So... how are we going to do it?
I would use a weighting system so lets say the average Euro Score is 1300 and the Worlds is 1400 we go the euro team whatever they score you multiply by 1.08 so its adjusted to a common scale.
This can be done to convert any of the teams comps to a central scoring system.
Than what I would do is maybee like the tennis you have seedlings based on peoples ranking with their averages adjusted to the central scoring system. I might be wrong but i think there are 64 teams. What i would do is have the top 16 teams getting seedings. Than the rest going random and than you play it out during the season. and you keep knocking teams out till you get to the grandfinal.
So there would be 7 rounds. So you dont start till later in the season when teams have played a few games so you can get a accurate average.
I would be happy to organise this. The winner would than hold the 15s champion team of the year.
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 04:54:19 PM
I would use a weighting system so lets say the average Euro Score is 1300 and the Worlds is 1400 we go the euro team whatever they score you multiply by 1.08 so its adjusted to a common scale.
This can be done to convert any of the teams comps to a central scoring system.
Than what I would do is maybee like the tennis you have seedlings based on peoples ranking with their averages adjusted to the central scoring system. I might be wrong but i think there are 64 teams. What i would do is have the top 16 teams getting seedings. Than the rest going random and than you play it out during the season. and you keep knocking teams out till you get to the grandfinal.
I would be happy to organise this. The winner would than hold the 15s champion team of the year.
^ yes!
And given the Brits and Asia haven't started yet, we should wait until mid-season for scores and such
Quote from: ossie85 on September 07, 2012, 04:59:34 PM
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 04:54:19 PM
I would use a weighting system so lets say the average Euro Score is 1300 and the Worlds is 1400 we go the euro team whatever they score you multiply by 1.08 so its adjusted to a common scale.
This can be done to convert any of the teams comps to a central scoring system.
Than what I would do is maybee like the tennis you have seedlings based on peoples ranking with their averages adjusted to the central scoring system. I might be wrong but i think there are 64 teams. What i would do is have the top 16 teams getting seedings. Than the rest going random and than you play it out during the season. and you keep knocking teams out till you get to the grandfinal.
I would be happy to organise this. The winner would than hold the 15s champion team of the year.
^ yes!
And given the Brits and Asia haven't started yet, we should wait until mid-season for scores and such
yeah just thought about that and with teams changing soo much from trades you want to wait till later. This comp would only last 7 rounds so you can wait till halfway through the season.
That sounds like a good way to go. My initial thought was the previous seasons winners play off or top 4 from each.
Wasn't sure how to score the champions matches, thing is the teams are drafted and named for very different scoring systems especially Asians SB where mark + kick + goal = +20, and then the Euro's SC is very different also using key defenders that will get smashed by people like delidio and grimes in SB and DT scoring.
Was thinking you could take the two teams playing each other and use the mean score of their scoring system (say SC)and their opponents scoring system (say DT).
But the multiplier you suggest is probably the easiest way to run it. And the fairest way.
I have no issue with who runs it or how you run it just let me know if and when you need any help with setup, results ect..
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 04:54:19 PM
I would use a weighting system so lets say the average Euro Score is 1300 and the Worlds is 1400 we go the euro team whatever they score you multiply by 1.08 so its adjusted to a common scale.
This can be done to convert any of the teams comps to a central scoring system.
Than what I would do is maybee like the tennis you have seedlings based on peoples ranking with their averages adjusted to the central scoring system. I might be wrong but i think there are 64 teams. What i would do is have the top 16 teams getting seedings. Than the rest going random and than you play it out during the season. and you keep knocking teams out till you get to the grandfinal.
So there would be 7 rounds. So you dont start till later in the season when teams have played a few games so you can get a accurate average.
I would be happy to organise this. The winner would than hold the 15s champion team of the year.
I would suggest weighting each position rather than each team personally...
just a suggestion
thats a great idea on how to do it Holz :)
So i will probably be playing myself with my asian's and euro's teams in the grand final hahah :P
Quote from: picker_man on September 07, 2012, 07:03:51 PM
thats a great idea on how to do it Holz :)
So i will probably be playing myself with my asian's and euro's teams in the grand final hahah :P
I think Maca (Worlds), Meow (Euro), Bombers (British) would be the early favourites
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 07:11:36 PM
Quote from: picker_man on September 07, 2012, 07:03:51 PM
thats a great idea on how to do it Holz :)
So i will probably be playing myself with my asian's and euro's teams in the grand final hahah :P
I think Maca (Worlds), Meow (Euro), Bombers (British) would be the early favourites
i like being the underdog ;)
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 07:11:36 PM
Quote from: picker_man on September 07, 2012, 07:03:51 PM
thats a great idea on how to do it Holz :)
So i will probably be playing myself with my asian's and euro's teams in the grand final hahah :P
I think Maca (Worlds), Meow (Euro), Bombers (British) would be the early favourites
And Nails - Asians ;)
Quote from: Nails on September 07, 2012, 10:58:53 PM
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 07:11:36 PM
Quote from: picker_man on September 07, 2012, 07:03:51 PM
thats a great idea on how to do it Holz :)
So i will probably be playing myself with my asian's and euro's teams in the grand final hahah :P
I think Maca (Worlds), Meow (Euro), Bombers (British) would be the early favourites
And Noz - Asians ;)
I agree mate :)
Quote from: Noz on September 07, 2012, 11:00:44 PM
Quote from: Nails on September 07, 2012, 10:58:53 PM
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 07:11:36 PM
Quote from: picker_man on September 07, 2012, 07:03:51 PM
thats a great idea on how to do it Holz :)
So i will probably be playing myself with my asian's and euro's teams in the grand final hahah :P
I think Maca (Worlds), Meow (Euro), Bombers (British) would be the early favourites
And Noz - Asians ;)
I agree mate :)
We will see, the first 6 picks "a team does not make".
Quote from: Noz on September 07, 2012, 11:00:44 PM
Quote from: Nails on September 07, 2012, 10:58:53 PM
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 07:11:36 PM
Quote from: picker_man on September 07, 2012, 07:03:51 PM
thats a great idea on how to do it Holz :)
So i will probably be playing myself with my asian's and euro's teams in the grand final hahah :P
I think Maca (Worlds), Meow (Euro), Bombers (British) would be the early favourites
And BB67th - Asians ;)
I agree mate :)
Good to see that we all share similar opinions on this topic :)
Plus i mate also add with the seeding i think it would only be fair to seed 8 teams. The top 4 finalists in the Euro's and Worlds as the Asians and British seasons haven't started yet.
Group 1 Group 2
World Team 1 Euro Team 1
Euro Team 2 World Team 2
World Team 3 Euro Team 3
Euro Team 4 World Team 4
Then the remaining 56 teams will be put in a random engine done by a outside party not involved in any of the World competitions, Not that i do not trust you Ozzie, Holz, MTTY or CW i just believe involving a third party would be fair in all sorts.
^ Could ask Monty to do it for us around 10 and then get the fixture done by the 2015 season ;D
Quote from: Noz on September 07, 2012, 11:05:47 PM
Plus i mate also add with the seeding i think it would only be fair to seed 8 teams. The top 4 finalists in the Euro's and Worlds as the Asians and British seasons haven't started yet.
Group 1 Group 2
World Team 1 Euro Team 1
Euro Team 2 World Team 2
World Team 3 Euro Team 3
Euro Team 4 World Team 4
Then the remaining 56 teams will be put in a random engine done by a outside party not involved in any of the World competitions, Not that i do not trust you Ozzie, Holz, MTTY or CW i just believe involving a third party would be fair in all sorts.
Im fine with someone else doing the draw. The problem with your idea for seeding is that with trading teams have changed alot and some have got much stronger and weaker. Because the comp will be held in the second half of the season we can just use the averages of the teams in the first half so we get the strongest teams with the seeding.
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 11:16:58 PM
Quote from: Noz on September 07, 2012, 11:05:47 PM
Plus i mate also add with the seeding i think it would only be fair to seed 8 teams. The top 4 finalists in the Euro's and Worlds as the Asians and British seasons haven't started yet.
Group 1 Group 2
World Team 1 Euro Team 1
Euro Team 2 World Team 2
World Team 3 Euro Team 3
Euro Team 4 World Team 4
Then the remaining 56 teams will be put in a random engine done by a outside party not involved in any of the World competitions, Not that i do not trust you Ozzie, Holz, MTTY or CW i just believe involving a third party would be fair in all sorts.
Im fine with someone else doing the draw. The problem with your idea for seeding is that with trading teams have changed alot and some have got much stronger and weaker. Because the comp will be held in the second half of the season we can just use the averages of the teams in the first half so we get the strongest teams with the seeding.
Yeah that seems like a fair idea, Didn't take trading into account. Seeding top 16 teams based on the first half of the season seems a fair plan to all teams.
I agree if the comp is to take place in the second half of the season then it should be seeded and the draw setup the week before it starts off the current team rankings.
If it is to be based on the previous seasons rankings then it should take place in the first part of the following season.
Agree with Colli. As we will be playing in later half of the year then use the rankings at a specified cut off point. If specified at the start of the year then we all know where we need to b at Round x to make the champions league.
Quote from: Colliwobblers on September 07, 2012, 11:19:14 PM
I agree if the comp is to take place in the second half of the season then it should be seeded and the draw setup the week before it starts off the current team rankings.
