H2H Exposed Part 1

Ted's Cracked Head · Post by **Ted's Cracked Head** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:02 am

Funny as it sounds, the remedy to H2H is more H2H. Could any of our many Stats Majors put a number to how much the luck factor would be reduced? Ted?
HMan83 I have already taken the 2006 NFFC season, taken every single score for each team every week and plugged them into a "system" to evaluate an All Play concept I have had for the past 4 years.

I will post the results on one of my sites in the very near future. I just have too many other things going right now.

I have already emailed Greg that I would like to do a 10-20 league All Play Test Satellite next year.

As far as the NFFC - I like it just the way it is.

kjduke · Post by **kjduke** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:04 am

John, there will be a lot of close league races this year as always.

Please explain how it is more fair that a 3rd place team - that misses the playoff by a few points or by unlcuky h2h scheduling - and then goes on to outscore the first or second place team by a hundred points over the next 3 weeks makes the NFFC more fair, than allowing that team into the playoff?

ultimatefs · Post by **ultimatefs** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:06 am

Originally posted by Hman83:
my bad John.... just like to see get you riled up sometimes. not like my 11th place finish in that 2006 league was much better. both bagged by the dirtbag.
sorry, HMan83 No worries.

I like to get KJ riled up and see him lose another "gaming" debate with me.

I would never debate financial matters with him.

kjduke · Post by **kjduke** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:06 am

Originally posted by JohnZ:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Of course there is a debate John, it is a 16-week season. yep, and the NFL is a 20-week season.

16 weeks regular, 4 weeks of playoffs.

nffc is 13 weeks regular, 3 weeks of playoffs.

EVERY team in NFFC gets to play in the playoffs, not just 37%.

The top 10% get to play for $100K

The bottom 90% play for $2500.

If you don't have the best h2h AND pts, you get to have a playoff.

So that covers all 16 weeks pretty fairly IMO.

All I see from you is an effort to add more teams to the league championship round that more times than not, don't deserve to be there.

I'm all for teams that deserve to be there. [/QUOTE]It sounds more to me like you are stuck on "that's the way it's always been" argument with no real supporting argument, rather than being open-minded to something that may be better.

bill · Post by **bill** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:06 am

I think the current system is very good.

Would like to see doubleheaders and to offer a few satellite leagues that use all-play only.

kjduke · Post by **kjduke** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:08 am

Originally posted by JohnZ:
quote:Originally posted by Hman83:
my bad John.... just like to see get you riled up sometimes. not like my 11th place finish in that 2006 league was much better. both bagged by the dirtbag.
sorry, HMan83 No worries.

I like to get KJ riled up and see him lose another "gaming" debate with me.

I would never debate financial matters with him.

[/QUOTE]Another ??? let's not open that can of worms, 'cause if you're claiming victory we gotta start tham all from scratch again!

ultimatefs · Post by **ultimatefs** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:23 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:
John, there will be a lot of close league races this year as always.

Please explain how it is more fair that a 3rd place team - that misses the playoff by a few points or by unlcuky h2h scheduling - and then goes on to outscore the first or second place team by a hundred points over the next 3 weeks makes the NFFC more fair, than allowing that team into the playoff? There are actually more close races this year because of the parity at all of the positions this year, as opposed to prior years when there were 1-5 clearly dominant guys at QB-RB-TE.

That 3rd place team you noted would likely win a/the consolation prize then, while the other two would not.

If that 3rd place team was very close, then maybe it wins the all-play mode and is the 3rd team.

Like you said, lot of closes races, why stop at 3 teams under what you want? Why not 4? Why not 6? They all have the same argument you are presenting.

It needs to really stay at two. Two is along the lines of the 10% theory for the $100K and is what makes winning these leagues more rewarding than some SAT that has 4 playoff teams, or any other league we play in. The only 3rd teams should be those 3-4 each year that get under the 10%.

This is a National Championship with a league component, not a yahoo league based on winning your league.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:25 am

Let me just jump in this moving thread and state that I have always looked at rules proposals when I see inequities or possible inequities with our current setup. As folks know, I gave h2h records much more credence in the early going and even awarded the $5,000 league prize ONLY to the h2h champion through the first few years. Three years of data proved that something needed to be done because the best teams didn't always win the top prize.

Same with not having a wild card in Year One. I saw where you could possibly finish with the third most points overall and NOT make our Championship Round. That had to be corrected and we did so with the 10% rule.

Same with random draft slots. I felt data proved that something had to be done there and we corrected it or at least tried to with 3RR/KDS.

Now onto this topic. The topic headline is H2H Exposed. Well, we have data every year that looks at each league and shows whether h2h allowed many teams into the championship round that weren't deserving and we'll have that same data again this year. I just went through every single league in both main events and did not see many wild discrepencies. I promise to do that tonight or tomorrow and post the results and obviously we'll post everything at the end of the year. If there really is an "exposure" to h2h, we'll address it. If nothing is "exposed" we can still debate the need for a better system, but right now I think our NFFC setup is very solid and isn't in need of an overhaul.

Adding a third league team to the Championship Round is a worthy debate, but it has its plusses and minuses. This year in both NFFC main events, there will be about 40 teams eligible for the $100,000 grand prize in each event. It's a select class and the goal of getting to the Championship Round and knowing you have a 1 in 40 shot at $1 million has to be an incredible feeling. Now if you added one more team from each league, it would still be a reasonable 1 in 60 or 62, but obviously it increases the odds.

I know KJ, you could go 3x the regular season in points, but our current 1x has provided incredible races these last few years and it seems to work. Again, I have no problem in that one being a separate debate from h2h and I look forward to some intelligent discussions there later on.

Okay, I'll post each league result soon.

kjduke · Post by **kjduke** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:36 am

Thanks for chiming in Greg and for taking another look at the data, but I will point out there is one thing that you can't see in the data - how we lose competitors early in the process because they started with bad luck.

The data you're looking at will have bias here as teams that start out lucky will be competing 100% to improve their team as the season goes on, while some of those unlucky throw in the towel early ... which will make the ending data look more supportive of H2H being fair than otherwise.

I think the proof of this lies in the auction league results where teams do not throw in the towel early because they feel hopeless after say, a 1-3 start. Those leagues tend to be closer in both W/L record, and closer in total points.

Again, I am not advocating getting rid of H2H, to the contrary, this league would be dull without it - but I think we can keep h2h, make the contest more just, and keep more teams involved deeper into the season with a couple of changes.

williamhare · Post by **williamhare** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:40 am

Greg-
You understand by "exposed" I meant a possibile disconnect between points and record? Nothing more.
Please, never do away with H2H. But, do address whatever drawbacks you might see to the DH's as that topic keeps getting dismissed despite only one party voicing a negative comment.
thanks, HMan83