DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> WPL - Results
Pages:   ... ...
Showing posts 276 - 300 of 630, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 04/28/2006 10:15:16 PM · #276
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by Rikki:


This way, the talent is spread out.


TALENT??? Nobody told me you had to have talent to be in here. Rut Roh...me thinks I am in the wrong place then...I had better leave...bye ya!!!


hehehhe... yes talent. notice how i didn't specify what kind of talent?

meow!
 04/28/2006 10:16:34 PM · #277
Originally posted by Rikki:
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by Rikki:


This way, the talent is spread out.


TALENT??? Nobody told me you had to have talent to be in here. Rut Roh...me thinks I am in the wrong place then...I had better leave...bye ya!!!


hehehhe... yes talent. notice how i didn't specify what kind of talent?

meow!


Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!

04/28/2006 10:24:26 PM · #278
Originally posted by GIS_boy:
Originally posted by yanko:
You could always try and draft your season one teammates after all Team Pentax is overrated and I doubt you guys would be top draft choices anyway. :P

ETA: *quicky runs away*


You can run but you can't hide, Round 5 just got personal friend!!!


Uh oh, Yanko, what have you done? I think it's probably akin to stepping on a fire ant mound....
 04/28/2006 10:30:41 PM · #279
If Rikki is talking about captain's "picking teams" from from the collective that wants to participate ... I think that's a good idea, too.

(forgive me if that's not what you said)

Part of what I saw in the previous creation of teams was that they were semi-cumbersome to put together unless you were either a "DPC Big Gun" or "DPC super forum talkative".

So just saying, "yes, i'd like to play" is a good way for "quieter" people to get on a team ... and perhaps a very competitive team.

(not sure if i'll be even participating, just trying to help figure out what's best)
 04/28/2006 10:37:38 PM · #280
I guess captains picking teams is one way to do it but I like the rivalry that comes from having camera based or location based teams.

I'm likely to be in the minority though.

bazz.
 04/28/2006 10:38:42 PM · #281
Y'all just can't stand the fact that a Camera system that nobody cares about is WHOOPING ALL Y'ALL'S BUTTS! :)
 04/28/2006 11:38:29 PM · #282
Originally posted by Artyste:
Y'all just can't stand the fact that a Camera system that nobody cares about is WHOOPING ALL Y'ALL'S BUTTS! :)


"Whoop" - a loud, cacaphonous, howling sound.

Whooping? As in whooping cough? Don't you mean whipping instead, or perhaps the more popular colloquilism 'whupping'?

Whooping someone's butt sounds positively nasty! How do you do that, put your face down close to the derriere and let go a howling whoop? Not exactly for the shrinking violet!!

Just kidding, dude, I know what you mean and it is appropriate!
 04/28/2006 11:53:35 PM · #283
Originally posted by sir_bazz:
I guess captains picking teams is one way to do it but I like the rivalry that comes from having camera based or location based teams.

I'm likely to be in the minority though.

bazz.


Like what I said to GIS Boy, you could field an all Pentax team via a draft should you feel like limiting yourselves. :P Dammit Melethia, I can't help it!
 04/29/2006 01:10:10 AM · #284
Originally posted by yanko:
Like what I said to GIS Boy, you could field an all Pentax team via a draft should you feel like limiting yourselves. :P Dammit Melethia, I can't help it!

Grrrrr...

And like GIS_boy said......now it's personal and we may even start trying to do well against you guys. :)

bazz.
 04/29/2006 02:10:54 AM · #285
I think Team Pentax should stay together.
 04/29/2006 04:39:10 AM · #286
Originally posted by sir_bazz:
I guess captains picking teams is one way to do it but I like the rivalry that comes from having camera based or location based teams.

I'm likely to be in the minority though.

bazz.


Absolutely, there will NOT be the same level of team rivalry if WPL is not brand or location based IMO.

In the future I would really like to see an Australian Team get up and would love to think I could be part of it.

I also think that cutting up the teams for each season will also prevent team members from bonding as a strong working team.
 04/29/2006 05:07:49 AM · #287
Originally posted by Southern Gentleman:
The handicap system I'm currently look at is molded from the 200@80% bowling system. Here is what it would be like.

Since 5.5 is the actual scale average then the handicap will be based on that to the photographer only gets 80% of the difference.

To start the season the photographers handicap will be based on there average.

Photographer A = 5.2000 (5.5000-5.2000/.80) = handicap of 0.2400
Photographer B = 5.5000 (5.5000-5.5000/.80) = handicap of 0.0000
Photographer C = 6.0000 (5.5000-6.0000/.80) = handicap of -0.4000 = 0

That's if the handicap system in implemented. Still just thinking about it.

