| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/02/2010 12:35:24 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
Originally posted by hahn23:
There are lots of great teams in DPL2. In some divisions, win/loss records indicate ties. I'm sure there is a tie-breaker. And, that's okay. This post is a quiet, courteous request to consider the inclusion of all teams with one loss, or less, in the playoffs. Certainly, the flexibility to incorporate wild-card teams in the playoff would be possible.... and appreciated. |
If this proposal were implemented, then there would be eight (8) teams from both A and B advancing to the playoffs. Seems like it would be in the best interest of DPC to expand the playoffs a bit. |
There are only 2 rounds of playoffs in the schedule. Even if they only take the division winners, there would need to be one additional round to declare a single winner.
As it looks now, there will be 2 champions declared.
In your model there would need to be 4 rounds to declare a single winner.
My team, with the 4th highest average out of all the teams, wouldn't make the cut in either scenario. :-( |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 12:35:49 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
There are lots of great teams in DPL2. In some divisions, win/loss records indicate ties. I'm sure there is a tie-breaker. And, that's okay. This post is a quiet, courteous request to consider the inclusion of all teams with one loss, or less, in the playoffs. Certainly, the flexibility to incorporate wild-card teams in the playoff would be possible.... and appreciated. |
Wild cards are a good idea, up to 4, based on record and a tie-break via head-to-head, then final percentile. The number of losses should not be the deciding factor, although it wouldn't change the selection with the current standings. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 12:38:53 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by bspurgeon:
Originally posted by hahn23:
There are lots of great teams in DPL2. In some divisions, win/loss records indicate ties. I'm sure there is a tie-breaker. And, that's okay. This post is a quiet, courteous request to consider the inclusion of all teams with one loss, or less, in the playoffs. Certainly, the flexibility to incorporate wild-card teams in the playoff would be possible.... and appreciated. |
Wild cards are a good idea, up to 4, based on record and a tie-break via head-to-head, then final percentile. The number of losses should not be the deciding factor, although it wouldn't change the selection with the current standings. |
Wildcards schmildcards! :) (I hate the wildcard in all sports) |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 01:03:35 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
There are only 2 rounds of playoffs in the schedule. Even if they only take the division winners, there would need to be one additional round to declare a single winner.
... |
The playoffs wouldn't need to be head-to-head matches. You could have Round 1 of the playoffs be comprised of two groups of four teams for Div. A & B. respectively, with the winners of each group meeting head-to-head in the finals.
Message edited by author 2010-06-02 13:04:33. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 01:40:51 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
There are only 2 rounds of playoffs in the schedule. Even if they only take the division winners, there would need to be one additional round to declare a single winner.
... |
The playoffs wouldn't need to be head-to-head matches. You could have Round 1 of the playoffs be comprised of two groups of four teams for Div. A & B. respectively, with the winners of each group meeting head-to-head in the finals. |
That's not really a playoff then. Have you ever seen a playoff that wasn't head to head? |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 01:53:37 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by hahn23:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
There are only 2 rounds of playoffs in the schedule. Even if they only take the division winners, there would need to be one additional round to declare a single winner.
... |
The playoffs wouldn't need to be head-to-head matches. You could have Round 1 of the playoffs be comprised of two groups of four teams for Div. A & B. respectively, with the winners of each group meeting head-to-head in the finals. |
That's not really a playoff then. Have you ever seen a playoff that wasn't head to head? |
This is photography, not football. You can't put four football teams on the field at the same time, but you can allow four photography teams to compete against each other in the DPC "arena". It's one of the great flexibilities of an Internet photo contest site. All I'm suggesting is the playoffs be opened up to greater participation. Otherwise, some very good teams, who have great win/loss records, will be closed out. It's simply too elite a screen between the regular season and the playoffs. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 01:58:20 PM · #32 |
Ya, I would vote for 4 more wildcard teams in the playoffs based on highest average. That would only add one week to the playoff schedule. They could be seeded 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7 etc. It helps if one division winds up being stacked with talented teams.
|
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:02:18 PM · #33 |
Maybe for the next time... The rules for DPL2 are already set.
four division winners go head to head in pairs.
Those two winners go head to head the following week. Winner for each league is decided.
He said he MIGHT have the two winners face off, but never said yes. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:14:18 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Ya, I would vote for 4 more wildcard teams in the playoffs based on highest average. That would only add one week to the playoff schedule. They could be seeded 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7 etc. It helps if one division winds up being stacked with talented teams. |
me too. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:17:29 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Maybe for the next time... The rules for DPL2 are already set.
... |
From the DPL faq page, it says,
"6 - How do the playoffs work?
The winning teams from each division all qualify for the playoffs. However, the rest of the details of the playoffs have yet to be finalised."
Emphasis added. I guess I hadn't read "the rest of the details of the playoffs". The tie-breaker beyond the win/loss record is the team season average, which is fine. Still think there should be the inclusion of wild card teams.
eta: found the details regarding tie breaker.
Message edited by author 2010-06-02 14:20:36. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:27:18 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Maybe for the next time... The rules for DPL2 are already set.
... |
From the DPL faq page, it says,
"6 - How do the playoffs work?
