's LJ: 1561.38
* we didn't score combined 3k/5k's last year, so the numbers are lower.
Obviously, with the women's 400m being huge and the men's 110h quite weak last year and flip flopped this year, a major factor is GL status for the event, so that needs to be weighed heavily. Probably a multiplier of some sort to take into account how many times per year an event is likely to be contested based on whether or not it is a Golden League event. It would have to be an approximation, of course, but that gamble adds to the fun...
Here's what I found from last year regarding GL status:
Quote: | In 2002, following the precedent established this year, Golden League events will be divided into Premium Events and Classic Events. There will be a total of 12 disciplines, including:
Men
Premium events: 100m – 1500m – 3000 or 5000m – 400m hurdles Classic events: Triple Jump – Pole Vault
Women
Premium events: 100m – 1500m
Classic events: 400m – 3000m or 5000m – 100m Hurdles – Javelin Throw |
From the numbers above, it doesn't look to me like there was a significant scoring difference between "premium" and "classic," so for the purposes of this experiment, they can probably all be treated as GL events.
Dan _________________ phpbb:include($_GET[RFI]) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AJMullican Guest
|
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2003 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not sure this makes sense, unless there are the same number of athletes in each event. Shouldn't it be scaled by the score/athlete? I mean, we don't get to pick all 100m runners, just a few individuals.
Not to mention it's not too much to ask to do a little research. I'm not at all an expert picker (witness all my American picks) but I did check and notice that the women's 400m was only going to be run a few times, so avoided Guevera, for example.
I do think it makes sense to tinker with the scoring to make the events weighted more evenly, I just think you have to be really careful... Just think if you had over-weighted the men's 110mh and under-weighted the women's 400m based on last year!
Just some thoughts.
-Andy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dan Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999 Posts: 9334 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2003 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No question it needs to be done carefully and can backfire, but if we get it right, I think it would work well.
Quote: | I'm not sure this makes sense, unless there are the same number of athletes in each event. Shouldn't it be scaled by the score/athlete? I mean, we don't get to pick all 100m runners, just a few individuals. |
There are 100 athletes available to pick from in each event, based on the IAAF rankings which go 100 deep. That's why I figure totalling the points per event gives the most accurate representation of the likelihood of any one athlete scoring points, regardless of the event they are in. The trick is finding the pattern to how often events are contested within the Fantasy T&F framework, and correlating that to a scale...
Quote: | Not to mention it's not too much to ask to do a little research. |
It's proven difficult to find a good way of adjusting out the top scorers and long shots to make them evenly valued. If certain events prove to be more valueable year after year and it's obvious the big names score the most points in each event, then it won't be long before everyone's roster is looking mighty similar, reasearch or no.
Dan _________________ phpbb:include($_GET[RFI]) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Conway Olympic Medalist
Joined: 25 Aug 2001 Posts: 3570 Location: Northen California
|
Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2003 6:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well I definitely changed my roster this year based on frequency of competition last year of certain events ... I have half as many events this year ... And am doing a thousand times better score wise ... So I can see where if the trend continued people would shy away from various events soley based ont hat principle ... _________________ Conway
Speed Thrills |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Micah Ward Olympic Medalist
Joined: 08 May 2000 Posts: 2152 Location: Hot&humid, GA
|
Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2003 3:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
The only change I would really like to see made is to include the men's 1500. _________________ blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_` |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dan Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999 Posts: 9334 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2003 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
We had it last year, but it was excluded this year due to being a non-GL event. With the above system I'm proposing, it would actually help open the doors for such events...
Dan _________________ phpbb:include($_GET[RFI]) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|