If it is to be based on the previous seasons rankings then it should take place in the first part of the following season.
Not sure how it can be done at the start sorry, think making weightings for Brits and Asia would be too difficult...
Quote from: ossie85 on September 07, 2012, 04:46:17 PM
So... how are we going to do it?
Quote from: BB67th on September 07, 2012, 11:03:41 PM
Quote from: Noz on September 07, 2012, 11:00:44 PM
Quote from: Nails on September 07, 2012, 10:58:53 PM
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 07:11:36 PM
Quote from: picker_man on September 07, 2012, 07:03:51 PM
thats a great idea on how to do it Holz :)
So i will probably be playing myself with my asian's and euro's teams in the grand final hahah :P
I think Maca (Worlds), Meow (Euro), Bombers (British) would be the early favourites
And Jayman - Asians ;)
I agree mate :)
Good to see that we all share similar opinions on this topic :)
as am I!
All you Asians guys are so annoying ::) :P
Always talking up your half completed teams.
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 07:11:36 PM
Quote from: picker_man on September 07, 2012, 07:03:51 PM
thats a great idea on how to do it Holz :)
So i will probably be playing myself with my asian's and euro's teams in the grand final hahah :P
I think Maca (Worlds), Meow (Euro), Bombers (British) would be the early favourites
World's and Euro teams would be short priced favourites as they have had more time to construct lists, form strategies and to trade a lot of players in.
Plus honestly, I think we should wait until 2014 before running this. As then we'll have a proper Champions league.
Plus IMO, this is how I believe it should run. Happy to organise it also and it's probably easier on Holz as he is running the Euro comp.
The 2014 Champions LeagueThe top 4 from each XVs competition from the 2013 season, will take part in the 2014 Champions League.
In order to establish a true winner, there will be several rounds. A round robin group stage, then a knock-out phase.
Round Robin StageThe 16 teams, would be split into four pots, decided by end of season rankings. Then would then be randomly assigned to four groups.
The four groups would then play each other twice, for a total of 6 games. In each of these games, home advantage rule would apply.
These game would take place between AFL Round 3 - 9.
Knock-out StageTwo wins from each group would then enter a knock-out stage.
A1 v C2, B1 vs D2, etc. etc.
The quarter finals and semi finals would have home and away legs with home advantage rules.
These games take place between round 14 - 17.
The grand final would be a once off match played in Round 20.
Thoughts?
So exactly the same as the UEFA champions league, just with less teams?
Quote from: c4v3m4n on September 09, 2012, 01:27:22 PM
Quote from: Holzman on September 07, 2012, 07:11:36 PM
Quote from: picker_man on September 07, 2012, 07:03:51 PM
thats a great idea on how to do it Holz :)
So i will probably be playing myself with my asian's and euro's teams in the grand final hahah :P
I think Maca (Worlds), Meow (Euro), Bombers (British) would be the early favourites
World's and Euro teams would be short priced favourites as they have had more time to construct lists, form strategies and to trade a lot of players in.
Plus honestly, I think we should wait until 2014 before running this. As then we'll have a proper Champions league.
Plus IMO, this is how I believe it should run. Happy to organise it also and it's probably easier on Holz as he is running the Euro comp.
The 2014 Champions League
The top 4 from each XVs competition from the 2013 season, will take part in the 2014 Champions League.
In order to establish a true winner, there will be several rounds. A round robin group stage, then a knock-out phase.
Round Robin Stage
The 16 teams, would be split into four pots, decided by end of season rankings. Then would then be randomly assigned to four groups.
The four groups would then play each other twice, for a total of 6 games. In each of these games, home advantage rule would apply.
These game would take place between AFL Round 3 - 9.
Knock-out Stage
Two wins from each group would then enter a knock-out stage.
A1 v C2, B1 vs D2, etc. etc.
The quarter finals and semi finals would have home and away legs with home advantage rules.
These games take place between round 14 - 17.
The grand final would be a once off match played in Round 20.
Thoughts?
Yeah I like that, think given we don't need every round the bye rounds should be avoided as they seem to have been in your layout.
Have to work out scoring systems to be used and home ground advantage.
I like the idea of the top 4 of each league going in, more interesting to have 4 teams from each 15's go through to Champions League.
As far as the seeding and rosters and groups ect. ect. i don't mind that all sounds good, think Holz has some idea too, has been working on setup for it i think.
but yeah most of that i like!
Every team from every competition should be involved (if possible). It will create more interest if everyone is involved, and give teams who haven't started the year well a chance to win something. Top 4 from each group to be seeded. No home ground advantage.
Or play a group stage with everyone involved, and then the top 2 from each group proceed to the knock-out stage.
Im thinking I run a knock-out cup each year so every team can be involved so that's kind of like a club world cup. Than C4 runs the champions league where only the top teams qualify for it.
So much like the soccer there are 3 trophy's your team can win each year.
^ I like that idea.
Quote from: whatlez on September 12, 2012, 07:57:58 PM
^ I like that idea.
+1 the knockout cup and the champions league. Sounds good if your both willing to run a comp.
Lots of work for those coaches who own multiple teams.
;D
Quote from: Colliwobblers on September 15, 2012, 12:49:46 PM
Quote from: whatlez on September 12, 2012, 07:57:58 PM
^ I like that idea.
+1 the knockout cup and the champions league. Sounds good if your both willing to run a comp.
Lots of work for those coaches who own multiple teams.
;D
Lots of work regardless.
Though I don't think my players could handle 3 international games per week. Don't think any sportsman could. :P
What about coaches who have 2 or more teams?
Quote from: Torpedo10 on September 15, 2012, 01:23:39 PM
What about coaches who have 2 or more teams?
All teams would have to be entered in knockout cup regardless of who the owner/coaches are.
Same for champions league, if you own 2 and both make the champions league then you have 2 in it :) but no tanking!
Quote from: Colliwobblers on September 15, 2012, 02:00:41 PM
Quote from: Torpedo10 on September 15, 2012, 01:23:39 PM
What about coaches who have 2 or more teams?
All teams would have to be entered in knockout cup regardless of who the owner/coaches are.
Same for champions league, if you own 2 and both make the champions league then you have 2 in it :) but no tanking!
you will be playing league games at the same time. So even if your playing yourself you would want to field a strong team or you will lose your league game.
Quote from: Holzman on September 15, 2012, 04:15:43 PM
Quote from: Colliwobblers on September 15, 2012, 02:00:41 PM
Quote from: Torpedo10 on September 15, 2012, 01:23:39 PM
What about coaches who have 2 or more teams?
All teams would have to be entered in knockout cup regardless of who the owner/coaches are.
Same for champions league, if you own 2 and both make the champions league then you have 2 in it :) but no tanking!
you will be playing league games at the same time. So even if your playing yourself you would want to field a strong team or you will lose your league game.
+1
My 3 teams are going to have so many results I won't know which team won what :'(
That's why I only have 1! :D
Just to test out the ranking system this was the order based on last year ( not including finals)
How they are worked out is i have averaged out the games in the worlds and have worked out the average is 134.46 points per game. I did the same for the euro and its 130.62. I than did 134.46/130.62 = 1.0294. So all euro teams get their average multiplied by 1.0294 to get an equivalent score. So Wolves were 144.57 but adjusted to world scores they were 148.82
This is just a test and I will be doing this for all comps and will adjust scoring to the worlds scoring system and in my opinion this is the fairest way of adjusting scores. It what I do for determining prices with different exchange rates and is probably the fairest and most simple method.
1. Pumas (W) 154.12
2. Wolves (E) 148.82
3. Suns (W) 146.65
4. Metal (E) 146.62
5.Cobras (W) 145.24
6.Magpies (W) 144.29
7.Roulette's (E) 143.09
8.Wolves (W) 140.65
9.Polar Bears (E) 138.16
10.Bears (W) 138.12
11.Warriors (W) 137.88
12.Bashers (E) 137.57
13.Armadillos (W) 137.41
14.Bison (E) 136.91
15.Titans (E) 135.15
15.Stalions (E) 135.15
17.Spetnaz (W) 133.65
18.Reindeer's (W) 133.35
19.Samurai (W) 132.71
20.Trolls (E) 131.76
20.Sons (E) 129.70
22.Valkyries (E) 129.70
23.Royals (W) 128.94
24.Sands (W) 128.65
25.Eagles (E) 127.72
26.Brewers (W) 127.65
27.Islanders (W) 125.94
28.Tigers (W) 125.12
29.Lions (E) 123.23
30. Revolution (W) 122.47
31.Dino's (E) 118.53
32.Destroyers (W) 117.47
How did I not win?? :'(
Quote from: CrowsFan on September 19, 2012, 02:02:30 AM
How did I not win?? :'(
How did I not make the finals :(
Great stuff btw Holz!
How did i make the Prelims and got pretty close to the final being ranked =7th on the euros list? I did finish 8th though, would've been amazing if I'd been pt through to the GF.
(http://i46.tinypic.com/313j7eq.png)
If I don't win this Champions League, I think it's rigged. :P
Holz, while I appreciate all of the effort you have put into your ranking system, there are a couple of constructive criticisms that I have.