The winning teams from each division all qualify for the playoffs. However, the rest of the details of the playoffs have yet to be finalised."
Emphasis added. I guess I hadn't read "the rest of the details of the playoffs". The tie-breaker beyond the win/loss record is the team season average, which is fine. Still think there should be the inclusion of wild card teams.
eta: found the details regarding tie breaker. |
As far as I'm concerned, that quote leaves open the possibility of wildcards. It tells us that each divisional winner is in for sure, but leaves open all the other details. Including who besides the winners might be in the playoffs.
The (slight) problem I have with the current scoring is that we are being SCORED head-to-head but we are COMPETING globally. That is to say, everyone's in the same match competing against everyone else, score-wise, but the there's this entirely arbitrary head-to-head component overlaid on that. So we have the phenomenon that not even CLOSE to the top 8 scoring teams are going into the playoffs, since the way the teams were seeded head-to-head places stronger teams against each other and weaker teams against each other.
It seems strange to me, but in the end it's just a game, and it is what it is :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:27:29 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Maybe for the next time... The rules for DPL2 are already set.
... |
From the DPL faq page, it says,
"6 - How do the playoffs work?
The winning teams from each division all qualify for the playoffs. However, the rest of the details of the playoffs have yet to be finalised."
Emphasis added. I guess I hadn't read "the rest of the details of the playoffs". The tie-breaker beyond the win/loss record is the team season average, which is fine. Still think there should be the inclusion of wild card teams.
eta: found the details regarding tie breaker. |
From Langdon directly in the DPL2 Thread (//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=983107&page=3#5941191)
Originally posted by langdon:
Division A and B will have separate play offs -- the top 4 teams will face off in single elimination bracket-style play. The first season didn't have an overall league winner, but we may try it this season... we'll see how things go. |
I do have a fairly good memory on these things :)
Message edited by author 2010-06-02 14:28:29. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:32:06 PM · #38 |
I don't understand why Division A and Division B won't be matching up. I feel kind of bad for some of the teams that were put in Div A as they might have prevailed as the winner of their division if they had been seeded into Div B.
eta: It looks like the top winner from B wouldn't have finished any better than 3rd or 4th in Div A. Seems like some 2nd and 3rd Div A finishers would have won Div B.
Message edited by author 2010-06-02 14:35:15. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:42:27 PM · #39 |
I hope there are wildcards because looking at the standings page my team is the only one to have the highest ave % but did not win. Not saying this to nudge our way in but if there are wildcards I have a feeling we are a higher possibility of being one. That being said the top 8 teams would for sure make it easy. However who is to say that we can not have a team from the upper bracket be a wildcard and also the bottom bracket. For example a random pick from either the North and West conference and a pick from the South and East conference. That would make 5 teams in each bracket letting the highest scoring team have a "bi" the first round. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:43:18 PM · #40 |
The (slight) problem I have with the current scoring is that we are being SCORED head-to-head but we are COMPETING globally. That is to say, everyone's in the same match competing against everyone else, score-wise, but the there's this entirely arbitrary head-to-head component overlaid on that.[/quote]
That's inherent in league competition that has head to head matchups. It's the head-to-head that defines the season, but the global that defines potential tie-breakers. The head-to-head component was odd in that we had two communications with our opponents during the entire season. Probably don't need the head to head aspect for DPL3...anyway...off topic...sorry!
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
So we have the phenomenon that not even CLOSE to the top 8 scoring teams are going into the playoffs, since the way the teams were seeded head-to-head places stronger teams against each other and weaker teams against each other. |
Teams that chose to stack their teams knew that there would be two divisions based on the teams average. If you want to be on a team of superDPCstars, then the competition is going to be stiffer. Completely fair. Next time have Judi, Jason, et al, sandbag a few weeks to bring down their pre-DPL average! ;) The other option is to change how teams are created. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:46:01 PM · #41 |
It actually sounded like things were still open for possible inclusion of wild cards.
If they're not included this time, I really wish they would be next time.
We went against the top team in the first round. We lost. Unfortunately, in looking at the top team in our division, it was unlikely that the other teams in our division would be able to beat them. So far all intents and purposes, there was no purpose in playing for the rest of the rounds, because no matter how many matches we won, they would always have one more. We played hard anyway. We tried our best. We did well. But it was always in the back of my mind that there wasn't much of a purpose.
So the point is this: Even if there is a clear winner, from the beginning, in your conference/division, with a wild card slot there's a reason to keep playing. It does feel strange coming in 5th out of 48, and yet not making it to the playoffs.
