The Loophole Thread

[Tamuhawk]

Round 1
CL Sandilands 127, Ablett 140, No.
EL Langdon 111, Georgiou 64, Yes.

Round 2
CL Ablett 120, Cox 63, No.

Round 3
CL Ablett 182, Pendles 115, Yes.

Round 4
CL Pendles 129, Ablett 138, Yes.
EL JKH 49, Impey 29, No.

Round 5
CL Pendles 128, Ablett 161, No.

Round 6
CL Pendles 124, Ablett 145, No.
EL Langdon 90, Bennell 66, Yes.

Round 7
CL Pendles 102, Ablett 141, No.
EL Langdon 128, Georgiou 23, Yes.

Round 8
CL JPK 153, Watson 158, Yes.

Round 9
CL Pendles 128, Ablett 184, No.
EL Ambrose 48, JKH 25, Yes.

Round 10
CL Pendles 153, Ablett 75, Yes.

 

[aj74]

Here is some background on why I am interested in this..

Great piece. But I would challenge this one bit:

"This is really the confounding factor in what I've concluded above. There's no real information on this, but my educated guess is that the loophole is worth on average 10-20 points per position per round. This would mean having a good B7,M9,R3 and F7 is important if you want to make up ground on the leaders.

So this would make the perfect 30 is around $1,500,000 more expensive than the perfect 22 or a total of $14,400,000."

You might not need an extra 1.5mil to get the desired result. With loopholing, the idea is that you can have less expensive players filling those last spots on each line.

So (and this might be a poor example) instead of having 500k in F6 and 500k in F7, you can get away with 400k in F6 and 400k in F7 because you are banking on one of them getting 100 (remember we are talking about the 9th/10th best forward or 20th and 21st best mid). Yes it still costs more than the 500k/125k that a perfect 22 would have, but it isn't as expensive as you'd think. Floating donuts reduce this cost again

Past years' winners have also blown up their trades with a couple of months to go. They have been able to hold in, but from memory there are some pretty low scores as they limp to the line. Those 400k players can be seriously helpful at that stage there if they each cost a half trade less.

Again: top post. A fair bit to think about there

 

[aj74]

Following on.... the perfect 30 would involve having 2 trades and a couple of hundred thousand in the bank too, I'd say.

 

[davo]

CL Ablett 75 Danger 97 no

 

[OzRulesFootball]

CL J Selwood 98, M Murphy 156, No

EL Bews 29, Docherty 102, No

EL Billings 33, Hartung or L McDonald to come, No... have Hartung on field at moment but could easily swap it to L Mac if Hartung named sub tomorrow.

Jay Hunt was loophole agent for both Emergency loopholes I had a go at with Bews and Billings in first two matches of the round.
With Jay Hunt not needed on field due to both scoring crap I parked him in back pocket bench next to Bews and moved L McDonald to midfield bench next to Billings. Hartung on field for now as expect a better score than what Billings got.
North play last game of round so I still have option of swapping L Mac and Hartung around if Hartung starts as sub. I expect he will start on field and score ok so will settle for L McD only needed as back up.

It is nice to be able to look at Bews and Billings score first and decide if I want them. Docherty did job nicely after traded Langdon on Thursday for Bews and Docherty could even become my D6.

 

[tracygrims]

Should have been:

EL, Langdon 88, Langford 95, no

But for some reason had Langdon on the ground.. Now that I think about it more, and after locking both my trades, it would have made no difference in any case with Langdon [emg] but could have still used the loophole if Langford was a late in (which he was)..

also

CL, Pendlebury 113, Ablett 130, no

 

[drafter]

EL - Langdon 88, Kolodjashnij 62. Yes. 26 points gained

CL - Pendles vc , Ablett c. No

 

[Tamuhawk]

Round 11

CL Pendles 113, Ablett 130, No.
EL Bews 29, Langford 95, No.
EL Selwood 98, Shenton 100, Yes.

I had a gut feeling Selwood was not going to have a good game. So just wanted to experiment a little, seeing as I had Acres donut. Just thought that had he scored a 70 odd, may have rolled the dice with Shenton. In the end, it wasn't worth the risk so I used Acres as a loophole to get Selwood's score and benched Shenton, was only a 2 point loss lol.

 

[Tamuhawk]

Round 12

CL Ablett 149, Pendles 112, Yes.
EL Bews 19, Burgoyne 74, No.

 

[DoggyODFL]

Round 12
CL Ablett (VC) 149, Pendles (C) 112 - yes

 

[meataxe]

R9
CL Pendlebury (VC) 128, Ablett (C) 184 - No

R10
CL Selwood (VC) 113, Ablett (C) 75 - No

R11
CL Pendlebury (VC) 113, Ablett (C) 130 - No

R12
CL Ablett (VC) 149, Pendlebury (C) 112 - Yes
EL Impey 119, C Cameron 78 - Yes

Note for the R12 EL - if it was not available then I would have executed a trade to have a genuine F6 like Zorko/Wingard starting.

