Indian Wells 2011 Prediction League (2nd in Series, Season 3)

seffina

seffina

G.O.A.T.
2djyo3s.jpg


Welcome to the Talk Tennis 2011 Indian Wells Prediction League!

ANYONE at ANY TIME can play in the PREDICTION LEAGUE. The game is easy and new players are very, very welcome!

HOW TO PLAY:​

For EVERY match, predict the winner and the number of sets it will take for the winning player to win the match. (EX: [1]R Nadal (ESP) vs [5] A Murray (GBR) - Murray in 4) If you predict the correct winner but in the wrong number of sets, you'll get THREE POINTS. If you predict both the correct winner and the correct number of sets, you’ll get FIVE POINTS.

Each predictor is also able to pick the winner and runner up of the tournament before the FIRST MATCH. At the conclusion of the tournament, two points will be given to each predictor who predicts a correct FINALIST and an additional three points if the FINALIST finishes in their predicted position of WINNER or RUNNER UP.

You can edit a pick until a particular match starts, however, please always make a new post quoting the original pick. DO NOT EDIT THE ORIGINAL POST.

Additional Rules and Instructions: League FILE & FAQ (HTML)​





PREVIOUS YEARS' PREDICTION LEAGUE FILES:
2010 PREDICTION LEAGUE
2009 PREDICTION LEAGUE

POINTS SCALE AND POINTS TO DEFEND
2507zp4.jpg


_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________

PREDICTION LEAGUE DOUBLES HEAD TO HEAD CONTEST:​

In addition to the regular tournament, each participant can pair up with another one and participate in a doubles tournament.

The doubles tournament is run similar to the FIFA World Cup. There are round robin rounds where you and your partner compete against doubles teams in your group. The top two or three teams from your group then move on to the knockout rounds. The exact format will depend on the number of doubles teams.

Doubles H2H Rules, Standings, and Instructions: League File​

_________________________________________________

PREDICTION LEAGUE STAFF

seffina - Current General League Director and Points Adjudicator
JayChu - Head to Head Director
Tennis_Maestro - Retired General League Director
Chelsea_Kiwi - Retired Head to Head Director


Sidenote: Disruptive/aggressive/obnoxious posting from anyone will result in a warning. If it continues, the player will be disqualified from the game for the remainder of the tournament.

HAVE FUN!
​
 
Last edited:
JayChu

JayChu

Hall of Fame
OK guys!

I’ve finally found some time to create a post about the issues/suggestions that I have about H2H. This is going to be a very long post..sorry folks!

Item 1: Australian Open H2H

One of the key flaws that I found was the advancement of the 4th place team to the qualifying rounds.

Recap:
Rod Laver group had one team where both players of a team did not bother to make picks after a certain day of the tournament. This allowed all of the other teams that faced them to win very easily and gain a sizable advantage for PTA. As a result, the fourth place team from the Rod Laver group advanced to the qualifying rounds and the fourth place teams from the Roy Emerson and Ken Rosewall groups lucked out.

I definitely see this as an unfair advantage, and it is a good thing where this error has been detected sooner than later.

Current scoring:
If a player does not make any picks for the day, I score the player’s points as follows:

[Lowest score of the day] – 5 points

My question to you guys is: what system can be in place to make it a fairer so that all teams are on equal grounds in situations like this?

Item 2: Tiebreaker

T1000 has suggested another way to break ties instead of using a PTA system. I believe the system that he suggested was doing something like cumulating all of your team’s scores in all Match Days play to break a tie instead. For example:
Team A, B, C and D are teamed up to play against each other in one group. MD1: A vs. B 50-45, MD2: A vs. C 65-64, MD3: A vs. D 30-35. Therefore, the “Points For” tiebreaker will be 145 (50+65+30) instead of a PTA score of +1.

If you guys have any suggestions, please make a post on the boards so everyone else can take a vote to it. I can test these suggestions for any future events. I may test out T1000’s tiebreaker suggestion for the Indian Wells event just to see how it will work.

Item 3: Announcements
Announcement 1
I’ve decided that I will be creating a team rankings system (exactly like our current system where it ranks the individuals, but on a team basis). This is not a race system where every team begins at 0 at the beginning of each year. It will be exactly like the 52-week entry rankings system.

This idea came about since almost all of the players already have a regular doubles partner for the game, and I want to create a system to show how each team have performed in the past 52 weeks.

I do not know if this will replace our current system that we have (I highly doubt it because certain players cannot play all events together as a team), but it would be great to show how each team has performed together against other teams.

This new doubles ranking will be made available either at the START or the END of the Indian Wells event.

If you guys believe that this system should replace our current individual rankings system, please let me know.

Announcements 2:
Last November, seffina and I talked about idea of creating another WTF H2H event for non-qualifiers.