I agree with Bear -- It's just a game, it was fun, and however this is played out, this time, is fine with me. However, it would be nice to fix some of these issues next time.
|
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:48:38 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by mbrutus2009:
I hope there are wildcards because looking at the standings page my team is the only one to have the highest ave % but did not win. Not saying this to nudge our way in but if there are wildcards I have a feeling we are a higher possibility of being one. That being said the top 8 teams would for sure make it easy. However who is to say that we can not have a team from the upper bracket be a wildcard and also the bottom bracket. For example a random pick from either the North and West conference and a pick from the South and East conference. That would make 5 teams in each bracket letting the highest scoring team have a "bi" the first round. Just a thought. |
Not to nit pick, but it's "bye", "bi" means something else in my book. ;-) |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:49:17 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by ErinKirsten:
eta: It looks like the top winner from B wouldn't have finished any better than 3rd or 4th in Div A. Seems like some 2nd and 3rd Div A finishers would have won Div B. |
I didn't make an effort to build a team of routinely high scoring photogs, yes we have a couple ( LevT and  LydiaToo), but overall, I took a different route in the team make up. I knew we would be in the lower brackets, very happy with my squad. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:54:13 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by bspurgeon:
Originally posted by ErinKirsten:
eta: It looks like the top winner from B wouldn't have finished any better than 3rd or 4th in Div A. Seems like some 2nd and 3rd Div A finishers would have won Div B. |
I didn't make an effort to build a team of routinely high scoring photogs, yes we have a couple ( LevT and LydiaToo), but overall, I took a different route in the team make up. I knew we would be in the lower brackets, very happy with my squad. |
Which is great - but I don't understand how the divisions were seeded. Some in Div A should have been in Div B and vice versa. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:56:14 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
We went against the top team in the first round. We lost. Unfortunately, in looking at the top team in our division, it was unlikely that the other teams in our division would be able to beat them. |
I agree. The 80% threshold for pre-DPL team average was way too high. I'd like to see it around 65%, spread the strength out. Lose the divisions and head-to-head match ups. Play out the 5 week season and but the top 16 teams based on percentage/team average in to the playoffs. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:56:16 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by mbrutus2009:
I hope there are wildcards because looking at the standings page my team is the only one to have the highest ave % but did not win. Not saying this to nudge our way in but if there are wildcards I have a feeling we are a higher possibility of being one. That being said the top 8 teams would for sure make it easy. However who is to say that we can not have a team from the upper bracket be a wildcard and also the bottom bracket. For example a random pick from either the North and West conference and a pick from the South and East conference. That would make 5 teams in each bracket letting the highest scoring team have a "bi" the first round. Just a thought. |
Not to nit pick, but it's "bye", "bi" means something else in my book. ;-) |
Oppsy... Haha! Yea now that you say that I realized I messed that one up! Haha! Sorry about that!
|
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:58:53 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by ErinKirsten:
Which is great - but I don't understand how the divisions were seeded. Some in Div A should have been in Div B and vice versa. |
Seeds 25 through 48 went in to Div B. Seed #25 had a team average near 55%. Seeds 1 through 24 were above 55%.
Message edited by author 2010-06-02 14:59:35. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 02:59:11 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
It actually sounded like things were still open for possible inclusion of wild cards.
If they're not included this time, I really wish they would be next time.
We went against the top team in the first round. We lost. Unfortunately, in looking at the top team in our division, it was unlikely that the other teams in our division would be able to beat them. So far all intents and purposes, there was no purpose in playing for the rest of the rounds, because no matter how many matches we won, they would always have one more. We played hard anyway. We tried our best. We did well. But it was always in the back of my mind that there wasn't much of a purpose.
So the point is this: Even if there is a clear winner, from the beginning, in your conference/division, with a wild card slot there's a reason to keep playing. It does feel strange coming in 5th out of 48, and yet not making it to the playoffs.
I agree with Bear -- It's just a game, it was fun, and however this is played out, this time, is fine with me. However, it would be nice to fix some of these issues next time. |
You know, all that is true but a lot of it also depends on the week and the challenges, if we would have been matched up against you guys on Round 4 we would have lost. Round 3 was our worst week, if we would have been matched up with The Village Burners or F/ATE we would have lost (didn't do the math but looking at the percentages it looks that way). |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 03:01:17 PM · #49 |
| Could someone explain seeding to me? I'm not understanding how that works. |
|
|
|
06/02/2010 03:04:52 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by elsapo:
Originally posted by vawendy:
It actually sounded like things were still open for possible inclusion of wild cards.
If they're not included this time, I really wish they would be next time.
We went against the top team in the first round. We lost. Unfortunately, in looking at the top team in our division, it was unlikely that the other teams in our division would be able to beat them. So far all intents and purposes, there was no purpose in playing for the rest of the rounds, because no matter how many matches we won, they would always have one more. We played hard anyway. We tried our best. We did well. But it was always in the back of my mind that there wasn't much of a purpose.
So the point is this: Even if there is a clear winner, from the beginning, in your conference/division, with a wild card slot there's a reason to keep playing. It does feel strange coming in 5th out of 48, and yet not making it to the playoffs.
I agree with Bear -- It's just a game, it was fun, and however this is played out, this time, is fine with me. However, it would be nice to fix some of these issues next time. |
You know, all that is true but a lot of it also depends on the week and the challenges, if we would have been matched up against you guys on Round 4 we would have lost. Round 3 was our worst week, if we would have been matched up with The Village Burners or F/ATE we would have lost (didn't do the math but looking at the percentages it looks that way). |
awww, Justin, no you're going to make me do the math!! (I just took a quick look before; now I have to go find out.) :)
|
|
