| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/28/2006 01:42:07 PM · #1 |
Hi everyone and thank you for a fun and exciting WPL1 and WPL2. Now it’s time to discuss the WPL3. I would like to ask a few questions and have everyone that wants to participate to answer them so that we can improve the WPL. The goal of this discussion thread is to get photographers advice on what they would like to see changed, if any, in season 3.
1. Did you think the regular season of the WPL2 was to long (10 weeks)?
2. Would you like to see each individual challenge count as a W/L in season three instead of going by the week?
This would shorten the season but the amount of challenges would stay the same or be slightly more. The WPL could have 10 games in only 5 weeks instead of taking 10 weeks as it did in WPL2
3. Would you like to see the amount of photographers per team stay the same or go up from seven to ten if question 2 is implemented?
4. Would you like to see team scores divisible by 3 instead of 4 this season if we implement question 2?
5. Should someone that would like to participate replace the photographers that did not participate in the WPL2? I’m only talking about the photographers that signed up and their participation at the end of the regular season was 0%
6. How long do you think the regular season should last (in weeks)?
7. Would you like the Divisions and Leagues to stay the same or would you like all teams pooled together and play against their beginning averages and the top eight teams make it to the playoffs?
I would like for everyone to have input in what WPL3 will be like. Please PM me with your suggestions or post them in this thread. The majority will rule on any changes to the WPL3 season.
Let the discussion begin
SDW
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 01:45:31 PM · #2 |
Here's my uneducated opinion:
2. Keep this by the week. People can't always get a shot in for the specific challenge.
5. I think anyone that did under 20% shouldn't be in.
And since I didn't participate in the last one, I can't really give input on the other things since I don't know how they ran.
--Mike
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 01:46:11 PM · #3 |
| Not a suggestion, sorry, but a question - is there a signup location in place yet for those interested in being on a team for WPL3 that weren't in WPL2? Thanks. |
|
|
|
09/28/2006 01:54:20 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Not a suggestion, sorry, but a question - is there a signup location in place yet for those interested in being on a team for WPL3 that weren't in WPL2? Thanks. |
I can make up a signup sheet for people that want to participate and teams.
Anyone that wants to participate in the WPL PM me with your screen name and a link to your profile. I will post a list of everyone and team on the WPL2 website. That way people can get together and make up their teams. Also if you already have a team please PM me and let me know if your team will be participating in WPL3. I will have the list up tomorrow.
SDW |
|
|
|
09/28/2006 01:55:14 PM · #5 |
Only my thoughts and not those of my team -
I thought the season was good at ten weeks.
I like the weekly format as it is now rather than an individual challenge format.
I think 7 people is a good amount for the teams and keeping the 4 highest scores is still the way to go. How much more would certain teams have crushed others had only the top three scores been taken into consideration.
I think that teams can be reorganized in between seasons depending onthe desires of the captain and the teams. If they decide to keep someone on who doesnt particiapte as much as the others then that is the handicap they have chosen to play with.
The divisions and leagues are nice in that some of the mediocre scoring teams still have a chance at placing in their division. Wildcard slots become more attainable.
Overall I would like to see it remain pretty much the same. Excellent work once again Scott. Great site and well maintained. This has been lots of fun. Would be even more fun if we beat 20D. Can you help out there somehow? ;)
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 01:56:34 PM · #6 |
I wouldn't count every challenge- it's nice to have a second chance, and few people can enter every single challenge anyway.
10 weeks was a little long, but not too bad. Maybe 8 weeks instead?
I don't like the idea of playing against our own averages at all... for uh, personal reasons. ;-)
It's pretty harsh to count non-entries as a zero. Three people could ribbon and still lose as a team if a fourth doesn't participate, so that's not a very good measure of the team's skill IMO. I'd rather have a baseline score of 4 (or whatever), and just use any higher scores the team earns to calculate the avg. |
|
|
|
09/28/2006 01:59:53 PM · #7 |
personally, i like the way that season 2 went... the only way to make each challenge count is to restrict players to paid members only. 'course, that could have it's advantages...
only suggestion i would make is allow a captain to make a substitution if someone doesn't submit for 3 straight weeks... maybe only allow one substituion during the regular season...
again, great work scott... it's been a blast.