 

[OzRulesFootball]

Looks like this thread has died in the arse sadly.

Good idea but now looks like person that started it looking for data no longer supporting it. Oh well, guess no point me adding my own either.

 

[tracygrims]

Looks like this thread has died in the arse sadly.

Good idea but now looks like person that started it looking for data no longer supporting it. Oh well, guess no point me adding my own either.

Sorry I've been a bit busy myself in the last weeks (including a week on holiday), but will do some work on this during the next week so please keep posting here

EL SMartin 112, Jacobs 116 - Yes
CL, Ablett 149, Pendlebury 110 - No


As of this week, I will have plenty loopholes opening up although will hopefully not have to use the first two at least!

Burgoyne with Langdon
Franklin with Ambrose
Smartin with Jacobs (whether I utilise this will be pending on Franklin or Burgoyne's score and if I can use Cameron or Cutler safely as captain, otherwise I have to use King which means I cannot safely put Martin on the field)
Ablett and Pendlebury

 

[tracygrims]

Last week had:
CL, Ablett, 106, Pendlebury 139, No
EL, Franklin 146, Ambrose 67, Yes

 

[OzRulesFootball]

Last week for me Docherty was used as emergency and did not take his score

EL Docherty 44, Luke McDonald 65, No
CL Murphy 106, Libba 142, No

Would have loopholed McGovern if I could but I had two forwards not playing so he was straight on field with 146 first up.
Might have to consider not even loopholing him if he keeps that up.

 

[Impromptu]

I didn't realise you can check old SuperCoach scores and old teams, but you can via Team History option.

I didn't include loopholes where I have a rookie(e) then have a premium starting otherwise it would be too much. For example in round 12, I have Bews(e) who scored 19 then I have a whole lot of premiums defenders (63-119) starting. While technically a loophole, I'm not sure if it is counted.

Took = Yes for loophole
Ignored = No for loophole

Round 8 (+30)

+0 - Ignored Sandilands (vice) 118 took Murphy 118
+30 - Ignored Cunningham (e) 31 took Bennell 61

Round 9 (+101)

+80 - Took Ablett (vice) 184 instead of Beams 104
+23 - Ignored Ambrose (e) 48 took Lloyd 71

Round 10 (+20)

+20 - Ignored Ablett (vice) 75 instead of Dangerfield 97

Round 11 (+16)

-4 - Took Beams (vice) 126 instead of Ablett 130
+5 - Took Impey (e) 77 instead of Ambrose 72
+15 - Ignored Bews (e) 29 took Gardiner 44

Round 12 (+82)

+43 - Took Ablett (vice) 149 instead of Beams 106
+39 - Took Impey (e) 117 instead of Ambrose 78

Round 13 (+62)

+33 - Ignored Ablett (vice)106 took Pendles (capt) 139
+29 - Ignored Impey (e) 38 took Ambrose 67 (technically not a loophole, but in practice it was a loophole as if Impey scored 100+ I would have used Ambrose in my upgrade)

Will have to give myself on the back and quote myself:

Also, 2nd placed team appears to be from another website (FFC), but interestingly he has Jayden Hunt (Floating Donut?) and thus I wonder if he reads from this website

All good if he did

Actually, aps1 (Slobs) has Jayden Hunt too

See: Floating Donut v.2014

 

[tracygrims]

Got around to putting the data together today, there are a few reasonable and expected numbers but they are definitely not a guide of what to necessarily expect for a few reasons.

Firslty, I have actually been asking the wrong question here - it should be:
How many points do you get from your EL/CL combo against your otherwise prefered choice
rather than:
How many points do you get from your both of your EL/CL options

Because of this, about half or perhaps slightly more than half the data should be zero (or those times when you took the best choice) and only be non-zero when you chose the 2nd best choice for CL/EL.. Therefore the averages I'm about to give should be reduced by 50% and then this would be still be on the higher side of what could be expected.
Also for the EL, there may be cases where a player is no realistic chance to score a reasonable enough score to be considered for keeping on the field. These cases will further bias the data, so I have actually taken a few of these out completely.

Furthermore, the very low amount of data does not really paint a very clear picture.

CL Average: +24.1
n=34
EL Average: +14.3
n=24

So on the face of it, it seems like loopholing is typically not worth more than around 10-15 points per round which is not a very surprising result. Of course this is not yet a guide to how predict the results from specific loopholes, but it may assist in deciding if a FD should be traded in over a playing rookie for example. Just keep in my too, its probably not every week that you will be able to utilise the EL and FD!

