| March Madness Forum View the Forum Registry |
| |
| 0 |
Subject: Looking ahead to next year Posted by: Guru - [330592710] Tue, Mar 28, 11:53 I know, this year's contest isn't over yet. But before it fades into a blur, I'd like to solicit feedback on possible improvements for next year. I already have some things planned. I will definitely have a tournament simulator set up in advance, so you can plug in your projected picks for as many games as you wish, and the simulator will work out the projected scoring for you. This should greatly alleviate some of the scoring confusion, and also help you identify some of the pairing interrelationships. I don't see any reason to adjust the scoring format. It doesn't seem to be "broke". How about basket units? I think they turned out to be a great addition. Perhaps I should expand the universe of basket unit definitions. There are endless possibilities. For example, all automatic qualifiers seeded in double digits. Or all teams seeded 13-16. Or some groupings by type of team mascot. Is the prize money setup OK, or would it be better to reduce the average prize amount and offer more prizes? (The same question applies to next fall's Football Pickoff.) I don't see any need for major overhauls. But there are always opportunities to tinker. | ||||||
| 1 | hansoal ID: 302222810 Tue, Mar 28, 12:04 | I think it works well the way it is (maybe I'm a bit biased:) ) I really like the bracket picks. It keeps everyone rooting for/against more teams than 20. | |||||
| 2 | Ref ID: 4409319 Tue, Mar 28, 13:02 | GURU, the thing that I had most trouble with was the understanding of the game. If you could break it down in layman's terms to say what you did right before the contest (i.e. longs go farther, shorts won't go as far), I think you will get even more participation. Great job and your updates were immediate. Now if my rotiserie commissoner could just update in a timely manner!!! | |||||
| 3 | SweetySoft ID: 14244155 Tue, Mar 28, 13:34 | I like the basket units the way they are. I don't think there should be too many teams in a basket, and I don't really like the idea of 'theme' basket units, such as by mascot, state, whatever. I like the basket units to be connected to each other in that they are in the same position (seed) or relate to each other (conference). The current rules are great and the simulator would be nice. I figured out what would be the best picks if my bracket was correct, but the simulator would be faster. This year was so unpredictable anyway, I don't think it would have made much of a difference. The prizes are fine, but maybe add different prizes in a few other categories not in place. (Best basket net or best individual team net, or whatever you can think of.) It's nice to still have different prize possibilities to hope for even if you're not in the running for contest winner. This was a great contest and I'll look forward to next year when I'll determine some better strategy to winning this. :) | |||||
| 4 | Chuck ID: 16201711 Tue, Mar 28, 15:52 | Personally, I like the idea of different basket grouping. There was a list on here at the beginning of the tourney (though I don't know where it is now...). But having groupings of weird and abstract characteristics could just add more variety (fun?) to the game. | |||||
| 5 | engle ID: 8242720 Tue, Mar 28, 17:11 |
I'm pretty happy(to say the least)with the contest format as it is now. I like the prizes(the more the merrier)and I played last year also so I would continue to play no matter what. I don't think we need anymore basket units. You are already stepping on your own toes alot as it is. Especially when you start buying conference and seed baskets, not complaining just offering a viewpoint.
| |||||
| 6 | JeffG ID: 492391412 Wed, Mar 29, 16:26 |
I think the addition of other basket units would add to the game. But I suggest that an individual basket should not contain more than 6 teams or less 3 teams. If there are additional baskets there should probably be some restriction so a entrant cannot long or short the same team more than three times if they are in more than three baskets. | |||||
| 7 | TBRaiders ID: 111271719 Thu, Mar 30, 00:55 |
I thought it was a great contest and the format and instructions were easy to follow. The addition of a points simulator would make it that much easier to make picks.
