50% pickers are in the top 150 of the pick 6

[BuckyOne]

Is it that much more difficult this year? Don't we usually knock it down better than that with half in the contest picking 50%?

[Optional]

The scoring is based on wins and how much you beat the spread by.

Win% is not a factor this year.

[Crusherrr]

It's a different ranking system going by record, then action points. Not by units won.

[BuckyOne]

I realize that is how ties are broken, etc. Two people that picked 5 correct, etc. But, if you look at about place 200. You could have got there by picking 50% of the games correctly.

[Optional]

I realize that is how ties are broken, etc. Two people that picked 5 correct, etc. But, if you look at about place 200. You could have got there by picking 50% of the games correctly.

I'd assume people are trying to beat the spread by as much as possible more than worry about how many losers they pick.

And also assume if you re-ranked the list with win % as the #1 ranking factor it would look similar to last year.

[pavyracer]

It's a weird system when the goal to win bitcoin is not to go 6-0 but go 6-0 and picking games where you can also beat the spread by as much as you can. It rewards people who play NCAAF than NFL as the spread win differentials are much higher in NCAAF.

[thetrinity]

I did a 2 unit when I picked Kansas st against Oklahoma, keeping me up fairly high

[mr. leisure]

It's a weird system when the goal to win bitcoin is not to go 6-0 but go 6-0 and picking games where you can also beat the spread by as much as you can. It rewards people who play NCAAF than NFL as the spread win differentials are much higher in NCAAF.

Yep , especially totals .

[pavyracer]

Yep , especially totals .

I have seen quite a few college games where both teams scored in the 50's without OT.

[Ghenghis Kahn]

Yep , especially totals .

I've mentioned this but LT Profits doesn't understand why totals are heavily weighted in this system. Too bad college football is my weakest sport. I'd be just hammering overs all day.

[BuckyOne]

Interesting stuff. For a given week you want those action points. For the year, there will be some separation and there might not be a tie to break and the guy with the higher win total finishes ahead. Even though the guy behind by 1 pick has a lot more action points.

But, the group record is still 49.86% so, i guess the guys that are winning are killing it and the guys on the low end are not picking all that bad.

[jjgold]

[terpkeg]

Looks like rankings go by number of wins then action as tie breaker. So if you dont take all 102 play, say just 90 min you are at significant disadvantage.

Is this accurate?

[BuckyOne]

Looks like rankings go by number of wins then action as tie breaker. So if you dont take all 102 play, say just 90 min you are at significant disadvantage.

Is this accurate?

That's the way I see it/really important to turn in the picks each week.

[pavyracer]

Looks like rankings go by number of wins then action as tie breaker. So if you dont take all 102 play, say just 90 min you are at significant disadvantage.

Is this accurate?

Since the rankings are not based on units won there is no advantage to picking less plays to protect units.

[terpkeg]

Then why is there a min play for eligibility of 90?

[daneblazer]

Wish I had tried. Literally just clicking buttons

[pavyracer]

Then why is there a min play for eligibility of 90?

Not sure as there is no advantage of making less plays. I suppose they don't want people joining late in the contest so they made a minimum of 90 plays to be eligible to win prizes. Theoretically someone can join in the middle of the contest and make 72 plays and go 72-0 and win this thing so they don't want that to happen.

[juicername]

It's so top heavy this year that you need to take a lot more chances.

[Roger T. Bannon]

It's a dumb contest.

[JohnGalt2341]

I just noticed DanielEspinosa's action score. Incredible!!

