All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > Gridiron Dynasty > SOTF: New Challenge Posted
8/13/2014 5:41 PM
When I put our entry together last night, I knew that the doubleheader was added.  But clearly the intent of the challenge wasn't built that way, so I didn't even bother trying to exploit it.

Also, all these forum games we do have something put in the rules, similar to what Casey put in this game:

-  "Everything else is similar to previous games, and by that we mean, you are playing each other, not the hosts, so don't try to outsmart the game. If you think you've found a loophole and want to run it by us, go ahead and ask and if we think its ingenius and doesn't go against the spirit of the rules, we'll give you the go ahead."

In this case, if you wanted to exploit the added doubleheader game, you probably should have asked.  In fact, I should have asked rather than just assume only one game would count myself.

8/13/2014 5:43 PM
Ouch Team 2.  No RP and Tulo and McCutchen are out.  Now watch, Team 2 will crush everyone...
8/13/2014 6:05 PM
I didn't think I needed to pick RP since the Pitching scoring combines them with the Starters so I threw saves out the window. Plus I didn't get any input from my teammates so I threw something together without any baseball knowledge.
8/13/2014 6:38 PM
Posted by csudak on 8/13/2014 4:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tropicana on 8/13/2014 2:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stevedotdec on 8/13/2014 2:17:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tropicana on 8/13/2014 12:18:00 PM (view original):
Posted by csudak on 8/13/2014 12:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ghutton9 on 8/13/2014 10:52:00 AM (view original):
How is the double header going to be handled for this challenge?
The originally scheduled game for the day is what counts
Which one is the originally scheduled game (and that's pretty unfair, honestly....)
The first game is the originally scheduled game.  That's the game that has the pitchers that were scheduled to pitch today in it.
And therein lies the problem -- I think time-wise the later game was the originally scheduled....which is why waiting to send your picks in, though dangerous because of tie-breaking possibilities, was a choice that could have been made and been a bang-or-bust proposition.

Hence why I say it is a little unfair to say one game over the other. You wouldn't have let someone who bid highly to buy Homer Bailey on Monday change their picks after the news came out he wasn't starting on Tuesday night. So why shouldn't both games count? You wait so you have the most information possible.
You logic on not changing picks is wrong.  Teams have until the deadline to change any picks they want, with the caveat being that is considered their submisstion for the order received.  That actually happens more often than you think with these challenges.
This is also good to know. I have to admit I'm not sure I like that rule either...
8/13/2014 6:43 PM
Posted by stevedotdec on 8/13/2014 5:41:00 PM (view original):
When I put our entry together last night, I knew that the doubleheader was added.  But clearly the intent of the challenge wasn't built that way, so I didn't even bother trying to exploit it.

Also, all these forum games we do have something put in the rules, similar to what Casey put in this game:

-  "Everything else is similar to previous games, and by that we mean, you are playing each other, not the hosts, so don't try to outsmart the game. If you think you've found a loophole and want to run it by us, go ahead and ask and if we think its ingenius and doesn't go against the spirit of the rules, we'll give you the go ahead."

In this case, if you wanted to exploit the added doubleheader game, you probably should have asked.  In fact, I should have asked rather than just assume only one game would count myself.

I don't think assuming that all the games that are scheduled are going to count as points is "finding a loophole." The game is on the schedule. If it was going to be, as csudak said, the games on the schedule as of Saturday night when the challenge was posted, then it should have said that. This is what it said --


This challenge will consist of bidding for players and teams from MLB games on Wednesday.

You will get 1000 points total to bid however you want. We will be focusing on 5 categories:

SP (all pitchers who start a game on Wednesday)
RP (any player that pitches in relief on Wednesday)
IF (any 1B, 2B, SS, or 3B that STARTS at one of those positions on Wednesday)
OF (any LF, RF, or CF that STARTS at one of those positions on Wednesday)
TEAM (any MLB team that plays on Wednesday)

It doesn't really give that caveat, and it certainly doesn't leave the impression that both games WOULDN'T count. I mean, why wouldn't they? They're a game being played on Wednesday, which is what the challenge said. I know it's not going to change, but let's not make it out like I was trying to game the system or anything here. I read what the challenge literally said, and interpreted it to say, unfortunately for me, exactly what it said.

