How high have you seen A+ prestige get in D1? When I denote prestige in D1, I'll use A++ to mean 2/3s of a letter grade above an A and A+ to mean 1/3 of a letter grade above an A etc.

After I won 2 titles in 3 years at Illinois (which has A+ baseline), I was able to knock another A+ down to moderate on a recruit they went all in (25 minutes, start, 20 HV, CV) on. I likely had a significant AP advantage (400-800), but I still must have been at the equivalent of A++++ or so, right?

I've had 3 relatively unsuccessful years since then (so NC/2nd/S16/S16) and I was still able to knock a B prestige down to moderate will at least a slight AP disadvantage, so I still must be around A++, right? I don't really know much about this, I'm interested on people's thoughts.

There’s about 8 people who can add to this convo. I am not one of them.

I’m not one either. However, I distinctly recall Gillispie saying he had nearly a full letter grade advantage over another A+ after he won 4 consecutive titles with his Kansas squad.

Following.

Posted by darnoc29099 on 6/5/2020 5:06:00 PM (view original):
I’m not one either. However, I distinctly recall Gillispie saying he had nearly a full letter grade advantage over another A+ after he won 4 consecutive titles with his Kansas squad.

This is helpful. Gil can probably give the best answers to this question.

Are you sure in all these cases these people were “all in”?

Honestly sounds more like they just didn’t put as much effort as you think they did.

long story short - sorry - but i am really in no position to comment on 3.0 recruiting battles!

i was pretty sure in 2.0 you could go higher than an a+, significantly. i have no idea if this is the case now, everything feels totally different. when i was over at uconn and they were coming off 3 titles, i just was too clueless, i had literally no idea what the hell was going on recruiting wise. im not sure i do now either to be honest. it didn't seem to me things were as easy as they would have been, like it didn't feel like it was easier after a couple titles than when i first got there - so i'm kinda skeptical, but i was *so* lost. also, seble has said you can't go higher than a+, but i couldn't tell from the ticket text if he was saying you can't display an a++ or you can't go over 100, if you will.

at first i was thinking yes it was higher than a+ because they were unlocking at lower AP than another A+ teams i was co-coaching with chap - and a bit lower than when i started at uconn. but i can't even find those notes and it was just a small number of ap - which apparently are hugely preference dependent - which i had no idea of (that was different in 2.0 - i mean there were no prefs - but there was unlocking - it just was not shown). but the battles didn't feel any easier. i for sure was massively misjudging the value of AP back then though. and preferences. and the % you'd get to win based on the % of effort. so... everything, i suppose :) so i pretty much just throw all that experience out the window.

Posted by indiansrck27 on 6/5/2020 11:33:00 PM (view original):
Are you sure in all these cases these people were “all in”?

Honestly sounds more like they just didn’t put as much effort as you think they did.

I doubt teams are putting something in the range of 15-19 HVs and 1 CV on a guy. Just wouldn't really make sense. Could have happened once but I doubt 4 times.

@Gil right now at Illinois it took me 48 AP to unlock a ship for a guy with neutral preferences and 35 AP to unlock a ship on a guy I had 5 VGs on and 1 G on.

At my peak it was 42 for a guy I had 1 VG on and 33 for a guy I had 3 VGs and 1 G on. Pretty different. Looks like 43-44 AP as the base instead of 48 or something which is about 9-11% effort.... which is how many letter grades? 1 or 1.5?

Posted by cubcub113 on 6/5/2020 10:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by darnoc29099 on 6/5/2020 5:06:00 PM (view original):
I’m not one either. However, I distinctly recall Gillispie saying he had nearly a full letter grade advantage over another A+ after he won 4 consecutive titles with his Kansas squad.

This is helpful. Gil can probably give the best answers to this question.

FWIW I think you can get higher easier than 95% of the WIS population realizes. I wish I had asked people about the effort they put into recruits the 2 years I had the 2 titles in 3 years in my system.

Knocked a C+ that I assume was all in on one of my guys to moderate with only a start, 25 minutes, and 7 HVs, 1 CV, and ~50 AP. Feels more like 3 letter grades for sure rather than 2 consider I was in a 73/27 with a B- this year with a start 25, 1 CV, 20 HVs, and a ~400 AP disadvantage.

Knocked an A+ that was all in on one of my guys to moderate as I discussed with a sizable AP advantage... but still knocking another all in A+ to moderate is crazy. Distinctly remember even preferences.

