Talking Poker NCAA Tournament Bracket Challenge

[PShabi]

Yeah, I can cover you on Stars. Ship to HighOnTrife on FTP.

Also, I suggest a more scientific approach, like "cooler mascot" for your picks.

[MAYHEM45]

Biggest cheerleader combined cup size?

[Fildy]

or just avg hotness of cheerleader, duke loses first round if this is the case tho

[Talking Poker]

Am I right in understanding that first round picks are worth (1 point + seed) while round 2 picks are only worth 2 points total?

So, if you pick a #1 seed and they win in the first round, you get 2 points. If you pick a #5 seed and they win, you get 6. But making correct second round 2 picks are only worth 2 points?

That seems wacky to me. I think you should either go with bonuses or not go with them, but I think a first round only thing is going to totally skew the results.

[PShabi]

It didn't in the one I was in last year, and Mel seems to have had experience with it. Let's hear from him, but imo, it makes it more interesting/fun (upsets are bigger) and won't skew nearly as much as you think.

[melioris]

I have done it with the first round and the first and second round weighted by seed. Either way is good. Sure, it screws up the pure "fair" weighted pools, but I think it is well worth it. A #1 has never lost to a #16, so why should that game count as much? Think about the games and which ones you watch and typically where the upsets happen in the seedings. Picking the #12 over the #5 should be rewarded if you know enough to pick it. I would recommend a bigger gap in points distribution from the weighted seeded round(s) to non-weighted seeded rounds to dampen the overall affect of the weighted seeded round(s). For example, if the first two rounds are weighted seeded rounds, they can be worth 1 and 2 points each. and then the third round can be worth 8 points, and the fourth worth 8 points and on up. this way it counter acts teh first two rounds being worthless in teh traditional weighted by round scoring system.

Finally, it is our pool, whatever every the rules are, it is "fair" as long we all agree upon them at the start.

PS I think everything i just wrote might be jibberish, but I am too tired to proofread.

[PShabi]

I REALLY like adding the seed in the first round. It made things sooooo much more interesting last year. My choices in order:

1) Let it ride how I set it up and if it blows, fire me as commisioner

2) Leave the weights how it is, but do the "seed added" thing for every round.

[Talking Poker]

I like #2 better. If I get rewarded for picking an upset in round 1, I should be rewarded again (more so) for picking them to upset AGAIN in round 2. That's the more impressive pick IMO.

[Talking Poker]

Have you decided on this? It kind of affects how I'll make my picks...

[PShabi]

We'll go with #2, I'll change it right now.