I’m announcing that this new event will occur, and this event can be played by ALL teams that didn’t qualify as the Crazy Eights. The format has been undecided yet, but it will offer a smaller amount of ranking points for the winner (probably a max of 500 or 600 points…will work out the kinks of this event later in late October, early November).

For any other suggestions/comments/criticisms that you guys have about H2H, please post it on the boards. If you do not want others to see your post, you can direct them to me through my e-mail by clicking on my name. I want to make H2H fun for everyone and to have everyone involved. Please help out guys!

Thanks for reading this long post! LOL
 
Last edited:
JayChu

JayChu

Hall of Fame
OK folks, I've finally made my post from above. Please help out if possible!

Thanks!

kpxjam9, shall we team up again? Let's put the Aussie Open behind us and win this!
 
Big_Dangerous

Big_Dangerous

Talk Tennis Guru
JayChu said:
OK folks, I've finally made my post from above. Please help out if possible!

Thanks!

kpxjam9, shall we team up again? Let's put the Aussie Open behind us and win this!
Click to expand...

I say in order to break a tie between 2 or more teams that can potentially advance from the group stages, you have to throw out the YPA because some teams may not make picks so the YPA's might very well be inflated and totally unfair. I say you calculate the team that has the highest overall score up to that point. Of course, there can still be a tie beyond this point, but imo it seems to be the fairest way to determine who should move on.

Not sure how you would break a tie beyond that, maybe flip a coin lolz.
 
Last edited:
Li Ching Yuen

Li Ching Yuen

Legend
1. T1000's rule is perfect and the "most fair" no doubt.

2. Suggestion in general: The Soccer Euro Cup format is the easiest, fun for the game. The groups with a large number of teams is sluggish and emphasizes too much on the group stage of the tournament which takes a lot of the excitement for the H2H imo.

The tb rule based on games is absurd imo. We can extend the T1000 suggestion tournament-wide or we could adopt a new stat that counts the perfect prediction (pp) which is the number of right predictions (nr of sets + winner) PER tournament. Of course, it being rolling as the competition advances.

Also the whole match day thing doesn't work imo. We should work with the number of matches that takes place every tournament.

For example: If there are 96 matches for a whole tournament. Use 50% of those for the group stage and the rest divided equally for each knockout round. This would require that every match is counted (which is something that's done in the PPL, so hopefully your job will be cut short).

3rd place match: useless and it doesn't really do anything imo. Even in real sports, it's the match that no one wants to play.

That's it for now. Also, I would ask every person that gets into this game to specifically confirm if they're reliable for a partner or that they're sure that they will keep with the H2H league and not let down.

Tell me what you think.
 
lonux

lonux

Hall of Fame
Li Ching Yuen said:
1. T1000's rule is perfect and the "most fair" no doubt.

2. Suggestion in general: The Soccer Euro Cup format is the easiest, fun for the game. The groups with a large number of teams is sluggish and emphasizes too much on the group stage of the tournament which takes a lot of the excitement for the H2H imo.

The tb rule based on games is absurd imo. We can extend the T1000 suggestion tournament-wide or we could adopt a new stat that counts the perfect prediction (pp) which is the number of right predictions (nr of sets + winner) PER tournament. Of course, it being rolling as the competition advances.

Also the whole match day thing doesn't work imo. We should work with the number of matches that takes place every tournament.

For example: If there are 96 matches for a whole tournament. Use 50% of those for the group stage and the rest divided equally for each knockout round. This would require that every match is counted (which is something that's done in the PPL, so hopefully your job will be cut short).

3rd place match: useless and it doesn't really do anything imo. Even in real sports, it's the match that no one wants to play.

That's it for now. Also, I would ask every person that gets into this game to specifically confirm if they're reliable for a partner or that they're sure that they will keep with the H2H league and not let down.

Tell me what you think.
Click to expand...

Some things:
I disagree with basically everything in this post, besides the bold part. The 3rd place match is less fun than the final - logically - but it is necessary IMO.
Also, I'm in. LCY, doubles?
 
mtr1

mtr1

Professional
In, with Stefan?

Regarding Jay's post, I think the doubles rankings work well as they are, a 52-week induvidual list, and the team race.
 
JayChu

JayChu

Hall of Fame
Thanks to everyone that has commented on my post. I really do appreciate the feedback and the suggestions.