I got in a 50/50 battle with an A/A- prestige with a start, 25 minutes, 50 AP and 12 HVs once and a 41/59 with a Start, 25 minutes, 100 AP, and 7 HVs and 1 CV. If they were 20 HVs and 1 CV that'd be pretty crazy. Mrslam was the other coach in the other two battles. I think Smith was the 50/50 and Aquino was the 40/60 if I remember correctly. If you could confirm if you went all in / remember the APs you put on that would be super helpful.

Don't remember preference for any of these guys besides the A+ vs A+ guy.

I put 1 AP on a recruit and was at moderate to low for a B- which is pretty wild. That definitely feels like roughly 3 grades.

7.0.3

I honestly don't remember how much effort I put into Smith and Aquino. I don't keep records on stuff like that. I also tend to conduct recruiting by feel and don't really try to figure out the exact impact of AP, preferences, visits, etc (beyond keeping track of the other team's budget).

I am almost positive that I was not "all in" with Aquino though.

Posted by cubcub113 on 6/6/2020 1:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by indiansrck27 on 6/5/2020 11:33:00 PM (view original):
Are you sure in all these cases these people were “all in”?

Honestly sounds more like they just didn’t put as much effort as you think they did.

I doubt teams are putting something in the range of 15-19 HVs and 1 CV on a guy. Just wouldn't really make sense. Could have happened once but I doubt 4 times.

@Gil right now at Illinois it took me 48 AP to unlock a ship for a guy with neutral preferences and 35 AP to unlock a ship on a guy I had 5 VGs on and 1 G on.

At my peak it was 42 for a guy I had 1 VG on and 33 for a guy I had 3 VGs and 1 G on. Pretty different. Looks like 43-44 AP as the base instead of 48 or something which is about 9-11% effort.... which is how many letter grades? 1 or 1.5?

7.0.3

I've heard you say that you rarely give 1-19 visits. I do understand your point behind this. But a few things to say....

1) that can't be true as often as you say. Let's say you have enough to go all in on two players this time around (based on your amount of openings). After doing so, I'm sure have a random amount of money left to offer 1, 7, or 12 HV to a third player. Whatever the remaining budget allows. That's not all in. I'm sure you'll use it at that point on an additional target if needed. Which kinda leads me to point #2

2) not everyone recruits the same. In the land of dice rolls, who's to say it's not better to go 15 HV on 3 rolls? Rather than 20 HV on 2 rolls. I'm not arguing for OR against it myself. I'm just getting to D1 so I don't have experience there we'll say. But I can tell you that I'll definitely consider trying it that way. I'm currently in the middle of a "WELL documented across the site" 1-for-17 roll losing streak. I lost 10, won 1, have lost 6 more. So for me, I want as many rolls as I can get! (And I don't mean a trailing 20/80 situation roll. A roll with intent to win). And I'm SURE I'm not the only person to ever think of this as a possibility/idea/strategy. Especially with odds being stretched. A "real" 20/80 roll would be something like 4 HV to 16 HV if all other factors were equal. But in HD, 4 HV doesn't get you in the roll at all against 16 HV. Even if it was a 100% fact that doing 20 HV every single time you can is the best strategy, I still feel like not everyone would do it. There's just so many coaches that play many different ways. And not everyone plays the way that you (or i) see as "the best way".

Just rambling.....

One more thing, I'm 0-3 in D1 rolls so far. One of them was for a 5* that's 20 miles away from home, I led on him from day one, as the only team that offered and ever moved above very low. Continued to pump AP (other schools could've been pumping AP as well. But it didn't "appear" that way). Late signer. For 21 cycles I led. Cycle 22, the last of RS1, a better school offered, but only moved up to low. When RS2 begins, the better school drops the bomb, and the recruit signs with him immediately and he's gone. I led 60/40.

Hindsight, why not go 16 HV next time? Leaving myself money for a back up. Maybe I lose the roll while trailing 40/60 instead. Either way, I'd have a solid shot at the recruit.

Posted by topdogggbm on 6/6/2020 11:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 6/6/2020 1:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by indiansrck27 on 6/5/2020 11:33:00 PM (view original):
Are you sure in all these cases these people were “all in”?

Honestly sounds more like they just didn’t put as much effort as you think they did.