The main thing I am working on now is having it where teams play teams in there own division as well as other divisions. That way you can control your destiny to a degree instead of waiting on a team above you to loose.

EDIT to add: I would ask for user input because I want what the majority wants.


Sorry but this would totally null out members like Kiwiness and Librodo and myself! Scoring on DPC is like a bell curve. Everyone knows it´s harder to score a 6.5 than a 5.5, let alone a 7.5 no matter what your name is and how many ribbons you have.

Let´s just do some math. My average is 6.36 at this moment. That would mean that I would get a 0.86*0.8=.0688 handicap! If this were implemented I would have to score a - 0.688 in every single challenge so a 6.5 score from me in any given week would just count as a 5.8. And then a member with 5.8 average would just get a 0.24 handicap and "just" has to score a 6.04 to count as much as I would! Let´s not talk about Gary, he is WAY more likely than me to score a 7+ but he would have to score a 7+ to count as much as the 5.8 member with a just barely a 6 grade.

I have absolutely no interest in participating if this handicap is set for season 2.
 04/29/2006 05:16:22 AM · #288
I think a handicap would be a bad idea, even if it means if I'm ever part of a team it will mean an instant loss for said team, heh. There's just too much variance between challenges to regulate things based on a 'norm' (user's average score). Also, it would pretty much remove the incentive for the lower-scoring members to do better, as they can submit average photos each week and still be on par with everyone else.

Message edited by author 2006-04-29 05:17:51.
 04/29/2006 05:27:17 AM · #289
If you create handicaps based on averages, you put people like me in hog heaven. I enter challenges every week, and a lot of the time I'm just goofing. I don't enter "bad" pictures (not consciously anyway) but I don't often pay a hell of a lot of attention to tailoring my entries to the voters' expectations. My DPC average, in my eyes, doesn't come close to describing how "good" of a photographer I am. And I'm not the only one like this, far from it.

I understand why some people are clamoring to retain the "group" nature of the teams, but it looks a little cockeyed when ONE team can have Kiwiness, Pedro, and Librodo on it. There aren't all that many proven winners in DPC, folks who can crank out the ribbons seemingly at will, and having three of them on one team is a little discouraging.

In a lot of team golf tournaments, the organizers create A, B, and C pools based on handicaps, and teams must have 1 A player, 1 B player, and 2 C players. I rather like the idea of some variation of this coming into play here. A "draft" would be pretty cumbersome, but if some pools were established (based on ribbons won perhaps) with a team limited to no more than 2 A players and 2 B players (everyone with a ribbon is a B or an A player, and 3 ribbons or more is the cutoff, something like that) then we can still pick our teams based on affinities as long as we stay within those guidelines, maybe?

R.

Message edited by author 2006-04-29 05:27:50.
 04/29/2006 05:37:32 AM · #290
Originally posted by Larus:
Originally posted by Southern Gentleman:
The handicap system I'm currently look at is molded from the 200@80% bowling system. Here is what it would be like.

Since 5.5 is the actual scale average then the handicap will be based on that to the photographer only gets 80% of the difference.

To start the season the photographers handicap will be based on there average.

Photographer A = 5.2000 (5.5000-5.2000/.80) = handicap of 0.2400
Photographer B = 5.5000 (5.5000-5.5000/.80) = handicap of 0.0000
Photographer C = 6.0000 (5.5000-6.0000/.80) = handicap of -0.4000 = 0

That's if the handicap system in implemented. Still just thinking about it.

The main thing I am working on now is having it where teams play teams in there own division as well as other divisions. That way you can control your destiny to a degree instead of waiting on a team above you to loose.

EDIT to add: I would ask for user input because I want what the majority wants.


Sorry but this would totally null out members like Kiwiness and Librodo and myself! Scoring on DPC is like a bell curve. Everyone knows it´s harder to score a 6.5 than a 5.5, let alone a 7.5 no matter what your name is and how many ribbons you have.

Let´s just do some math. My average is 6.36 at this moment. That would mean that I would get a 0.86*0.8=.0688 handicap! If this were implemented I would have to score a - 0.688 in every single challenge so a 6.5 score from me in any given week would just count as a 5.8. And then a member with 5.8 average would just get a 0.24 handicap and "just" has to score a 6.04 to count as much as I would! Let´s not talk about Gary, he is WAY more likely than me to score a 7+ but he would have to score a 7+ to count as much as the 5.8 member with a just barely a 6 grade.