Your ranking doesnt take into account the following:
- LTI to key players that will be involved in 2013 season
- Your averages are based in scores each week and teams change each week.
- The massive amount of trades that have occurred in the post-season
So, I would like to propose a new alternative which I believe is fairer as it accounts for all of the above....
..and is far more complicated. :P
PART ONEI believe that instead of ranking the teams based on weekly score averages, that it should be based on the strength of your squad. Now this is where it gets kind of tricky.
14 EXV teams with 35 players vs. 18 WXV teams with 46 players.
Need to find a way of normalising it. Just so happens there is a way to do so.
At the end of Round 14 of the WXV Draft, the same number of players were taken at the end of Round 18 of the EXV draft.
Which then means that at the end of the Round 21 in the WXV draft, the same number of players were taken at the end of the Round 27 of the EXV Draft.
21 rounds x 18 players = 378 players
27 rounds x 14 players = 378 players.
Therefore,
a EXV squad of 27 players is equal to a WXV squad of 21 players.Good number and a good place to start.
PART TWOSo, now that we have our normalisation of squad sizes, we then just take the 27 highest averaging players from 2012 from each EXV team, average them, and we have our EXV team ranking. Similarly with the WXV, take the 21 highest averaging from 2012 from each, average them and you have your WXV team ranking.
Now to allow for LTIs (like Ball, LeCras etc.) they would be included based on their 2011 average.
So after that,
we have a rankings for our the EXV competition and the WXV competition.
PART THREELastly, we need to find a way to normalise the scores between SC and DT and while this may seem tricky, it's not really.
Thanks to TooSerious, the havey SC/DT ratios for each individual player.
I'll chuck them all in a spreadsheet and then average it out giving the closest thing to an
official SC/DT ratio.
Use that ratio on the EXV rankings and it'd bring them in line with the WXV rankings.
CONCLUSION :o
Hope that all makes some kind of sense. This IMO, would be a fairer ranking system. It accounts for LTIs, off-season trades, squad strengths and the SC/DT ratio.
Of course, none of the above can really be calculated until lists
have been finalised.But once they have, I can then work on calculating my version of the seeding/ranking system along with a ratio.
Thoughts?
You would be able to do this fairly easily with the other scoring systems as well couldn't you C4? I think the idea works all right.
Agree with C4, much better approach. :)
Your model has my full support c4. :)
I will go along with whatever, I still think the champions league should by definition be the top 4 teams from each competition from the previous seasons ladder.
In the case of the Asians and the British, the only way to qualify 4 teams for the 2013 champions league is either to rate the teams lists or to go off (British and Asian) NAB cup pre-season tournament results.
Won't be that accurate but it's the only way.
How I would rank the British and Asian team lists is straight out of the prospectus which rates players. Again not entirely accurate for fantasy scoring, but again it is set in stone and cannot be argued unfair or biased. And can have all teams in each competition ranked rated and a top 4 for each (British/Asians) can be determined to go into 2013 champions league.
And as for the Holz knockout cup, well that can be seeded in the way that either of you has laid out, again I don't really care, but c4 seems to have been rather thorough in his formula.
Quote from: BB67th on September 20, 2012, 05:13:36 PM
You would be able to do this fairly easily with the other scoring systems as well couldn't you C4? I think the idea works all right.
Problem with your competitions is the ratio.
I'd need VS and SB scores for every player for every round from 2012 in order to be able to work out rankings and more importantly, a fair ratio.
c. 800 players x 22 rounds x 2 competitions = 35,200 data points.
That's um, quite a lot.
We'd need a collective group effort on that one...could be tricky.
Quote from: Colliwobblers on September 20, 2012, 05:21:48 PM
I will go along with whatever, I still think the champions league should by definition be the top 4 teams from each competition from the previous seasons ladder.
In the case of the Asians and the British, the only way to qualify 4 teams for the 2013 champions league is either to rate the teams lists or to go off (British and Asian) NAB cup pre-season tournament results.
Won't be that accurate but it's the only way.
How I would rank the British and Asian team lists is straight out of the prospectus which rates players. Again not entirely accurate for fantasy scoring, but again it is set in stone and cannot be argued unfair or biased. And can have all teams in each competition ranked rated and a top 4 for each (British/Asians) can be determined to go into 2013 champions league.
And as for the Holz knockout cup, well that can be seeded in the way that either of you has laid out, again I don't really care, but c4 seems to have been rather thorough in his formula.
You do make a fair argument there CW.
As for AXV and BXV team entries, see above.
As for EXV and WXV team entries, the biggest issue is trades made in the off-season. Teams ie mine are already radically different from the past season, and because of this, my overall WXV team ranking will have also changed. Some teams may have become quite stronger, some quite weaker. Now if a team that missed out on the top 4 last year dominates this year, then really, the should be challenging for the Champions League as they'd most likely be the Champions for that year. Similarly for weaker teams, I don't want to see imbalances in the Champions League because a team has decided to rebuild in the off-season.
Hence why the team rankings made at the start of the year makes sense. It then allows those post-season stronger teams to compete. I'd hate to dominate a season and not be a part of the Champions League until the following year, too much goes on in the post-season.
sorry, but what about a round robin over like the first 4 rounds to identify what teams are in? like EVERYONE plays EVERYONE in those rounds, and the top 16 with the most wins get into the champion league for the remainder of the season?
then next year do the top 16 thing?
I will have to have a re read of your scoring system. I just want to clarify something which appears to have been interpreted wrong.
The scores I gave were a test run to see how balanced it could separate the worlds and euro teams and it looks fairly successful in that. I will be doing the calculations for all comps when we are halfway through the 2013 season. So this will get rid of issue 1 and 3 as it will account for all team changes over the off season as it will be just based on your 2013 performance.
The changing of teams each week however are not taken into account in my scoring system. However I feel as the comp is ran over 7 weeks if you make it all the way. Than I don't see the harm in averaging out the season from weekly scores becasue it is a 7 week knock-out comp.
To be honest i have issues with your scoring system. I can see your point of saying the 27 euro squad is equal to a 21 worlds squad and based on numbers yes it is. However once you get a team of say 20 so you have your 15 and bench options than you start taking more speculative picks so I would say a top 21 world team is stronger than a top 27 euro team.
I will go with public opinion but I always say the simplest way is the easiest way I worry that actually counting for team size increases bias in the stats.
If we were doing a champs league where the top 4 from each club play, your method perhaps is superior but in the clubs world cup method where it relies on that seasons permanence I much prefer my model.
Are you opposed to a clubs world cup with my method and a champs league with your method.
Fair points Holz and C4. I guess I don't mind however you work it out, as long as you get all 15's teams in the knockout cup. And an even spread of teams from all four 15's competitions in the champions league then it will be fine by me.
Still if you cannot work out a way to rank all teams from all competitions evenly for the knockout cup then all that will effect is the seeding...
But if you can't work out a way to balance and rate all teams in all competitions equaly for the champions league DON'T just rate all teams in each competition evenly for each individual competition and take the 4 highest ranked teams from each competition.
I understand you need to rank all teams for seeding in the knockout cup.
But I do not understand why you need to rank teams across all competitions for the champions league, shouldn't you just be taking the top 4 ranked teams in each competition into the champions league? Regardless of how or when you rank the teams?
Quote from: Colliwobblers on September 20, 2012, 06:08:53 PM
Fair points Holz and C4. I guess I don't mind however you work it out, as long as you get all 15's teams in the knockout cup. And an even spread of teams from all four 15's competitions in the champions league then it will be fine by me.
Still if you cannot work out a way to rank all teams from all competitions evenly for the knockout cup then all that will effect is the seeding...
But if you can't work out a way to balance and rate all teams in all competitions equaly for the champions league DON'T just rate all teams in each competition evenly for each individual competition and take the 4 highest ranked teams from each competition.
I understand you need to rank all teams for seeding in the knockout cup.
But I do not understand why you need to rank teams across all competitions for the champions league, shouldn't you just be taking the top 4 ranked teams in each competition into the champions league? Regardless of how or when you rank the teams?
Thats what I would like Colli
Champs league: just the top 4 teams from each comp play a round robin before the byes. Than after the byes comes the final.
Seeding based on last years finishing.
Club World Cup: starts after the byes rankings on that season and its knock-out and every team in the comp is in it.
Perfect...
but wait.. what's that?
sneaking up... is it? it's.......
(http://i46.tinypic.com/2naqiox.jpg)
Yes i agree but if you can work out a rating system between you and C4 to rate the teams in each 15's competition to slect the "current season" top 4 - GREAT, that's fine too.
Quote from: c4v3m4n on September 20, 2012, 05:10:54 PM
Holz, while I appreciate all of the effort you have put into your ranking system, there are a couple of constructive criticisms that I have.
Your ranking doesnt take into account the following:
- LTI to key players that will be involved in 2013 season
- Your averages are based in scores each week and teams change each week.
- The massive amount of trades that have occurred in the post-season
Holz's rankings will be based on performance of teams in the first half of season 2013.
The rankings he put up are just a guide of how it will work. He'll work out averages based on the first half of next season, so if LeCras is averaging 80 it will be included.
The scores of players traded into teams will be included if they are representing their teams in the first half of season 2013.
If you're going to base rankings/seeds on lists ahead of the 2013 season then that has one
major flaw. First year players will have an average of 0. The next Toby Greene isn't included in C4's model, but his scores would be taken into account in Holz's model.
