Competitions SCS Premier League Darts- World Championships - Tuesday 27th December @10:00pm AEDT
- Thread starter The Banker
- Start date
It's okay .. I'm probably leaving ...
@The Banker has done an awesome job thus far ... and I'd like to remain but ...
- well you can all see my point of view (as posted) ... even though most disagree that is just not the way I see it ... pure and simple ..
@The Banker has done an awesome job thus far ... and I'd like to remain but ...
- well you can all see my point of view (as posted) ... even though most disagree that is just not the way I see it ... pure and simple ..
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,960
- Likes
- 126,628
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Lockout is not until 6:00am AEDT tomorrow morning and all would either be posting or sending their entries far before midnight tonight. The Banker has created a pm with me for this competition and we have both been discussing this tournament, upcoming tournaments, darts and fantasy sports in general in which he mentioned Wade earlier this week (edit: see above).
Selections are not set in stone when posted earlier in the week and are able to be changed when time and work permits a more in depth look, if that is necessary. The earlier selections are posted, it reduces the possibility of forgetting, needing to be prompted or rushing to meet lockout,etc. 11/16 participants have posted in the thread and I expect a similar percentage to continue throughout reducing the benefit gained from PM. Given the small player pool to choose from there are going to be very similar selections throughout and we are all able to change if we wish to create a point of difference once seeing what others are posting in the thread.
The operative word in his initial post in this thread was tentative and as mentioned above his consideration of Wade,etc predated this post on Page 18.
Selections are not set in stone when posted earlier in the week and are able to be changed when time and work permits a more in depth look, if that is necessary. The earlier selections are posted, it reduces the possibility of forgetting, needing to be prompted or rushing to meet lockout,etc. 11/16 participants have posted in the thread and I expect a similar percentage to continue throughout reducing the benefit gained from PM. Given the small player pool to choose from there are going to be very similar selections throughout and we are all able to change if we wish to create a point of difference once seeing what others are posting in the thread.
The operative word in his initial post in this thread was tentative and as mentioned above his consideration of Wade,etc predated this post on Page 18.
OK ... then my simple solution is that all tips are to be posted within this thread up until the final deadline ... ie no PM's !!
- This way there is no possibly of "inside knowledge" ... and we can all change our tips right up to the last minute ..
My tips for the record are:
Clayton
Price (C)
Smith
MVG
- This way there is no possibly of "inside knowledge" ... and we can all change our tips right up to the last minute ..
My tips for the record are:
Clayton
Price (C)
Smith
MVG
Last edited:
- Joined
- 24 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 4,380
- Likes
- 18,390
I’d prefer if you stayed.
I think you need to understand that I’m trying to get this off the ground. I think it’s fantastic that we have 16 entries. It’s more than I expected.
I saw a clear fault in scoring and I want to improve everyone’s experience. That came at my detriment as well.
I get nothing out of winning or losing my own money. I just want to provide a platform into a missing fantasy sport.
So I hope we can virtual shake hands and move past this.
I think you need to understand that I’m trying to get this off the ground. I think it’s fantastic that we have 16 entries. It’s more than I expected.
I saw a clear fault in scoring and I want to improve everyone’s experience. That came at my detriment as well.
I get nothing out of winning or losing my own money. I just want to provide a platform into a missing fantasy sport.
So I hope we can virtual shake hands and move past this.
I'm 100% happy with you PM'ing them to Connoiseur.
While this being the 2nd week, and a small field, there was very little to gain from a tactics point of view, in PM'ing my tips to you.
I can see as we get to bigger comps, and closer to finding a winner, that PM'ing tips will be a good option to have.
I vote "No" to all tips being posted here, as I think the ability to PM them can add something in future weeks.
While this being the 2nd week, and a small field, there was very little to gain from a tactics point of view, in PM'ing my tips to you.
I can see as we get to bigger comps, and closer to finding a winner, that PM'ing tips will be a good option to have.
I vote "No" to all tips being posted here, as I think the ability to PM them can add something in future weeks.
I think I've just provided a "possible" option going forward ...
- as one that has had many discussions about the scoring systems with you I think you've made the right call ..
- I don't want to leave ... just didn't like what I saw as a "potential" unfair advantage ...
- I don't care about the prize money on offer (very generous of you) ... has absolutely nothing to do with why I'm in this comp ..
- as one that has had many discussions about the scoring systems with you I think you've made the right call ..
- I don't want to leave ... just didn't like what I saw as a "potential" unfair advantage ...
- I don't care about the prize money on offer (very generous of you) ... has absolutely nothing to do with why I'm in this comp ..
- Joined
- 24 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 4,380
- Likes
- 18,390
The thing is, I stated I would send my tips to @Connoisseur, but then after doing it at the trading period of the Masters I was pretty bored with that because nobody could see who I selected, so within about half hour I just posted them. I don’t really care much for it being a secret on my end.
I respect others doing this if they choose.
I’m still sticking to my theory. Why not have a stab at each match. I see the loser potentially getting negative points. And I stick by that I don’t have a lot of room to move after selecting Wright and Clayton.
I respect others doing this if they choose.
I’m still sticking to my theory. Why not have a stab at each match. I see the loser potentially getting negative points. And I stick by that I don’t have a lot of room to move after selecting Wright and Clayton.
Can't see why we can't pick any 8 in this.
Price and Wright are definitely no deffo winners in any comp tbh.
Wright v Smith is a pickem for me so going Price over Wade is a no brainer even if he
happens to lose.
So your left with Smith as a pick unless you go down the pick 2 in the same match route.
Price and Wright are definitely no deffo winners in any comp tbh.
Wright v Smith is a pickem for me so going Price over Wade is a no brainer even if he
happens to lose.
So your left with Smith as a pick unless you go down the pick 2 in the same match route.
- Joined
- 24 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 4,380
- Likes
- 18,390
My resolution to the problem.
I’m happy to post my tips first in future. I will do this by Wednesday midnight.
Then it’s fair game for you guys on Thursday to post away.
The only weeks this may be an issue is 8 and 16, but we will work that out at the time.
Beyond this tournament I will have a think.
I’m happy to post my tips first in future. I will do this by Wednesday midnight.
Then it’s fair game for you guys on Thursday to post away.
The only weeks this may be an issue is 8 and 16, but we will work that out at the time.
Beyond this tournament I will have a think.
While I concede your point, I like that it's a consistency that carries over from the bigger contests. Having a salary cap in some events, but not others becomes a bit wishy-washy if we come up against a medium, rather than big or small comp.
Having said that, I'm clueless as to how big the fields will be in coming events, but I like the consistency of the salary cap being there for all comps.
There may be an arguement down the track to create an "artificial" cap, where we manually adjust the price up and/or down some players, to even the field out a little.
Having said that, I'm clueless as to how big the fields will be in coming events, but I like the consistency of the salary cap being there for all comps.
There may be an arguement down the track to create an "artificial" cap, where we manually adjust the price up and/or down some players, to even the field out a little.