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 03:11:01 PM · #8 |
Thanx Scott for PM´ing me about this discussion, would have missed it otherwise as I am not really all that active here these days :)
1. Yes, way way too long and honestly I would not play again if the season is more than 5-6 weeks + playoffs but that´s just me.
2. No, think it´s better as it was, just week to week so that if there is for example a member challenge you don´t like, you can always just wait for the open challenges and not let your team down. Having to compete in week to week is enough, back to back challenges would just make this ardous and not fun, for me at least. Week to week still gives you some sense of control.
3. 7 is cool by me, that system works well for me.
4. Same answer as in 3, division by 4 is good, we only missed it once in the 10 weeks so it´s "doable", 3 is too little and 5 too much if there are no substitutions.
5. I don´t really understand this question, I think WPL seasons should be kindof independent, people can go on in their current teams or new teams can be formed or jump ship and join another team as they please so I don´t think there would be any restrictions after the "team forming window" or what you wanna call it is closed as it was about 2 weeks before the WPL2 started.
6. Like I told Scott at one point, I would personally have more fun with a shorter season and longer playoffs instead. The reason is that is that if we take WPL2 for example, there are only 3 teams making the playoffs on each division so if a team is down like 1-4 after 5 weeks there is really no reason for them to keep competing in the next 5 weeks as it´s almost impossible for them to make the playoffs. I personally would lose interest if the team I was on was that far behind.
I want to suggest smaller groups, maybe 4-6 teams in 6 divisions or something like that. Then only them play internally for 3-5 weeks and the winner of each division goes in to the playoffs + wildcard teams so that we have 8-16 teams in playoffs, the lowest scoring playing the highest scoring and then just have a week by week elimination till we have a finals. That would mean the whole season would be much more exciting, you can still make the playoffs if you are maybe 1-2 behind after 3 weeks and I personally think things would be much more interesting this way.
7. Sure, this idea doesn´t sound too bad either, I don´t really care as long as the regular season is cut much shorter and the playoffs made longer. |
|
|
|
09/28/2006 03:12:59 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
It's pretty harsh to count non-entries as a zero. Three people could ribbon and still lose as a team if a fourth doesn't participate, so that's not a very good measure of the team's skill IMO. I'd rather have a baseline score of 4 (or whatever), and just use any higher scores the team earns to calculate the avg. |
I dunno, I think it´s okay to count them as zero :) We actually pulled of a victory in week 7 when three of us actually did what you said, ribboned and only had 3 entries but we still managed to pull out a win :)
I can´t say that I totally disagree with this though and I bet a couple of other teams who had a lot of weeks where only three of them competed would disagree though. Maybe not a bad idea to have a "base score" of 4.0 and then go from there?
Message edited by author 2006-09-28 15:13:51. |
|
|
|
09/28/2006 03:27:16 PM · #10 |
Scott so are you saying that if someone was on a team in WPL1 and WPL2 but the team has disbanded that they cant join a new team in WPL3? I was a member of The Olypmians in both but halfway through WPL2 the team pretty much dropped out, and at the end I asked the captain for my release from the team, for 2 reasons, I was no longer an Oly shooter and I also wanted to be part of a team that was willing to participate. I have signed up for the new 30D team and am ready for WPL3 whenever it starts. I think an 8 week with a week to week thing is awesome. 10 weeks was a little long, but with the number of teams growing something in the format will have to change. Thanks for all the great work and I look forward to season 3 starting.
MattO
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 03:27:51 PM · #11 |
10 weeks plus playoffs was too long for me. I would support a shorter season, but not limit it to the top 3. In fact, it would be more fun if the two lowest and two highest are averaged. That way, it pushes the people who are scoring low to improve. The zero issue is harsh, so I'm not sure how you want to deal with that.
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 03:40:33 PM · #12 |
Some of my thoughts.
10 weeks was too long. I woudl like to see maybe 6 or 7 then payoffs.
I like the idea of playing off averages or maybe some sort of handicap system. I mean as much as i love some of my and my teamates work most of us can't regularly spit out high 6's and 7's this makes it really less interesting and fun for some. this is the same reason that I won't be entering the MS tournament. I may donate the money anyway but I don't want to be embaressed.
