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....