The performance of players outside the playing 15 shouldn't matter. Your whole squad doesn't play. You can only play 15 every week. My 20th best player could be averaging 65 and not even be a realistic chance of making my team. Everyone has a chance to trade for/draft a strong list, and those who choose not to should not be rewarded.
Quote from: c4v3m4n on September 20, 2012, 05:42:56 PM
Quote from: BB67th on September 20, 2012, 05:13:36 PM
You would be able to do this fairly easily with the other scoring systems as well couldn't you C4? I think the idea works all right.
Problem with your competitions is the ratio.
I'd need VS and SB scores for every player for every round from 2012 in order to be able to work out rankings and more importantly, a fair ratio.
c. 800 players x 22 rounds x 2 competitions = 35,200 data points.
That's um, quite a lot.
We'd need a collective group effort on that one...could be tricky.
Holz's version is fairly simple, and very fair. You don't need to over complicate it. The SB and VS scores wouldn't need to be entered into a spreadsheet, all we'll need is the average of their first 10 games or so.
Quote from: meow meow on September 20, 2012, 06:30:50 PM
Quote from: c4v3m4n on September 20, 2012, 05:10:54 PM
Holz, while I appreciate all of the effort you have put into your ranking system, there are a couple of constructive criticisms that I have.
Your ranking doesnt take into account the following:
- LTI to key players that will be involved in 2013 season
- Your averages are based in scores each week and teams change each week.
- The massive amount of trades that have occurred in the post-season
Holz's rankings will be based on performance of teams in the first half of season 2013.
The rankings he put up are just a guide of how it will work. He'll work out averages based on the first half of next season, so if LeCras is averaging 80 it will be included.
The scores of players traded into teams will be included if they are representing their teams in the first half of season 2013.
If you're going to base rankings/seeds on lists ahead of the 2013 season then that has one major flaw. First year players will have an average of 0. The next Toby Greene isn't included in C4's model, but his scores would be taken into account in Holz's model.
The performance of players outside the playing 15 shouldn't matter. Your whole squad doesn't play. You can only play 15 every week. My 20th best player could be averaging 65 and not even be a realistic chance of making my team. Everyone has a chance to trade for/draft a strong list, and those who choose not to should not be rewarded.
Quote from: c4v3m4n on September 20, 2012, 05:42:56 PM
Quote from: BB67th on September 20, 2012, 05:13:36 PM
You would be able to do this fairly easily with the other scoring systems as well couldn't you C4? I think the idea works all right.
Problem with your competitions is the ratio.
I'd need VS and SB scores for every player for every round from 2012 in order to be able to work out rankings and more importantly, a fair ratio.
c. 800 players x 22 rounds x 2 competitions = 35,200 data points.
That's um, quite a lot.
We'd need a collective group effort on that one...could be tricky.
Holz's version is fairly simple, and very fair. You don't need to over complicate it. The SB and VS scores wouldn't need to be entered into a spreadsheet, all we'll need is the average of their first 10 games or so.
Valid point meow, I didn't take into account draftees. But you yourself said it that with no GWS or GC, draftees aren't going to be given instant opportunities anymore, just look at all the other draftees from last year. So, the next Greene probably wont happen again until Tassie is brought in.
Also, if we then look at ranking the teams after 10 weeks, then neither comp can start until after the byes. Which means that both comps would have to run concurrently, which IMO will be FAR too messy for those coaches who have more than one team involved. Therefore, IMO, there should only be one competition . And really, this is beginning to get out of hand with the idea of multiple best of comps plus regular fixtues and I'm sure people agree with me.
Plus, my proposal for the Champions League requires 11 weeks to run. Now, I dont want take anything away from the final series of either comps, so it would have to finish before Round 20 of the AFL. Which means that it would have to start at latest in Round 7. Now, do you believe that you will be able to have a fair and accurate assessment of all teams and their players by the end of Round 6? Maybe, but that is hell of a lot of work. Far far too much to organise in the space of a week. :-\
Look, I've stated my case.
IMO, I think my model works and so do others.
IMO, two competitions running concurrently is too messy for coaches involved and getting a little out of hand. Should only be one competition.
If others feel differently, then that is perfectly fine and I accept that. Just stating my opinions. :)
2009 Draft- no GWS/ GC
Scully, Trengove and Martin all averaged 80 odd that could very well slide in as a second utility
more importantly though- Michael Barlow- 113 average
Take C4's idea guys, it will ensure the league is as strong as can be.
Teams that score really well can always end up lower on the ladder than they should be. This way they will be included.
The only problem I have with C4's plan is that it has no method or even mention of how to include the Asians or British teams :o
I don't care if there is only one champions league that is the plan after all, Holz was looking at a SEPARATE thing altogether so put that aside for now and let's just talk champions league.
What is the point of a champions league consisting of 2 out of the 4 competitions?
And I am adverse to any champions league being made up of teams worked out on a universal ranking system, with the different scoring systems and rules this is all but impossible. (in particular that Asians VC scoring comes to mind.)
Not only that, you cannot simply formulate scoring across competitions evenly, SC is so fundamentally different to DT.
Teams cannot be ranked as players in teams in different competitions are there for TOTALLY different scoring systems.
Key defenders are worthless in DT and SB.
Marks are not counted at all in British.
Goals are 12 points in Asians.
I Cannot for the life of me see why you cannot work out a way to simply rank the teams INSIDE THEIR OWN COMPETITIONS
and take the top 4 (BY YOUR RANKING SYSTEM) from each 15's competition.
Wouldn't this be far simpler and far more accurate and make the champions league far more interesting to all coaches of all 4 competitions giving an even representation from each 15's competition.
As for how you rank the top 4 for each 15's competition i don't care as long as whatever you decide works accurately.
I'm sure C4 will work it out perfectly. I just think it would be cool to have a competition that involved every XV team. Holz came last in the euro last year, but could be top 4 this year but miss out on the comp.
Quote from: meow meow on September 20, 2012, 08:08:37 PM
I'm sure C4 will work it out perfectly. I just think it would be cool to have a competition that involved every XV team. Holz came last in the euro last year, but could be top 4 this year but miss out on the comp.
yeah thats my point i would like to see everyone invovled.
I really don't see what's wrong with having the champs league where only a 1/4 of the teams involved and a cup where everyone is involved.
Both will be knock-out after the byes, so if a team is involved in both comps its unlikely they will be after a few rounds.
Quote from: awesome dude who knows everything on September 20, 2012, 05:46:12 PM
sorry, but what about a round robin over like the first 4 rounds to identify what teams are in? like EVERYONE plays EVERYONE in those rounds, and the top 16 with the most wins get into the champion league for the remainder of the season?
then next year do the top 16 thing?
I like this idea, I think it's smart.
I actually prefer Holzman's scoring system sorry c4, yours has merit no doubt, but think simple should be better.
How about we have a Champions League just between Worlds and Euros this season? May not be popular but the Brits and Asia teams haven't played yet.
Worlds and Euros had to wait a year, why shouldn't the others?
Quote from: ossie85 on September 21, 2012, 08:50:05 AM
I actually prefer Holzman's scoring system sorry c4, yours has merit no doubt, but think simple should be better.
How about we have a Champions League just between Worlds and Euros this season? May not be popular but the Brits and Asia teams haven't played yet.
Worlds and Euros had to wait a year, why shouldn't the others?
I like it.
Quote from: ossie85 on September 21, 2012, 08:50:05 AM
I actually prefer Holzman's scoring system sorry c4, yours has merit no doubt, but think simple should be better.
How about we have a Champions League just between Worlds and Euros this season? May not be popular but the Brits and Asia teams haven't played yet.
Worlds and Euros had to wait a year, why shouldn't the others?
Because when you look back at past champions league winners in years to come this year that only had half the 15's competitions included will be considered "lesser"? (especially if a team from the Asians or British wins a few in a row in future seasons) - it will be easy to say whoever wins this one was only the winner as the Briitish and Asians weren't in it :)
just an example....
Suit yourselves but I think both c4 and holz rating systems allow for the new competitions as they plan to rate on the current season form, not previous seasons ladders.
I'll go wit hthe crowd, but surely 4 is better than 2....
I hear what you're saying Colliwobblers, but surely a Champions League should be comprised of Champion teams... Every Brit and Asia team are at 1-1..
But, I'm stepping back and letting others decide this one!
Perhaps we put this on ice until the end of next season. :)
That way the format can be properly sorted out, the seeding/ranking system can be sorted out and we can then have all 4 competitions involved.
Seems like we are rushing in to things and I want this done right, not rushed.
Quote from: ossie85 on September 21, 2012, 12:05:56 PM
I hear what you're saying Colliwobblers, but surely a Champions League should be comprised of Champion teams... Every Brit and Asia team are at 1-1..
But, I'm stepping back and letting others decide this one!
Yeah fair point, might give the guys running it a chance to get their systems right with the formula that exist between SC and DT, before trying to work out how to figure in SB and VS.
I'm going with the crowd, would like to see in future seasons a relatively even number of teams from each 15's competition (the best in each comp) go through to the champions League and that's about all i am firm on :)
Quote from: ossie85 on September 21, 2012, 08:50:05 AM
I actually prefer Holzman's scoring system sorry c4, yours has merit no doubt, but think simple should be better.