I have absolutely no interest in participating if this handicap is set for season 2.

The handicap is still just an idea but you have it wrong. You would have a zero handicap. There is no such thing as a negative handicap only positive if you qualify. Maybe I didn't explain the handicap system well enough.
Here how it works. A basic overview

Photographers with a 5.5 of less avg. would have a handicap
Photographers with a 5.5 of above avg. would not have a handicap and would not have any points taken away.

EXAMPLE:
[Handicap formula: 5.5000 - photographers avg / 80%. (no negative handicaps)
Photographer A
-beginning avg. 5.2500
-Handicap: 0.2000
-Scored a 5.7000 + HC = 5.9000

Photographer B
-beginning avg.: 6.2500
-Handicap: 0 because his/her avg. is above the handicap line.
-Scored a 6.1000 + HC = 6.1000

But like I said; the handicap system is just a thought right now. It would make more of an even competition without lowering any photographers score. But it is up to WPL participants whether it is implemented or not. I want the majority to rule, not me.
 04/29/2006 10:10:19 AM · #291
Originally posted by Southern Gentleman:

[Handicap formula: 5.5000 - photographers avg / 80%. (no negative handicaps)
Photographer A
-beginning avg. 5.2500
-Handicap: 0.2000
-Scored a 5.7000 + HC = 5.9000

Photographer B
-beginning avg.: 6.2500
-Handicap: 0 because his/her avg. is above the handicap line.
-Scored a 6.1000 + HC = 6.1000

But like I said; the handicap system is just a thought right now. It would make more of an even competition without lowering any photographers score. But it is up to WPL participants whether it is implemented or not. I want the majority to rule, not me.


Ah ok, I get it now, missunderstood the calculations and missed that "=0" bit. Well this handicap system is one I could live with, just one thing I would like to add is that there would be some kind of minimum amount of challenges you would have to had entered before you get a handicap assistance, like you would have had to be in 10 or more challenges, something like that? Just cause most people start off scoring low while they are figuring out what works well in the challenges so even people who are very good could get a 4.8 average in their first two challenges.

Edit: Spelling...

Message edited by author 2006-04-29 10:13:37.
 04/29/2006 07:34:13 PM · #292
Question: Will the Free Study IX count as a WPL scoring challenge? Thanks!

Message edited by author 2006-04-29 19:34:48.
 04/29/2006 07:48:56 PM · #293
for Week 6 I assume ;)
 04/29/2006 08:15:17 PM · #294
Originally posted by Rikki:
for Week 6 I assume ;)


Good luck Rikki, your the only one in our team to qualify!!
 04/29/2006 08:18:47 PM · #295
Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by Rikki:
for Week 6 I assume ;)


Good luck Rikki, your the only one in our team to qualify!!


not yet. i'm getting buried in comments. Have you seen my profile lately???
 04/29/2006 08:19:55 PM · #296
Originally posted by Rikki:
Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by Rikki:
for Week 6 I assume ;)


Good luck Rikki, your the only one in our team to qualify!!


not yet. i'm getting buried in comments. Have you seen my profile lately???


OK so we have no-one!!
 04/29/2006 08:20:59 PM · #297
Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by Rikki:
Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by Rikki:
for Week 6 I assume ;)


Good luck Rikki, your the only one in our team to qualify!!


not yet. i'm getting buried in comments. Have you seen my profile lately???


OK so we have no-one!!


but i didn't say i'm out of it yet ;) Wooohoo! Team 20D!
 04/29/2006 08:36:39 PM · #298
I think Bear's idea is a very good compromise. I much rather see more balanced teams versus handicaps.
 04/29/2006 09:50:09 PM · #299
Here̢۪s a suggestion that̢۪s a bit of a compromise between the current system and a handicap system that should be quite easy to implement and would run concurrent.

I think we could keep the current system as is but increase the wildcard entry to two teams coming from a handicap system and they would each play the two divisional winners for the positions in the final.

Scott has a great spreadsheet in place to track the most improved which is in itself a handicap system as we are all trying to beat our average. All we would need to do is add the 4 highest scores in each team at the end of the normal season to get a final figure and the two teams (non-division winners) with the highest improvement would move on to the play off̢۪s as wildcards.

What do you think ??

04/29/2006 10:58:45 PM · #300


Message edited by author 2006-04-29 23:36:36.
Pages:   ... ...
Current Server Time: 08/06/2025 12:37:38 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/06/2025 12:37:38 PM EDT.