Just as a side, there are three generalbreeds of EL for mine: prem-prem, rookie-rookie or prem-rookie with the ones with closer averages and higher standard deviations to be the most advantagous.



Thank you to everyone who contributed: Maso, Lukus193, IDIG, OzRules, Rowsus, Oh My Watson, davo, doc ron, d-buzz, Krieks, JeremyTobin23, Mr_Arrogance, DoggyODFL, drafter, Emre, Goodie's Guns, Hawk, PeptideCourage, Zimmer, soidog, Batters31, jaca, MMM, Tamuhawk, meataxe and Impromtu.






I am willing to continue looking at this if other people are interested and get proper answer as well as analyse different types of loopholes a little closer. For this I would need a huge amount of data and for that I may even be able to generate this from scores earlier this season or other seasons, so unless you want to keep track of your own loopholes there is no need to continue to post.

 

[OzRulesFootball]

I think the loophole agents will always come down to a case by case basis.

If I can make good cash with a specific rookie I'll always favour that but if the conditions of draw and circumstances of young player and his price is just right and the alternatives for cash cows is nothing special the alternative of a Jay Hunt v Georgiou was a no brainer for me. The upside to picking Gergiou was not there as was not the type of footballer to score well and limited opportunity to make the type of cash I'd want from a starting cash cow rookie. If Jay Hunt actually played rather than not play he could have played a better role of a cash cow than Georgiou as imo, he is type of footballer that likely to score better. I picked him also as outside chance to get games because Dees team was not stable by any means so a new guy always chance to get games at start of year if things fall their way. So I kind of had an each way bet with him. If he played I intend to make use of him as cash cow but if not then adjust his role to pure loophole agent. That happened for me early last season with Colquhoun for a few weeks as DEF/MID. He was picked as a possible cash cow but did not play some early games so a few times used as a loophole agent when opportunity presented itself.
As it is Jay Hunt has spent his time in VFL and got tight back so out injured and looks like he won't play seniors at all this season. Jay Hunt with Luke McDonald as a package deal link for DEF/MID has been fine with me. My overall team has gone to the toilet because forward line rookies and even premiums have not worked for me how I needed but McDonald and Jay Hunt played their roles to perfection for DEF/MID link as rookies.
I got Langdon decent scores at least 2 or 3 times on the back of Jay Hunt helping out in his role.
Maybe Jamie Bennell was only other defender rookie that could have taken rather than Jay Hunt but I was less sure of Bennell role with Eagles and not the type of rookie to play on field imho. I've no sat down and worked out how that would effect the scores I got if I had not taken Jay Hunt and taken Bennell instead. Bennell clearly made more cash however you also have to use a trade to get access to that cash and maybe if I had Bennell I might have missed some of really good scores I got from Langdon via loophole agent Jay Hunt. Least with Jay Hunt I do not use a trade as he has not played the role of cash cow in the end. He has simply turned into a pure loophole agent and no trade used to do that. A cash cow needs to cost a trade to get the cash out of them. If the loophole agents are DPP with club games late and the other player you link them up with also tends to play late it can work nicely. Not always going to have circumstances like that, so make use of it whilst it lasts. In Jay Hunt's case, teaming him up with Luke McDonald has been ideal imho. McDonald been a slower burner but still making useful cash. I wish all my lines in SC have worked as well as my backline this season. Forward line been a horror story of other extreme.

 

[OzRulesFootball]

EL Bews 31, Docherty (whatever he gets), *** No!
CL J Selwood 138, Ablett (?), Still making up my mind

 

[tracygrims]

I can start Burgoyne as Emg this week as he has the first game. Then have the option of moving Langdon on the field for Cutler if Burgoyne puts out a score in the 70's. But if Burgoyne scores over 80, I'd be inclined to leave Cutler on the field and use Burgoyne's emergency score. That sounds great in theory, but three of my backs play on Sunday! With the high frequency of players being late outs, I'm going to be extremely concerned until the last final teams come in, especially with someone like Bartel up against the Dogs in Geelong. Burgoyne has only scored below 80 on 4 occasions this year with 72, 74, 75 and 76. So if Langdon scores his average I should only miss out on about 10 points in a worst case.

Do I go for broke and use the loophole or do I play it safe and keep Langdon as my emergency?


--

Luckily I have Petrie as emergency in the first game, so providing no changes in my forward line, I can take a look at his score (85+) and then throw Cameron on or hope Walker smashes GWS. However Cameron is not a suitable captain choice as Adelaide play before GAJ, Hartung plays first and the only possible captain choices from Haw/Nth are Burgoyne, NDS or Petrie - all unlikely to go over 140. This means I am forced to use King in my captain loophole and SMartin becomes deadwood as R4 since Brisbane also play before GAJ! Do I skip EL in rucks in favour of CL this week?

Edit: I think I know the answer to both these questions after writing this all down, but there it is