How about we have a Champions League just between Worlds and Euros this season? May not be popular but the Brits and Asia teams haven't played yet.
Worlds and Euros had to wait a year, why shouldn't the others?
I think this might be best.... I mean, we don't have proper scoring ratios for SB/VS do we?
it won't be as simple as that either Zip the Asians XVs have a VC score 150% as well as the C score 200%, so comparing scores accross competitions is no simple matter.
Quote from: Colliwobblers on September 21, 2012, 03:39:05 PM
it won't be as simple as that either Zip the Asians XVs have a VC score 150% as well as the C score 200%, so comparing scores accross competitions is no simple matter.
It's pretty simple when you use Holz's method. If the average score of the Asian teams is 1500 and the average score of the WXV teams is 1300 then the asians will get a multiplier of x 0.8667. It doesn't matter how the 1500 is achieved.
Quote from: meow meow on September 21, 2012, 03:54:35 PM
Quote from: Colliwobblers on September 21, 2012, 03:39:05 PM
it won't be as simple as that either Zip the Asians XVs have a VC score 150% as well as the C score 200%, so comparing scores accross competitions is no simple matter.
It's pretty simple when you use Holz's method. If the average score of the Asian teams is 1500 and the average score of the WXV teams is 1300 then the asians will get a multiplier of x 0.8667. It doesn't matter how the 1500 is achieved.
good point :)
still think it's better to take the top teams from each league rather than the top teams overall, unlikely but possible there could be no teams represented from one or more 15's competition. So the champions of a given competition effectively may not even make the cut for the champions league.
I guess once the lads sort all this out then they have to sort out how to "score" the champions league matches, given the different make up of teams based on the different scoring systems how is that going to work :)
Still they can work it out :)
Quote from: Colliwobblers on September 21, 2012, 03:39:05 PM
it won't be as simple as that either Zip the Asians XVs have a VC score 150% as well as the C score 200%, so comparing scores accross competitions is no simple matter.
It is simple. Teams would be ranked without captain or vice-captain bonuses. ::)
Then we'd set up a universal set of rules that everyone agrees upon.
Quote from: meow meow on September 21, 2012, 03:54:35 PM
Quote from: Colliwobblers on September 21, 2012, 03:39:05 PM
it won't be as simple as that either Zip the Asians XVs have a VC score 150% as well as the C score 200%, so comparing scores accross competitions is no simple matter.
It's pretty simple when you use Holz's method. If the average score of the Asian teams is 1500 and the average score of the WXV teams is 1300 then the asians will get a multiplier of x 0.8667. It doesn't matter how the 1500 is achieved.
Actually meow, Holz's method is based on weekly scores, so it has included captain scores. My method however, does not.
^ yeah holzs system accounts for that.
Quote from: Ziplock on September 21, 2012, 04:10:58 PM
^ yeah holzs system accounts for that.
OK I must have missed something. How?
since the ratios would be dependent on teams averages, which would include C and VC scores implemented :P
Quote from: Ziplock on September 21, 2012, 04:35:25 PM
since the ratios would be dependent on teams averages, which would include C and VC scores implemented :P
You don't want to have C/VC scores affecting the data though. ???
Quote from: Ziplock on September 21, 2012, 04:35:25 PM
since the ratios would be dependent on teams averages, which would include C and VC scores implemented :P
Yes, but we after a normalization of statistics here to ensure complete fairness. What don't people get?
By adding in captain and vice-captain bonuses, the weekly averages are then skewed and gives higher rankings to those with luck on their side.
Buddy scored 200 in SC one week. If you had the captain bonus well done, 400 points. But if you had the captain bonus on say Jordan Lewis who scored lets say 50, then you've lost a lot of points and your average drops. Luck.
But by basing it on purely individual scores, it eliminates this and provides a truly fairer system.
Quote from: Sid on September 21, 2012, 04:39:17 PM
Quote from: Ziplock on September 21, 2012, 04:35:25 PM
since the ratios would be dependent on teams averages, which would include C and VC scores implemented :P
You don't want to have C/VC scores affecting the data though. ???
Exactly.
yeah it would?
for instance C/VC data is counted in a teams overall scores?
Quote from: Ziplock on September 21, 2012, 04:46:01 PM
yeah it would?
for instance C/VC data is counted in a teams overall scores?
Not sure what you mean by yeah it would. :-\
What we're saying is that C/VC choices should not be included in the calculations because it will skew the averages. How is that good?
http://www.fanfooty.com.au/forum/index.php/topic,55738.0.html
scrads scored 2024 points for the season- an average of 145 ppg, including his captain score.
captain (and vc is some of the comps) is crucial to a team- for instance, if you have swannie, that means you get an extra 15 ppg for having him, and then another 15 ppg having him captain. If VC scores a certain amount, then having a stronger midfield is far more beneficial than it is in euros/ worlds.
That's basically rewarding the teams that had high picks. Counting a teams top player (in essence) twice doesn't make sense.
...
that's what this game is about?
that's what the captain score is?
it gives an advantage to those with the best players?
Quote from: Ziplock on September 21, 2012, 04:59:49 PM
...
that's what this game is about?
that's what the captain score is?
it gives an advantage to those with the best players?
You still get an advantage for having the best players, but I don't see any good reason to double any given players influence on the average of their team. As has been said, it just skews the average.
then by that logic we should scrap the captains and vice captains bonuses all together.
Quote from: Ziplock on September 21, 2012, 05:07:59 PM
then by that logic we should scrap the captains and vice captains bonuses all together.
Only for the ranking and seeding system. ::)
not sure why people are making a big deal about it. Either you should have the top 4 from each comp play off in the champs league. If you win the title you are ranked 1 and if you come second than you are the number 2 seed in your comp.
My idea was also just have a knock-out comp that every team gets a shot to go in. the top 16 teams get seeded based on my ranking system and the rest get randomised. There is no major advantage for seeding as everyone gets in the comp.
It seems some are opposed to 2 comps but why not just have these running. I don't see why people can be opposed to 2 comp if your not interested than don't take notice of it.
I think I agree with Holz and C4. Seems the way to get this sorted out to make everyone happy.
1. Holz runs his knockout cup. If people don't care to bother "because it is too much" then maybe they shouldn't own multiple teams or any?
After all it requires nothing! the week the knockout cup is on you have already named your best starting side for the regular competition no?
2. C4 runs the champions league. His formula is what it is and however he works it out is what it is.
2 Points - and just my opinion one of what 50 XVs coaches?
* The champions league should consist of the best teams in each competition - don't care about your rankings or the formula or whether you use placings, current form, or a list rating method.
* I think it would be shower to end up with a champions league without representation of EVERY 15s league.
* Zip is right all fantasy based competitions are a teams score wfor the week, and all fantasy competitions involve a captains score as a bonus. It is TOTALLY relevant.
How can you rank a team by manipulating the data by removing the teams captain? that is not rating the teams it is rating the teams without their captains.
Not only that but it is rating the teams coach's ability to pick a captain each week.
BUT AGAIN C4 CAN RUN IT SO WHATEVER HE DECIDES IS FINE BY ME - JUST AGREE WITH ZIP ON THAT.
AND AS I HAVE SAID EARLIER I THINK COACHES FROM EVERY XVs COMPETITION WOULD WANT TO SEE THEIR BEST TEAMS IN THE CHAMPIONS LEAGUE.
Holz and C4 - make it happen ! :) over to you :)
A captain is a part of the team and works itself out over the course of a season, imo captain should be included in rankings and seedings and the comp blah blah.
For the champions league the points are getting weighed right on because SB is higher scoring then let's DT. However, because their are less teams in Euros wouldn't the scoring meant to be weighed more because less players are picked.
Quote from: whatlez on February 27, 2013, 03:08:56 PM
For the champions league the points are getting weighed right on because SB is higher scoring then let's DT. However, because their are less teams in Euros wouldn't the scoring meant to be weighed more because less players are picked.
the weigthing system works so it doesnt matter how many teams or what scorign system you use. it all based on the averaged scores of the league. So the only way you can get an advantage is by having big S.D in the teams.
Go the mighty Bears!
Is this going ahead this season then?
Why not, just for this year, combine the two competitions.
Play a knockout competition until we get down to 16 teams. Then run the round robin during the middle of the season (play each other team twice) and the finals at the end of the season.
This is how I'd envision it would work, giving two games (home + away) for all knockout matches:
Total number of XV teams = 64.
Knockout stage 1 (64 teams): Round 4+5
Knockout stage 2 (32 teams): Round 6+7
Round Robin period 1 (16 teams): 8+9+10
Mid Season break (bye): Rounds 11, 12 and 13
Round Robin period 2 (16 teams): Rounds 14+15+16.
Quarter final stage (8 teams): Rounds 17+18
Semi final stage (4 teams): Rounds 19+20
Grand final (2 teams): Rounds 21+22
I haven't included Round 23 as AFL teams tend to rest players then so I don't like the grand final of any comps being on this week (even though it is GF week for all the fantasy comps).
That way everyone gets a taste of Inter-competition footy but chances are the best teams will still play off for the finals.