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 03:53:57 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by MattO:
Scott so are you saying that if someone was on a team in WPL1 and WPL2 but the team has disbanded that they cant join a new team in WPL3? I was a member of The Olypmians in both but halfway through WPL2 the team pretty much dropped out, and at the end I asked the captain for my release from the team, for 2 reasons, I was no longer an Oly shooter and I also wanted to be part of a team that was willing to participate. I have signed up for the new 30D team and am ready for WPL3 whenever it starts. I think an 8 week with a week to week thing is awesome. 10 weeks was a little long, but with the number of teams growing something in the format will have to change. Thanks for all the great work and I look forward to season 3 starting.
MattO |
NO. No one would be band from the WPL unless they were band from DPC. I want the WPL to be a place that everyone can participate that wants to. But their are some basic math to teams vs weeks. And I'm trying to get as many people that want to participate in the WPL3 in as short of season as possible.
I believe Larus suggestion of a shorter season and longer playoffs is great. The season would be as long as the amount of teams in each division because you have to play everyone in your division once or it want be fair.
From the replies so far I was thinking something like this.
1.Two leagues (World League and Global League)
2.Each League has two divisions (Division A - Division B)
3.Each Division will have 6 teams. (That will allow for 4 more teams. 28 more photographers)
4. Seven photographers per team.
5. Top four scores / 4 will be the teams average for the week.
6. A 5 week season.
7. Playoffs will be bracketed single elimination till we have a winner from the World league and Global league.
9. The winners of both leagues will play for the title of WPL3 Champions in the PhotoBowl II.
Message edited by author 2006-09-30 21:52:49. |
|
|
|
09/28/2006 03:56:23 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Southern Gentleman:
1.Two leagues (World League and Global League)
2.Each League has two divisions (Division A - Division B)
3.Each Division will have 6 teams. (That will allow for 4 more teams. 28 more photographers)
4. Seven photographers per team.
5. Top four scores / 4 will be the teams average for the week.
6. A 5 week season.
7. No team will be eliminated from the playoffs. The season will determine the order of playoffs for each division.
8. Playoffs will be bracketed single elimination till we have a winner from the World league and Global league.
9. The winners of both leagues will play for the title of WPL3 Champions in the PhotoBowl II. |
I agree 100% with every point and this would be the perfect WPL season as far as I am concerned and would get me fired up again about competing, I was and am very fatigued by the last season, I think this would make things WAY more interesting. |
|
|
|
09/28/2006 03:57:11 PM · #15 |
I think people are missing the idea that going by challenge instead of week allows for more head-to-head matches in a shorter period of time. Having then to enter more challenges is mediated by only needing 3 people per challenge AND adding more people on your team 10 instead of 7. This seems like a great scenario because it shortens the season (most people seem to be complaining) BUT allows more people to participate.
It seems like more, but would it really be hard to make sure at least 3 people out of 10 participate in each challenge (I'm assuming 1 member challenge, 1 open challenge where either can be entered)?
I like things the way Scott suggested. I'm with Larus and am not sure I'd have the energy for another 10 week season.
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 04:00:05 PM · #16 |
I would like more information on what a WPL is.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 04:02:41 PM · #17 |
Thanks for the pm Scott.
Yes, I think 10 weeks was a long time and for the teams that continue (play-offs), we are talking three months. I would think 5 weeks or 6 at the most is much better.
It might be easier to administer a week by week thing rather than the other idea. It might prove hard for the captains to keep track of how many team-members have submitted in each challenge.
Some kind of sub-system would be great. Picking a sub that has a higher average should not be allowed. I am sure some good sub-rules could be made.
I think that the teams should be able to pick their own subs. There is ample time for any dpc'er to get on a team before it all starts. A pool of subs is ok, but I don't think the teams should have to pick a sub from the pool.
7 photographers seems ok if we divide with 4.
Edit to clarify.
Message edited by author 2006-09-28 16:12:10. |
|
|
|
09/28/2006 04:02:52 PM · #18 |
So we can replace photographers? yes. I know we have two teammates from our team that will be bowing out from season 3 as WPL was just too much work for them to enjoy. I was thinking maybe have divisions of 5 teams and play them twice which would give us and 8 week regular season but could then make it tough for a team with a high average that gets stuck in a really tough division. Then have division leaders and wildcards in the playoffs.