Leaderboard
Go to Bottom

1	Daniel Espinosa	46-15-0	75.41 %	L 2	500.5	+32.91	5 pending
2	gavin	41-18-2	69.49 %	W 7	234.5	+26.71	5 pending
3	boscokid	40-25-1	61.54 %	L 1	173.5	+12.88	-
4	ICE-BLOOD	38-20-2	65.52 %	W 3	338.0	+17.62	6 pending
5	chrisbuc40	38-18-0	67.86 %	W 3	330.0	+21.56	-
6	AUSTINRUSSELL	38-21-1	64.41 %	L 1	228.0	+23.67	2 pending
7	shrekdaddy	38-20-2	65.52 %	W 2	153.0	+13.34	6 pending
8	kcburg	38-22-3	63.33 %	W 2	137.5	+17.75	1 pending
9	7deuceoff$uit	38-22-2	63.33 %	L 3	79.5	+8.90	4 pending
10	mush	37-21-2	63.79 %	W 1	396.5	+12.43	3 pending
11	rammer	37-21-3	63.79 %	W 6	289.0	+17.41	5 pending
12	sammyesalem	37-23-1	61.67 %	L 1	270.0	+15.49	-
13	TheMoneyShot	37-22-0	62.71 %	L 2	251.5	+17.11	1 pending
14	JayW1288	37-22-2	62.71 %	W 1	248.5	+12.38	3 pending
15	bigdaddyjames	37-25-2	59.68 %	L 1	234.0	+9.35	-
16	cmaulsby	37-21-2	63.79 %	W 6	186.0	+17.67	6 pending
17	TeddyB	37-21-1	63.79 %	L 1	125.0	+18.71	1 pending
18	jimk6969	37-23-1	61.67 %	W 6	121.0	+12.39	4 pending
19	victor777	37-24-0	60.66 %	W 3	115.5	+11.94	5 pending
20	gauchojake	37-24-0	60.66 %	L 2	77.0	+14.49	5 pending

[Roger T. Bannon]

Not sure as there is no advantage of making less plays. I suppose they don't want people joining late in the contest so they made a minimum of 90 plays to be eligible to win prizes. Theoretically someone can join in the middle of the contest and make 72 plays and go 72-0 and win this thing so they don't want that to happen.

That has been the rule in the past so they kept it. Obviously, not much of this was thought through. SBR Drew screwed it up and they tried to fix it and made it worse.

[unde0087]

Wish I had tried. Literally just clicking buttons

[Foxx]

I just noticed DanielEspinosa's action score. Incredible!!
Leaderboard
Go to Bottom

1	Daniel Espinosa	46-15-0	75.41 %	L 2	500.5	+32.91	5 pending
2	gavin	41-18-2	69.49 %	W 7	234.5	+26.71	5 pending
3	boscokid	40-25-1	61.54 %	L 1	173.5	+12.88	-
4	ICE-BLOOD	38-20-2	65.52 %	W 3	338.0	+17.62	6 pending
5	chrisbuc40	38-18-0	67.86 %	W 3	330.0	+21.56	-
6	AUSTINRUSSELL	38-21-1	64.41 %	L 1	228.0	+23.67	2 pending
7	shrekdaddy	38-20-2	65.52 %	W 2	153.0	+13.34	6 pending
8	kcburg	38-22-3	63.33 %	W 2	137.5	+17.75	1 pending
9	7deuceoff$uit	38-22-2	63.33 %	L 3	79.5	+8.90	4 pending
10	mush	37-21-2	63.79 %	W 1	396.5	+12.43	3 pending
11	rammer	37-21-3	63.79 %	W 6	289.0	+17.41	5 pending
12	sammyesalem	37-23-1	61.67 %	L 1	270.0	+15.49	-
13	TheMoneyShot	37-22-0	62.71 %	L 2	251.5	+17.11	1 pending
14	JayW1288	37-22-2	62.71 %	W 1	248.5	+12.38	3 pending
15	bigdaddyjames	37-25-2	59.68 %	L 1	234.0	+9.35	-
16	cmaulsby	37-21-2	63.79 %	W 6	186.0	+17.67	6 pending
17	TeddyB	37-21-1	63.79 %	L 1	125.0	+18.71	1 pending
18	jimk6969	37-23-1	61.67 %	W 6	121.0	+12.39	4 pending
19	victor777	37-24-0	60.66 %	W 3	115.5	+11.94	5 pending
20	gauchojake	37-24-0	60.66 %	L 2	77.0	+14.49	5 pending

Not only is Danny incredible, the word on the street is that she is hot.

[Roger T. Bannon]

The problem with the contest is that SBR Drew wanted to give out as much money to as many people as possible. So he did away with the season-long format. He focused on the 6-0. People realized that you had to go 6-0 to win anything and realized that you had to pick plus odds to come out ahead. People did not like that or the contest so SBR tried to make changes. But they wanted to keep with the weekly contest angle.

So they chose to go with Action points which just changes the way you need to angle. The pushes as losses is really a killer. That was not something that was considered.

Most of us just put in picks the same as always and then realized slowly that we were doing it all wrong. But the object is still to go 6-0 so you just make picks and hope for the best.

[Roger T. Bannon]

Interesting stuff. For a given week you want those action points. For the year, there will be some separation and there might not be a tie to break and the guy with the higher win total finishes ahead. Even though the guy behind by 1 pick has a lot more action points.