Good idea Memph :) I think we have 18 teams though? (18+18+16+14 = 66?) I could be wrong
Quote from: ossie85 on February 27, 2013, 04:45:55 PM
Good idea Memph :) I think we have 18 teams though? (18+18+16+14 = 66?) I could be wrong
dam thought we had 64, thats going to cause problems from my kncokout comp.
now this is how im plannign to run the champions league.
The top 4 teams from every comp from the year before (so 2012) will battle it out in a 16 team comp, the format of that i will discuss later. Now obviously with only the euro and worlds running last year this creates problems, so qualification can go one of 2 ways.
1. 8 euro teams and 8 world teams
2. 4 of each with the british and asian coming from some method not sure how you guys might have an idea.
you get put in 4 brackets so bracket 1. has
1. Worlds
2. Euro
3. British
4. Asian
bracket 2 is
4. Worlds
1. Euro
2. British
3. Asian
and so forth.
only the top 2 from each group qualify so 8 teams left.
than you play each team once (7 games) than
its 1v2 to make grandfinal, 3v4
loser of 1v2 plays winner of 3v4
grandfinal
So rounds 1-3 Group stages
round 4-10 top 8 play each other
round 14-15 finals
round 16 Grandfinal
than round 17-22 is the knock-out comp with round 22 the knockout comp grandfinal
round 23 is reserved for each individual leagues grandfinal.
Watch out for the mighty Russian Roulettes guys 8)
Quote from: Holzman on February 27, 2013, 05:09:26 PM
Quote from: ossie85 on February 27, 2013, 04:45:55 PM
Good idea Memph :) I think we have 18 teams though? (18+18+16+14 = 66?) I could be wrong
dam thought we had 64, thats going to cause problems from my kncokout comp.
now this is how im plannign to run the champions league.
The top 4 teams from every comp from the year before (so 2012) will battle it out in a 16 team comp, the format of that i will discuss later. Now obviously with only the euro and worlds running last year this creates problems, so qualification can go one of 2 ways.
1. 8 euro teams and 8 world teams
2. 4 of each with the british and asian coming from some method not sure how you guys might have an idea.
you get put in 4 brackets so bracket 1. has
1. Worlds
2. Euro
3. British
4. Asian
bracket 2 is
4. Worlds
1. Euro
2. British
3. Asian
and so forth.
only the top 2 from each group qualify so 8 teams left.
than you play each team once (7 games) than
its 1v2 to make grandfinal, 3v4
loser of 1v2 plays winner of 3v4
grandfinal
So rounds 1-3 Group stages
round 4-10 top 8 play each other
round 14-15 finals
round 16 Grandfinal
than round 17-22 is the knock-out comp with round 22 the knockout comp grandfinal
round 23 is reserved for each individual leagues grandfinal.
l think this is a terrific way to go about it Holz
my eagles probably would have been one of the favourites for the champions league trophy but as we won the spoon we wont be qulifiyng. will be dangerous in the knockout comp though.
for the knockout comp might have to kick the lowest two teams out of the comp. not really happy with that as i want it to be all inclusive but cant see another way around it.
so who qualifies for the champions league?
we could have like play offs for it- like top 10 teams over first 7 rounds make it in or w.e :P
Quote from: Holzman on February 27, 2013, 05:36:28 PM
my eagles probably would have been one of the favourites for the champions league trophy but as we won the spoon we wont be qulifiyng. will be dangerous in the knockout comp though.
for the knockout comp might have to kick the lowest two teams out of the comp. not really happy with that as i want it to be all inclusive but cant see another way around it.
l'm happy for the Crabs (AXV) to be one of the ones to miss out in the KO comp if we're seen as one of the weakest
Quote from: Ziplock on February 27, 2013, 05:42:28 PM
so who qualifies for the champions league?
we could have like play offs for it- like top 10 teams over first 7 rounds make it in or w.e :P
its supposed to be the top 4 from 2012.
so Scrads 1
Quote from: Holzman on February 27, 2013, 05:50:33 PM
Quote from: Ziplock on February 27, 2013, 05:42:28 PM
so who qualifies for the champions league?
we could have like play offs for it- like top 10 teams over first 7 rounds make it in or w.e :P
its supposed to be the top 4 from 2012.
so Scrads 1
so would that be......
1st. Premier
2nd. Runner-up
3rd. Losing semi-finalist (to Premier)
4th. losing semi-finalist (to runner-up)
should it be done on overall point, position on ladder, or finals?
Quote from: nostradamus on February 27, 2013, 05:55:13 PM
Quote from: Holzman on February 27, 2013, 05:50:33 PM
Quote from: Ziplock on February 27, 2013, 05:42:28 PM
so who qualifies for the champions league?
we could have like play offs for it- like top 10 teams over first 7 rounds make it in or w.e :P
its supposed to be the top 4 from 2012.
so Scrads 1
so would that be......
1st. Premier
2nd. Runner-up
3rd. Losing semi-finalist (to Premier)
4th. losing semi-finalist (to runner-up)
no where you finished on the ladder.
Quote from: ossie85 on February 27, 2013, 04:45:55 PM
Good idea Memph :) I think we have 18 teams though? (18+18+16+14 = 66?) I could be wrong
Well that's awkward. Which comp has only 14 teams?
And why isn't there an even number of teams in each comp?
Shouldn't this have been factored in when the comps were started? We really need at least two more teams to work a proper European competition although ideally two teams need to be cut for it to work perfectly.
Especially disappointing as I don't have a team :(
I still think though that for this season the best way is to just run the one competition as there is no clear/easy way to pick the teams who should be in the CL comp from British and Asians.
For example in the Asians there's about 6-8 teams who could easily argue they should get a spot in the Champions League.
Also how do you decide which two teams don't get to play in the Knockout Cup Holz?
Then you can start the dual comps next season.
How about this to solve the 66 team problem. Based on my previous idea. Round Robin now consists of three groups of six rather than four groups which means 10 games (home & away vs each opponent).
Total number of XV teams = 66.
Knockout stage 1 (64 teams): Round 1+2 (Euro and World Premiers sit out this round)
Knockout stage 2 (32 teams): Round 3+4 (Euro and World Premiers sit out this round)
Round Robin period 1 (18 teams): 5+6+7+8+9+10 (Euro and World Premiers join in this round)
Mid Season break (bye): Rounds 11, 12 and 13
Round Robin period 2 (16 teams): Rounds 14+15+16+17.
Quarter final stage (8 teams): Rounds 18+19 (Top two from each group of three plus the next best two teams. Seeding is now done at this stage based on the round robin stage)
Semi final stage (4 teams): Rounds 20+21
Grand final (2 teams): Rounds 22+23
Then in 2014 you can go on to use the best four teams from each competition method.
the knockout one is easy.
im using a ranking system to seed the teams based off their 2013 season. thats why the comp is towards the end of the season.
i will be able to rank teams from 1st to 66th.
the champions league is abit more complicated.
im abit opposed to your idea (even though its actualyl a really good idea), just because im trying to create abit of tradition in the XVs so would like to have a champions league and a knockout comp winner.
im likely going to have a top 8 from worlds and euros.
euro has the 14 teams by the way, was intentional by me so we have strong teams. Fealt there just isnt that depth in DT that SC has. for example plenty of decent backs in Sc due to contested marks and other stuff counting so key back score alirght, in DT they suck. think Rance.
By memory most teams rested players rd22 when players were rested last...
Wasn't many resting last year because of contested top 8.
And it seemed in 2011 it was the 2nd last round players were rested, not the last as they wanted players to still have some running in them coming into week 1 of finals.
Quote from: Holzman on February 27, 2013, 06:04:23 PM
Quote from: nostradamus on February 27, 2013, 05:55:13 PM
Quote from: Holzman on February 27, 2013, 05:50:33 PM
Quote from: Ziplock on February 27, 2013, 05:42:28 PM
so who qualifies for the champions league?
we could have like play offs for it- like top 10 teams over first 7 rounds make it in or w.e :P
its supposed to be the top 4 from 2012.
so Scrads 1
so would that be......
1st. Premier
2nd. Runner-up
3rd. Losing semi-finalist (to Premier)
4th. losing semi-finalist (to runner-up)
no where you finished on the ladder.
Hmmm, no-one remembers each years minor premiers, it's all about who wins the Grand Final (in the real thing that is).
l know in comps like the EPL that there's real prestige in finishing top at the end of the season regardless of whether they win the Grand Final or not.
Whereas in the AFL if you finish top and dont win the Granny its seen as a real disappointment..........Winning the Grand Final is always the ultimate goal, it just helps to finish top (or 2nd) because of the weeks rest and double chance.
"im likely going to have a top 8 from worlds and euros."
l think this is probably the best idea, it's called the Champions league for a reason, and there havent actually been Champions from either the BXV or AXV leagues yet.
Your trying to establish a fantastic tradition Holz, so it would just undermine a great idea to compromise it in its inaugural year
memph- holz has been considering putting in expansion teams as well.
Quote from: nostradamus on February 27, 2013, 06:45:27 PM
Quote from: Holzman on February 27, 2013, 06:04:23 PM
Quote from: nostradamus on February 27, 2013, 05:55:13 PM
Quote from: Holzman on February 27, 2013, 05:50:33 PM
Quote from: Ziplock on February 27, 2013, 05:42:28 PM
so who qualifies for the champions league?
we could have like play offs for it- like top 10 teams over first 7 rounds make it in or w.e :P
its supposed to be the top 4 from 2012.
so Scrads 1
so would that be......