Just a few quick comments here and there:
- I do agree that the "Points For" system is the fairer system to use instead of PTA. So starting at the Indian Wells event, I will be implementing this new system instead to prevent situations from the Aussie Open happening again.
- Big_Dangerous: Definitely will not use a coin toss =P. I don't like luck based situations LOL
- LCY: How do you suggest to change the format of the event? I honestly like the MDs because it works well the way it has for the last year. There are several factors that you need to take into consideration as well, such as number of teams playing, number of groups, number days the tournament itself runs for etc. Any suggestions you have, I'll review upon it, talk it over with seffina, and then everyone can vote on it. Please e-mail me your idea!
- RE 3rd place match: It offers valuable ranking points for finishing in 3rd place. Plus since we are basing off of the FIFA format, they do also hold a 3rd place match as well. So I don’t see it as a useless match to hold
- mtr1: I was already leaning towards a no for using the new doubles rankings to rank and seed teams. This is more of a statistical analysis for you and your team to use

Any other suggestions, please inform now before the Indian Wells event begins! =)
 
Li Ching Yuen

Li Ching Yuen

Legend
The main suggestion is this:

If you've got let's say 16 teams(which is 32 players) then follow the exact same format as the Euro Cup (same number of teams), which is 4 groups of four, everyone plays eachother in their group and the breaker rule is the number of goals, in our case total points (what T100 proposed).

And then the knockout rounds: Qf's, semies, Finals.

But I think you should change how many matches count per round.

An example:

Total number of matches of the tournament: 100

Group R1-R3: 20 matches = 60 matches in total
QFs: 15 matches
Semies: 15 matches
Finals: 10 matches.

Which means the finals would take place during quite a few of the last days of the tournament, without needing any breaker rules most probably. This ensures that the best team gets the win. I think that the current format is based too much on "luck" on whoever has a bad day or a partner that doesn't make picks.

Also: no 3rd place match and no nr. of games rule. The default breaker rule should be T1000's proposal or the one I mentioned before.

That's it really. Of course you'll have to number the matches to see exactly which ones count for what round but that's not that hard since Seffina already posts the daily schedule chronologically, so you can use that. I think that you can get the 32 players number pretty easily (usually it hovers around that for the big tourneys), in case there are a few more just ask everyone to confirm if they want to play and in case someone gets left out than that's that.

And that's it. That's basically my suggestion.
 
mtr1

mtr1

Professional
JayChu said:
- mtr1: I was already leaning towards a no for using the new doubles rankings to rank and seed teams. This is more of a statistical analysis for you and your team to use
Any other suggestions, please inform now before the Indian Wells event begins! =)
Click to expand...

Sounds good, statistics are always fun to look at.
 
dcdoorknob

dcdoorknob

Hall of Fame
Just wanted to add that, while I have no problem with a team doubles ranking system existing, I would be disappointed if it where to entirely replace the individual doubles rankings. As someone who has had trouble finding a regular doubles partner, a team only ranking system might lessen my interest just a bit in that aspect of the competition, and I'm also not sure that it would be very inviting to new players.
 
JayChu

JayChu

Hall of Fame
dcdoorknob said:
Just wanted to add that, while I have no problem with a team doubles ranking system existing, I would be disappointed if it where to entirely replace the individual doubles rankings. As someone who has had trouble finding a regular doubles partner, a team only ranking system might lessen my interest just a bit in that aspect of the competition, and I'm also not sure that it would be very inviting to new players.
Click to expand...

Not a problem at all dcdoorknob! Like I already stated, I wasn't really leaning towards a doubles ranking systems instead. I will be sticking with the individual rankings instead.

However, the new doubles rankings system will be more of a statistical analysis for you and your partner to see how well you stack against other teams.
 
Last edited:
NYKings

NYKings

Legend
dcdoorknob said:
Just wanted to add that, while I have no problem with a team doubles ranking system existing, I would be disappointed if it where to entirely replace the individual doubles rankings. As someone who has had trouble finding a regular doubles partner, a team only ranking system might lessen my interest just a bit in that aspect of the competition, and I'm also not sure that it would be very inviting to new players.
Click to expand...

I agree with this... 100%.
 
JayChu

JayChu

Hall of Fame
I'll release the H2H schedule and groups this week. Most likely on Tuesday or Wednesday evening (EST)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

seffina
Australian Open 2011 Prediction League (1st in Series, Season 3)
15 16 17
Replies
830
Views
45K
kOaMaster
kOaMaster
seffina
WIMBLEDON 2011 PREDICTION LEAGUE (9th in series, Season 3)
13 14 15
Replies
741
Views
40K
kishnabe
kishnabe
seffina
  • Poll
Madrid Masters 2011 Prediction League (5th in Series, Season 3)
8 9 10
Replies
498
Views
22K
seffina
seffina
seffina
  • Poll
Shanghai Masters 2011 Prediction League! (13th in Series, Season 3)
5 6 7
Replies
346
Views
23K
JayChu
JayChu
seffina
  • Poll
FRENCH OPEN 2011 PREDICTION LEAGUE (7th in Series, Season 3)
16 17 18
Replies
874
Views
42K
aphex
aphex
Top