But, the group record is still 49.86% so, i guess the guys that are winning are killing it and the guys on the low end are not picking all that bad.

You want the action points for the week but obviously luck is going to be the biggest factor in going 6-0 and having Action Points. I would guess that less than 10% of people in this contest actually understand how it actually works, including the people that arranged it this way. That is why you are looking at the standings. The standings don't really matter.

[pavyracer]

With games being cancelled at the last minute a lot of people get killed with the pushes that count as losses. I wonder how many bet the Clemson-FSU game earlier and now are stuck with a loss (push).

Also the strategy of betting early to beat the closer is gone cause you don't wanna risk picking a game on Tuesday that may be cancelled later. Then when you wait late to pick it the line you wanted to bet is not available anymore.

I just wait now until 15 min before kick off to make sure the game is going to be played so I won't get a loss (push).

[Roger T. Bannon]

One other reason that middling results are doing well I think is because non-pros are not in the contest as much. I think there has been a huge dropoff of people that might have been in the contest but since they cannot win money or have a chance at winning a big prize, they just drop off.

That's good for SBR Pros but probably bad for the site. Probably need to give non-Pros more reason to stick around and convert to pros because the BTP contest was a pretty big part of that in the past. I know it is why I wound up becoming PRO. I had a bad year but won 2,500 points one week and then I figured out it was worth something.

[7deuceoff$uit]

I'm okay with wins being the determining factor for ranking, but I wish they had made the tiebreaker based off units first over action points.

[Roger T. Bannon]

I'm okay with wins being the determining factor for ranking, but I wish they had made the tiebreaker based off units first over action points.

That was the biggest complaint last year because you had to pick plus odds to win anything. This year people are not complaining as much about that so I think SBR thinks they are doing pretty well with it.

If you use units, you've got no chance using your regular picks.

The best way to deal with it is to go back to the old format but just give out more and smaller prizes if that is what SBR wants to do. That's the reason to give out weekly prizes.

They should give out the betpoints to the weekly winners. Nobody cares enough about betpoints to pick plus odds. They are going to try to win for the year.

[7deuceoff$uit]

That was the biggest complaint last year because you had to pick plus odds to win anything. This year people are not complaining as much about that so I think SBR thinks they are doing pretty well with it.

If you use units, you've got no chance using your regular picks.

The best way to deal with it is to go back to the old format but just give out more and smaller prizes if that is what SBR wants to do. That's the reason to give out weekly prizes.

They should give out the betpoints to the weekly winners. Nobody cares enough about betpoints to pick plus odds. They are going to try to win for the year.

But it's now primarily based off wins and not units, where before it was based off units then action points. I just feel like units carry more weight than action points when handicapping, so it would make sense to have them still be a factor. I do get what you're saying though.

[Roger T. Bannon]

But it's now primarily based off wins and not units, where before it was based off units then action points. I just feel like units carry more weight than action points when handicapping, so it would make sense to have them still be a factor. I do get what you're saying though.

Yeah, the thing is that you cannot win by handicapping that way. You have to pick plus odds. That's the whole problem with the new format. People don't really like it. They want the old format. It was really a perfectly designed contest and you had the great technology for it and now that is mostly wasted.

If you were going to do weekly according to units, would be better to go with MoneyLines. The system is probably not capable of that and that would not be very popular I am sure.

[horja1]

It's a weird system when the goal to win bitcoin is not to go 6-0 but go 6-0 and picking games where you can also beat the spread by as much as you can. It rewards people who play NCAAF than NFL as the spread win differentials are much higher in NCAAF.

Daniel Espinosa - NCAAF exclusive

[Roger T. Bannon]

You will probably have a slighter chance at winning with college in terms of action points. But there is always going to be somebody that hits around 70% to win this thing because that is what you have to do with 1,500 people in it. Somebody is going to do that whether they are picking NFL or college.

Actually, nobody at the top is playing this the right way and if they had, they would not be at the top. Ultimately, you have to get really lucky to be at the top. No strategy will win it for you.

The Action points just comes down to the weekly factor and obviously you are not going to be any better off with NFL or college on a weekly basis. If you pick college instead of NFL, you will probably wind up going 3-3 instead of the 6-0 you would have had.

It's ultimately just about what format people like the best. People that win with weeklies are going to be happy. People that don't, aren't.

The BTP format was extremely popular but SBR wanted to give out more prizes. This is not the only way to do that.