1st. Premier
2nd. Runner-up
3rd. Losing semi-finalist (to Premier)
4th. losing semi-finalist (to runner-up)
no where you finished on the ladder.
Hmmm, no-one remembers each years minor premiers, it's all about who wins the Grand Final (in the real thing that is).
l know in comps like the EPL that there's real prestige in finishing top at the end of the season regardless of whether they win the Grand Final or not.
Whereas in the AFL if you finish top and dont win the Granny its seen as a real disappointment..........Winning the Grand Final is always the ultimate goal, it just helps to finish top (or 2nd) because of the weeks rest and double chance.
I actually based it off the epl system. For me I have always felt the minor premiership should be talked up more. Gives the best induction of who the best teams for the year are not just on the day. Especially considering this is fantasy and we can't do anything about the result. No disrespect to most and he was a deserving winner but I think we all know scrads had the best euro team last year and he deserves the number 1 spot in my opinion. Willing to change is enough people say but I'm happy with having it based off ladder position. Will create some tension in the home and away season too as people chase that top 4 spot.
My only concern with that is what happens when a team comes from lower than 4th to win the Premiership in one (or more) of the leagues?
We'll have a Champions league without one (or more) of the actual Champion teams :o
Afterall the XV leagues were set up based on the AFL not the EPL
....well thats my 2 cents worth, and wont keep going on about it.
In the end it's totally up to you Holz, the idea is a fantastic one and kudos to you for setting it all up
I agree with Nost here.
Keen for this to start. Hopefully the Strikers can scrape into the 4 in AXV. And as you all know, my Badgers are premiership favourites in British - just ask Lez :P
Quote from: Jayman on February 27, 2013, 07:56:41 PM
I agree with Nost here.
Keen for this to start. Hopefully the Strikers can scrape into the 4 in AXV. And as you all know, my Badgers are premiership favourites in British - just ask Lez :P
That's why I'm interested because with 18 teams, I think the weighing of the Badgers could easily win this comp.
Also for the 66 teams. Kick out the worst teams in the comps (seems harsh) e.g. Hawka Euros, Tbag Asian. And there you go. Then there's c4 worlds and Fisher Worlds.
There are worse teams than mine, nothing but a few supersater and potentiol guns at Tibet ;)
Quote from: tbagrocks on February 27, 2013, 08:42:12 PM
There are worse teams than mine, nothing but a few supersater and potentiol guns at Tibet ;)
Wake up already.
Quote from: whatlez on February 27, 2013, 08:33:41 PM
Quote from: Jayman on February 27, 2013, 07:56:41 PM
I agree with Nost here.
Keen for this to start. Hopefully the Strikers can scrape into the 4 in AXV. And as you all know, my Badgers are premiership favourites in British - just ask Lez :P
That's why I'm interested because with 18 teams, I think the weighing of the Badgers could easily win this comp.
Also for the 66 teams. Kick out the worst teams in the comps (seems harsh) e.g. Hawka Euros, Tbag Asian. And there you go. Then there's c4 worlds and Fisher Worlds.
I'm assuming you're having a joke here whatlez.
Unless there's something I'm missing about the Sportal scoring the Bradford Badgers team is not likely to make top 4 in the British league, let alone win the CL.
Quote from: Memphistopheles on February 27, 2013, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: whatlez on February 27, 2013, 08:33:41 PM
Quote from: Jayman on February 27, 2013, 07:56:41 PM
I agree with Nost here.
Keen for this to start. Hopefully the Strikers can scrape into the 4 in AXV. And as you all know, my Badgers are premiership favourites in British - just ask Lez :P
That's why I'm interested because with 18 teams, I think the weighing of the Badgers could easily win this comp.
Also for the 66 teams. Kick out the worst teams in the comps (seems harsh) e.g. Hawka Euros, Tbag Asian. And there you go. Then there's c4 worlds and Fisher Worlds.
I'm assuming you're having a joke here whatlez.
Unless there's something I'm missing about the Sportal scoring the Bradford Badgers team is not likely to make top 4 in the British league, let alone win the CL.
Hmm I added up the scores of the top 4 teams from last year and was ahead by at least 70. That doesn't include players like Matera, Fasolo, Prestia, McKenzie, Brennan, Barlow, I would say Brodie Smith, but he's injured :(, Hanley all improving from last years dismal averages.
Plus the fact that I have 4 mids who should average 135+ and with a 150+ captain scoring let alone 700-800 points in my 4 midfield slots. But that's not much to you.
Quote from: Memphistopheles on February 27, 2013, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: whatlez on February 27, 2013, 08:33:41 PM
Quote from: Jayman on February 27, 2013, 07:56:41 PM
I agree with Nost here.
Keen for this to start. Hopefully the Strikers can scrape into the 4 in AXV. And as you all know, my Badgers are premiership favourites in British - just ask Lez :P
That's why I'm interested because with 18 teams, I think the weighing of the Badgers could easily win this comp.
Also for the 66 teams. Kick out the worst teams in the comps (seems harsh) e.g. Hawka Euros, Tbag Asian. And there you go. Then there's c4 worlds and Fisher Worlds.
I'm assuming you're having a joke here whatlez.
Unless there's something I'm missing about the Sportal scoring the Bradford Badgers team is not likely to make top 4 in the British league, let alone win the CL.
No joke mate. We are a definite top 4 team and should be favourites...
No you won't be favourites, but decent chance odds, Gazelles aren't in the favourites, Strikers are underrated but there is a huge fight for the top 4 after the 3 favouries, watch out for the Lambs :o
Quote from: whatlez on February 27, 2013, 09:02:31 PM
Quote from: Memphistopheles on February 27, 2013, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: whatlez on February 27, 2013, 08:33:41 PM
Quote from: Jayman on February 27, 2013, 07:56:41 PM
I agree with Nost here.
Keen for this to start. Hopefully the Strikers can scrape into the 4 in AXV. And as you all know, my Badgers are premiership favourites in British - just ask Lez :P
That's why I'm interested because with 18 teams, I think the weighing of the Badgers could easily win this comp.
Also for the 66 teams. Kick out the worst teams in the comps (seems harsh) e.g. Hawka Euros, Tbag Asian. And there you go. Then there's c4 worlds and Fisher Worlds.
I'm assuming you're having a joke here whatlez.
Unless there's something I'm missing about the Sportal scoring the Bradford Badgers team is not likely to make top 4 in the British league, let alone win the CL.
Hmm I added up the scores of the top 4 teams from last year and was ahead by at least 70. That doesn't include players like Matera, Fasolo, Prestia, McKenzie, Brennan, Barlow, I would say Brodie Smith, but he's injured :(, Hanley all improving from last years dismal averages.
Plus the fact that I have 4 mids who should average 135+ and with a 150+ captain scoring let alone 700-800 points in my 4 midfield slots. But that's not much to you.
What scoring system is used?
Quote from: nostradamus on February 27, 2013, 09:29:06 PM
Quote from: whatlez on February 27, 2013, 09:02:31 PM
Quote from: Memphistopheles on February 27, 2013, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: whatlez on February 27, 2013, 08:33:41 PM
Quote from: Jayman on February 27, 2013, 07:56:41 PM
I agree with Nost here.
Keen for this to start. Hopefully the Strikers can scrape into the 4 in AXV. And as you all know, my Badgers are premiership favourites in British - just ask Lez :P
That's why I'm interested because with 18 teams, I think the weighing of the Badgers could easily win this comp.
Also for the 66 teams. Kick out the worst teams in the comps (seems harsh) e.g. Hawka Euros, Tbag Asian. And there you go. Then there's c4 worlds and Fisher Worlds.
I'm assuming you're having a joke here whatlez.
Unless there's something I'm missing about the Sportal scoring the Bradford Badgers team is not likely to make top 4 in the British league, let alone win the CL.
Hmm I added up the scores of the top 4 teams from last year and was ahead by at least 70. That doesn't include players like Matera, Fasolo, Prestia, McKenzie, Brennan, Barlow, I would say Brodie Smith, but he's injured :(, Hanley all improving from last years dismal averages.
Plus the fact that I have 4 mids who should average 135+ and with a 150+ captain scoring let alone 700-800 points in my 4 midfield slots. But that's not much to you.
What scoring system is used?
Sportal.
wow....nice !!!
that might be handy having Swan and Ablett 8)
Quote from: nostradamus on February 27, 2013, 09:37:00 PM
wow....nice !!!
that might be handy having Swan and Ablett 8)
Oh no British is Sportal. The respected scoring system is used, but will be weighed from team sizes, inflated scoring from different competitions etc.
Quote from: whatlez on February 27, 2013, 09:41:34 PM
Quote from: nostradamus on February 27, 2013, 09:37:00 PM
wow....nice !!!
that might be handy having Swan and Ablett 8)
Oh no British is Sportal. The respected scoring system is used, but will be weighed from team sizes, inflated scoring from different competitions etc.