I am curious as to how you would set it up. I had thought of being able to complete a bracket and then having a simulator showing top longs and short for that bracket. BTW- That still wouldn't have helped me when I was picking Butler, ST Bonnies, and Fresno State to the Sweet 16. ( Did I mention Uconn, OSU, Temple, STJ, Texas, Oklahoma, and Stanford?....lol) I liked the brackets just the way they are but any additional brackets would only add to the game. It would add more opportunity for diversity. It would require more research for each selection. Then I could finally pick the wrong teams because I like them better. As far as prizes are concerned: That is just a bonus. The thought of a prize never entered my thoughts when I got to participate.(Regardless of the fact that I wasn't going to win) Thanks again for the great contest. I know I was rooting for all my longs and cursing in my shorts...err...at my shorts. | |||||
| 8 | TBRaiders ID: 111271719 Thu, Mar 30, 02:25 |
Hmm, what I meant say was:
I liked the | |||||
| 9 | Guru ID: 330592710 Fri, Mar 31, 19:29 | TBRaiders - see the Tournament Return Simulator. I did it last week. Unfortunately, not in time for this year's picking. | |||||
| 10 | SweetySoft ID: 14244155 Mon, Apr 03, 06:26 | Just another thought I had... if someone is eligible for more than one prize next year, perhaps you should just reward that person with the greater of the two (or more) prizes, and allow the next in line claim the other prize (or prizes) just to spread the winnings out a little just in case someone happened to manage more than one prize. | |||||
| 11 | Pistol Pete ID: 360392819 Tue, Apr 04, 19:06 | Great contest Guru. Add more baskets if you like but it works well the way it is IMHO. The fact that I went from 7th to 4th on the last day was (of course) more reason for me...but I digress- I "lucked out" in all honesty because of the volatilty of the basket units which afforded me to take Mich St as a long. I nearly dropped to floor when I saw the 88pt turn around in my favor after the championship game. I hope I don't sound like I'm gloating, but it did seem pretty unlikely that I could move up 3 places on the last day...and that should give hope to next year's entries. "It ain't over 'til it's over!" : ) | |||||
| 12 | TBRaiders ID: 111271719 Thu, Apr 06, 11:14 | I couldn't get in to make my baseball trades so I decided to check out the Tournament Return Simulator. Good stuff Guru! I entered in all the winning teams and was humbled by the total possible score if you chose the top longs and shorts. Then I went back and filled out my bracket like I had originally predicted. I was pretty close to "guestimating" what the best shorts and longs would have been. The simulator will definetly be a helpful tool next year. | |||||
| 13 | Species ID: 714729 Thu, Apr 06, 13:14 |
Interesting you thought you "lucked out", Pistol Pete, as that was the theme of my feedback to Guru directly before I noticed this thread. May as well post it here, verbatim: " wanted to give you a few thoughts, with the intent on being constructive, about this year's March Madness game. The idea of baskets, I felt originally, was a good one. I thought it would add a bit of intrigue and allow someone to double up or triple up some of their favorite teams. Naturally this also carried some risk since if your team bowed out it would be double or triple-whammy. In the end, however, I feel that the addition of baskets turned the game into someone's "lucky break". Maybe it was simply because of so many upsets, but unless you lucked into the #8 basket you practically had no chance. The #8 basket was simply not a good pick, given their historical performance and given that they get the #1 seeds in round 2. But in the end, if someone had them they were a +/-$G200 better than nearly any other pick. The conference baskets also allowed for some "bail out" picks. I had LSU in my Final Four so I also longed the SEC. Overall I felt the SEC got shafted in the seedings so combined with my LSU pick I thought they'd be a good long. Well, LSU screwed up but I lucked out with Florida -- a bit undeservedly so, I think. I hope this doesn't sound like 'sour grapes', because that's not the reason I'm writing. I just think that the baskets add too much of a luck factor, especially in the long category, that takes some of the real skill out of the game. I still think the basic structure is great and takes the monotony out of the normal bracket games. Keep up the good work on the site." -- end of mail to Guru -- Again, let me stress that this isn't sour grapes - I still placed 2 teams in the top 50. But still, in a way I think the baskets involved more luck than skill this year. Perhaps this was just a funky year with all of the upsets, but if I win I want it to be because I really thought UNC (for example) was going to the Final Four and not because I lucked into the #8 basket (no disrespect for the Champ, engle....) | |||||
| 14 | Guru ID: 330592710 Thu, Apr 06, 22:39 | On the other hand, my daughter placed second, and didn't have the #8 seed basket... | |||||
| 15 | engle ID: 49338622 Thu, Apr 06, 23:06 | species,while i understand what you are saying, it also sounds like you are too caught up in the stats ie: historical performance, while it may be true that #8seeds haven't fared well in the past,you also have to take into consideration that these particular #8's have some pretty damn good coaches. i also thought this years #1's were pretty soft with one obvious exception. the reason i bought the #8's was because i thought if i could get R. Majerus,D Bennet,B. Gutheridge and R. Williams coached teams for 4$ i might get lucky,which i did. i also think that no matter what, when you enter a contest like this you are going to have to have some luck to win. i think this was a true year of pariety in college basketball, i thought going in that there were probably 10-12 teams that truly had a chance to win it,not your usual 3-5. i also think that the best team won even though i personally root for Purdue and Miami,Fl. | |||||
| 16 | Species ID: 45118323 Fri, Apr 07, 00:19 |
engle - that's cool, and I understand where you're coming from as well. But seriously, did you or anyone else really think you'd get 2 of those #8's in the Sweet 16, let alone the Final Four? I wholeheartedly agree that the #1's were soft - I shorted the other three AND the #1 seed basket - but sheesh, not THAT soft! I guess I just need to take my defeat like a man! | |||||
| |||||||
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?) | |||||||