So, Go Jason Kipnis and the Cleveland Indians, I guess....
8/13/2014 7:29 PM
Casey made a ruling, and from his position I know every ruling is going to make someone unhappy. I respect the position he is in. Regardless of whether I would have made the same decision, I don't think we as a team should continue to argue the point.

In fact, the worst thing he could do as a host isn't making the occasional wrong decision. The worst thing would be to constantly flip back and forth on decisions.

8/13/2014 8:01 PM
I think its fair to reason that the INTENT of the challenge was for games that were scheduled originally for Wednesday. 

That goes back to the overriding rules of the entire game, which Steve already posted, but I will again:

"Everything else is similar to previous games, and by that we mean, you are playing each other, not the hosts, so don't try to outsmart the game. If you think you've found a loophole and want to run it by us, go ahead and ask and if we think its ingenius and doesn't go against the spirit of the rules, we'll give you the go ahead."

Thus, whether I used the another word or two in the challenge doesn't change my intent of the challenge.

8/13/2014 8:26 PM
Just realized I listed Leake on 2 teams.  He is on Team 1.  Team 3, your third pitcher is Dickey.
8/13/2014 10:20 PM
Posted by csudak on 8/13/2014 8:26:00 PM (view original):
Just realized I listed Leake on 2 teams.  He is on Team 1.  Team 3, your third pitcher is Dickey.
Mmm...that's ok.  Team 3 can have Leake...
8/13/2014 11:37 PM
Posted by csudak on 8/13/2014 8:03:00 PM (view original):
I think its fair to reason that the INTENT of the challenge was for games that were scheduled originally for Wednesday. 

That goes back to the overriding rules of the entire game, which Steve already posted, but I will again:

"Everything else is similar to previous games, and by that we mean, you are playing each other, not the hosts, so don't try to outsmart the game. If you think you've found a loophole and want to run it by us, go ahead and ask and if we think its ingenius and doesn't go against the spirit of the rules, we'll give you the go ahead."

Thus, whether I used the another word or two in the challenge doesn't change my intent of the challenge.

Jesus. It's exceptionally not fair to say that. And it IS exceptionally unfair to say that I somehow ed trying to game the system by saying all the games played on Wednesday were included in a challenge that said, all of Wednesdays games are included. If you want to say I should have asked that's fine, but given the wording of the challenge it is really unfair for anyone to say that
8/14/2014 6:30 AM
Never once did I say you were trying to game the system.  All I'm saying is that the intent of the challenge was that all scheduled games for Wednesday when the challenge was announced were the games that were going to be included.  I'm the one who created the challenge, so obviously I'm the only one who knows the intent of it.  How you continue to question what my intent was I don't really understand.
8/14/2014 6:45 AM
Posted by csudak on 8/14/2014 6:30:00 AM (view original):
Never once did I say you were trying to game the system.  All I'm saying is that the intent of the challenge was that all scheduled games for Wednesday when the challenge was announced were the games that were going to be included.  I'm the one who created the challenge, so obviously I'm the only one who knows the intent of it.  How you continue to question what my intent was I don't really understand.
What he is saying is that the ruling came down after the bids were set and we spent 100 on Cleveland when we obviously wouldn't have spent 1/10th of our money on them if they weren't playing twice. We would have likely had someone like Tampa Bay if the ruling had come when we could adjust our picks.

Life goes on, but it cost us 75 points just not knowing. and assuming games played Wednesday meant games played Wednesday.

8/14/2014 7:36 AM
With all that said, here are the standings:

1st: Team 5 with 711 points
2nd: Team 1 with 652 points
3rd: Team 4 with 526 points
4th: Team 2 with 484 points
5th: Team 3 with 466 points


Team 5 is safe and will need to vote one member from Team 1 (stevedotdec, bobprobert, or pokerdonk) into the elimination challenge.

Worst kill pick from Teams 4, 2, and 3 are automatically in the elimination.

Votes are due by 7am Tomorrow.


8/14/2014 8:58 AM
Posted by onside on 8/9/2014 1:38:00 PM (view original):
By a wide margin, osgonlz is ELIMINATED.  His golfers were just too good.

amorak and bobprobert both hit the nail on the head, and each will receive two power play clues (amorak technically won on the tiebreaker).
never got my clues...
8/14/2014 11:56 AM
Are we all individually voting or am I just sending in one vote for the team?
of 42
All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > Gridiron Dynasty > SOTF: New Challenge Posted

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.