Ahh ok :-[
Quote from: tbagrocks on February 27, 2013, 09:16:47 PM
No you won't be favourites, but decent chance odds, Gazelles aren't in the favourites, Strikers are underrated but there is a huge fight for the top 4 after the 3 favouries, watch out for the Lambs :o
8)
Might have a slow-ish start to the year without Tippett, but once he's back we'll be hard to stop ;) That being said I think our depth is solid enough to cover for Kurtley while he's shredding in the gym for the first 11 rounds :P
Quote from: Jayman on February 27, 2013, 09:09:07 PM
Quote from: Memphistopheles on February 27, 2013, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: whatlez on February 27, 2013, 08:33:41 PM
Quote from: Jayman on February 27, 2013, 07:56:41 PM
I agree with Nost here.
Keen for this to start. Hopefully the Strikers can scrape into the 4 in AXV. And as you all know, my Badgers are premiership favourites in British - just ask Lez :P
That's why I'm interested because with 18 teams, I think the weighing of the Badgers could easily win this comp.
Also for the 66 teams. Kick out the worst teams in the comps (seems harsh) e.g. Hawka Euros, Tbag Asian. And there you go. Then there's c4 worlds and Fisher Worlds.
I'm assuming you're having a joke here whatlez.
Unless there's something I'm missing about the Sportal scoring the Bradford Badgers team is not likely to make top 4 in the British league, let alone win the CL.
No joke mate. We are a definite top 4 team and should be favourites...
Ok I'm going to seriously have to have a look at the Sportal Scoring system then if you're favourites. Or maybe the British teams are much more evenly balanced that the Asians.
You've got an awesome midfield but your team looks very average in defence and up forward.
Also a word of advice - I'd definitely be starting Mzungu over Cassisi and Prestia this season.
sportal gives like 12 points for a goal and 6 for a tackle
I think thats the main difference...
Thats sportsbet. Sportal is all about contested possessions
annoying names with sport in them.
ok lol :P
l dont care what scoring system or ajustment is used, l think the Russian Roulettes will be big contenders for the inagural title ;)
lez is talking shower pickers team in BXV is better then his and i think my team is pretty even with his to
He has good mids but rest is shower my mids are a bit weak but they have potential and the rest of my team is very strong
he is in the top 3 teams in BXV but by no means favs
Yeah its really balanced because of the lack trading. Asian had lots of trading and teams were weakened as a result. British also has 18 teams so getting a strong starting line-up will be harder. Basically with each team should lack 2 prems less than Asian. Therefore my side in British is stronger.
Also it is a contested game and you underrate my contested ball nuts
Yeah surely the cruisers would give you a run fr your money lez ;)
There are a few dark horses in the British that I would also put some money on to finish top 3. Colli has a reasonably strong list as well.
Get around the Huddersfield Hawks.
the bashers would have to be one of the favourites for the champions league.
the team that probably would have one it (eagles) unforuntately wont be able to participate. Its a shame as I dont think i can win in 2014 with goddard and gibbs likely losing DPP.
I will be strgulling down back but my mid would be
Pendles Gibbs Lids Goddard Boyd Barlow Athony D.Swallow K.Simpson
Bloody nice midfield Holz :o 8)
Maybe you'll have to trade Lids to the trolls? ::) :P
Quote from: Toga on February 28, 2013, 03:15:37 PM
Bloody nice midfield Holz :o 8)
Maybe you'll have to trade Lids to the trolls? ::) :P
could just give me cotchin instead and i would have the best mid of any team by miles.
my mids arent too bad either......
Ablett, Swan, Griffin, ROK, Moloney, Chappy, Greene, Hodge, Lower, Howlett, Broadbent, Hill, Didak, K.Mitchell, Bell, Hunter
This my midfield in British;
Swan, Sidebottom, Rich, Moloney, Montagna. Cooney, Claye Beams, de Boer, Picken. Jesse Stringer, McGinnity
Very solid I think.
Cotchin (151) Griffen (135) Barlow (125) Swallow (136)
Booooommmm.
Rest of your team sucks though
So if the best team sucks. How bad is yours?
Quote from: whatlez on February 28, 2013, 04:21:43 PM
So if the best team sucks. How bad is yours?
your the only one that thinks your team is the best
How about you let the results do the talking lol
Quote from: ossie85 on February 28, 2013, 04:27:39 PM
How about you let the results do the talking lol
that's boring ::)
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on February 28, 2013, 04:12:10 PM
Rest of your team sucks though
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lsplz5bp9z1qapynuo1_400.gif)
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on February 28, 2013, 04:32:25 PM
Quote from: ossie85 on February 28, 2013, 04:27:39 PM
How about you let the results do the talking lol
that's boring ::)
Lol exactly. But everyone reckons the Badgers are the best :D
Quote from: whatlez on February 28, 2013, 08:01:57 PM
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on February 28, 2013, 04:32:25 PM
Quote from: ossie85 on February 28, 2013, 04:27:39 PM
How about you let the results do the talking lol
that's boring ::)
Lol exactly. But everyone reckons the Badgers are the best :D
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lsplz5bp9z1qapynuo1_400.gif)
Great use of old material ;)
Quote from: Holzman on February 28, 2013, 03:08:33 PM
the bashers would have to be one of the favourites for the champions league.
From Belgium ;D
Quote from: Ricochet on March 13, 2013, 07:33:18 PM
Quote from: Holzman on February 28, 2013, 03:08:33 PM
the bashers would have to be one of the favourites for the champions league.
From Belgium ;D
eagles would be favourites but we arent in it so your lucky. I will lose all my DPP this year and probably never have a chance. this year would have been my year.
Do we know which Asians sides will be competing?
Don't think they are toga
i was trying a way to work it out, but i think it will jsut be the top 8 from the worlds and euro. I want it so its based off last year so it gives extra incentive to stay in that top 4.
Ah ok no worries thanks Holz & CF :)
Would've liked to show the world what Mongolia's got but I agree with your decision - just means that we'll be able to come out strong next year with big Kurtly playing all year 8)
Quote from: Toga on March 13, 2013, 11:51:30 PM
Ah ok no worries thanks Holz & CF :)
Would've liked to show the world what Mongolia's got but I agree with your decision - just means that we'll be able to come out strong next year with big Kurtly playing all year 8)
im annoyed too, my team i think would have taken out the comp.
So basically the champions league is a year behind the normal league, in terms of qualifying. So what are your plans for future seasons the top 4 from each of the 4 comps go into the champions league the following season?
Would like some clarification on how you plan to run it all.
What happened to the idea of starting it like after round 7 so AXVs and BXVs can get involved? :(
I liked that one as I think my AXVs is my best team lol
Quote from: Colliwobblers on March 14, 2013, 10:56:49 PM
So basically the champions league is a year behind the normal league, in terms of qualifying. So what are your plans for future seasons the top 4 from each of the 4 comps go into the champions league the following season?
Would like some clarification on how you plan to run it all.
I think that's the plan.
It's just too hard to garner atm what a top 4 for the newer comps would be.
Quote from: Ziplock on March 14, 2013, 11:08:45 PM
Quote from: Colliwobblers on March 14, 2013, 10:56:49 PM
So basically the champions league is a year behind the normal league, in terms of qualifying. So what are your plans for future seasons the top 4 from each of the 4 comps go into the champions league the following season?
Would like some clarification on how you plan to run it all.
I think that's the plan.
It's just too hard to garner atm what a top 4 for the newer comps would be.
I understand and accept this but for the record all the AXVS clubs are ranked using champion data ranking system and our top 4 as per the ranking system, the entire league pretty much agrees with are clear cut.
Quote from: Colliwobblers on March 14, 2013, 11:22:09 PM
Quote from: Ziplock on March 14, 2013, 11:08:45 PM
Quote from: Colliwobblers on March 14, 2013, 10:56:49 PM
So basically the champions league is a year behind the normal league, in terms of qualifying. So what are your plans for future seasons the top 4 from each of the 4 comps go into the champions league the following season?
Would like some clarification on how you plan to run it all.
I think that's the plan.
It's just too hard to garner atm what a top 4 for the newer comps would be.
I understand and accept this but for the record all the AXVS clubs are ranked using champion data ranking system and our top 4 as per the ranking system, the entire league pretty much agrees with are clear cut.
Yeah I have monitored the rankings as an assistant to Laos but yeah the point of the champions league is for the teams to qualify the year before the comp. I'm sure everyone in the euro would rate my team in the top 4 but I didn't qualify last year so I can't go in the comp.
The World Cup on the other hand is done on this years competition so the Asian and British teams will have a shot at winning that one. I understand where your coming from but being a soccer fn I like how you need to qualify for certain comps and it brings more interest into the comp if there are teams that have made finals but are battling it out for champions league qualification.
Makes sense, I agree with the need to qualify - just thought a nominated 4 from each of asians and british could join to make it a champions league of the 4 theoretical best of each league.
theoretical because as you say teams change so much over the off season the champion leagues teams for the year they play in it may not be that years best teams (as they are last years best teams)
still it all makes sense. this is the right way to do it, just would have liked to see the first champions league have all 4 comps in it right from the start. for historical and stats keeping purposes.
still the 2 new leagues are just that a season behind so again can't argue with the decision or the logic.
Should we perhaps rate the teams based on the averages of their players the year before? ( I mean you'd have to adjust for injured palyers/ injury prone players, and it'd be more subjective... but if we ran it on a vote?)
Badgers for rhe wim cunys