Some other suggestions were to the website. I was wondering if it was possible to get a ranking of photogs and teams in order of the highest average as well as most improved. Just my 2 cents. THanks alot for everything Scott, very appreciated.
joe
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 04:55:35 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by bvoi:
10 weeks plus playoffs was too long for me. I would support a shorter season, but not limit it to the top 3. In fact, it would be more fun if the two lowest and two highest are averaged. That way, it pushes the people who are scoring low to improve. The zero issue is harsh, so I'm not sure how you want to deal with that. |
not sure i like this better than the way it's going, but it is sure an interesting idea...
i'd say, as for the zero scores, you can't get your team mates to enter, then oh well. that's kind of what it means to be on a team, yes/no?
maybe use your idea, but state it as the top 2 and bottom 2 non-zero scores, though... again, if only 3 people enter, you still add the 3 and divide by 4...
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 05:04:06 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by Larus:
this... would get me fired up again about competing |
Oooh... there's a strong argument for keeping things the way they are now. ;-P |
|
|
|
09/28/2006 05:11:58 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by Southern Gentleman:
From the replies so far I was thinking something like this.
1.Two leagues (World League and Global League)
2.Each League has two divisions (Division A - Division B)
3.Each Division will have 6 teams. (That will allow for 4 more teams. 28 more photographers)
4. Seven photographers per team.
5. Top four scores / 4 will be the teams average for the week.
6. A 5 week season.
7. No team will be eliminated from the playoffs. The season will determine the order of playoffs for each division.
8. Playoffs will be bracketed single elimination till we have a winner from the World league and Global league.
9. The winners of both leagues will play for the title of WPL3 Champions in the PhotoBowl II. |
I like this idea. So you would allow for substitutions prior to the start of the season but not after, correct? |
|
|
|
09/28/2006 05:16:23 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by yanko:
I like this idea. So you would allow for substitutions prior to the start of the season but not after, correct? |
That is correct. Prior to the beginning of the season teams can make any change they wish to make but once the season starts the team is locked in. |
|
|
|
09/28/2006 05:18:03 PM · #23 |
just wanted to make sure that u know that team trigger happy is in.
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 05:48:36 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Southern Gentleman:
Originally posted by MattO:
Scott so are you saying that if someone was on a team in WPL1 and WPL2 but the team has disbanded that they cant join a new team in WPL3? I was a member of The Olypmians in both but halfway through WPL2 the team pretty much dropped out, and at the end I asked the captain for my release from the team, for 2 reasons, I was no longer an Oly shooter and I also wanted to be part of a team that was willing to participate. I have signed up for the new 30D team and am ready for WPL3 whenever it starts. I think an 8 week with a week to week thing is awesome. 10 weeks was a little long, but with the number of teams growing something in the format will have to change. Thanks for all the great work and I look forward to season 3 starting.
MattO |
NO. No one would be band from the WPL unless they were band from DPC. I want the WPL to be a place that everyone can participate that wants to. But their are some basic math to teams vs weeks. And I'm trying to get as many people that want to participate in the WPL3 in as short of season as possible.
I believe Larus suggestion of a shorter season and longer playoffs is great. The season would be as long as the amount of teams in each division because you have to play everyone in your division once or it want be fair.
From the replies so far I was thinking something like this.
1.Two leagues (World League and Global League)
2.Each League has two divisions (Division A - Division B)
3.Each Division will have 6 teams. (That will allow for 4 more teams. 28 more photographers)
4. Seven photographers per team.
5. Top four scores / 4 will be the teams average for the week.
6. A 5 week season.
7. No team will be eliminated from the playoffs. The season will determine the order of playoffs for each division.
8. Playoffs will be bracketed single elimination till we have a winner from the World league and Global league.
9. The winners of both leagues will play for the title of WPL3 Champions in the PhotoBowl II. |
that sounds pretty good.
not sure if the sign-up has begun but i don't think i'll be looking at captaincy again. maybe as a recruit.
|
|
|
|
09/28/2006 06:25:00 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Larus:
this... would get me fired up again about competing |
Oooh... there's a strong argument for keeping things the way they are now. ;-P |
I don't suppose you'd be in favor of an automatic 1.0 deduction on every entry entered by those wearing goofy jester hats? |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 09:09:36 PM EDT.