I doubt teams are putting something in the range of 15-19 HVs and 1 CV on a guy. Just wouldn't really make sense. Could have happened once but I doubt 4 times.

@Gil right now at Illinois it took me 48 AP to unlock a ship for a guy with neutral preferences and 35 AP to unlock a ship on a guy I had 5 VGs on and 1 G on.

At my peak it was 42 for a guy I had 1 VG on and 33 for a guy I had 3 VGs and 1 G on. Pretty different. Looks like 43-44 AP as the base instead of 48 or something which is about 9-11% effort.... which is how many letter grades? 1 or 1.5?

7.0.3

I've heard you say that you rarely give 1-19 visits. I do understand your point behind this. But a few things to say....

1) that can't be true as often as you say. Let's say you have enough to go all in on two players this time around (based on your amount of openings). After doing so, I'm sure have a random amount of money left to offer 1, 7, or 12 HV to a third player. Whatever the remaining budget allows. That's not all in. I'm sure you'll use it at that point on an additional target if needed. Which kinda leads me to point #2

2) not everyone recruits the same. In the land of dice rolls, who's to say it's not better to go 15 HV on 3 rolls? Rather than 20 HV on 2 rolls. I'm not arguing for OR against it myself. I'm just getting to D1 so I don't have experience there we'll say. But I can tell you that I'll definitely consider trying it that way. I'm currently in the middle of a "WELL documented across the site" 1-for-17 roll losing streak. I lost 10, won 1, have lost 6 more. So for me, I want as many rolls as I can get! (And I don't mean a trailing 20/80 situation roll. A roll with intent to win). And I'm SURE I'm not the only person to ever think of this as a possibility/idea/strategy. Especially with odds being stretched. A "real" 20/80 roll would be something like 4 HV to 16 HV if all other factors were equal. But in HD, 4 HV doesn't get you in the roll at all against 16 HV. Even if it was a 100% fact that doing 20 HV every single time you can is the best strategy, I still feel like not everyone would do it. There's just so many coaches that play many different ways. And not everyone plays the way that you (or i) see as "the best way".

Just rambling.....

One more thing, I'm 0-3 in D1 rolls so far. One of them was for a 5* that's 20 miles away from home, I led on him from day one, as the only team that offered and ever moved above very low. Continued to pump AP (other schools could've been pumping AP as well. But it didn't "appear" that way). Late signer. For 21 cycles I led. Cycle 22, the last of RS1, a better school offered, but only moved up to low. When RS2 begins, the better school drops the bomb, and the recruit signs with him immediately and he's gone. I led 60/40.

Hindsight, why not go 16 HV next time? Leaving myself money for a back up. Maybe I lose the roll while trailing 40/60 instead. Either way, I'd have a solid shot at the recruit.

I tend to agree with this.

I agree with Top for the most part. Definitely lots of scenarios of putting in a mid level number of HVs. I may have 1 EE that gives me 3 grand. This could mean I only offer 7 HVs or something with that amount of money. Happens all the time.

The guy who dropped the bomb almost certainly when 20/1. If you only go 16/1 you may not even be at high. Maybe you are, maybe you aren’t, but I would spend the $800 to give yourself a higher probability of even having a chance.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 6/7/2020 9:41:00 AM (view original):
The guy who dropped the bomb almost certainly when 20/1. If you only go 16/1 you may not even be at high. Maybe you are, maybe you aren’t, but I would spend the $800 to give yourself a higher probability of even having a chance.

Yeah, its completely illogical to battle an A+++ and put 16 HVs on it you're at B+. There are far better ways to spend your $$$ than getting to Moderate on a guy LOL.

But Top's second points is maybe slightly more likely? That people don't understand how stupid this is? I doubt this, the Minnesota vs Illinois battles I talked about were the only ones where my opponent didn't *definitely* put 15+ on. And I feel pretty safe assuming when Middle Tennessee puts 15 HVs on a guy I'm on they put 20...

Posted by emy1013 on 6/7/2020 3:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 6/6/2020 11:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 6/6/2020 1:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by indiansrck27 on 6/5/2020 11:33:00 PM (view original):
Are you sure in all these cases these people were “all in”?

Honestly sounds more like they just didn’t put as much effort as you think they did.

I doubt teams are putting something in the range of 15-19 HVs and 1 CV on a guy. Just wouldn't really make sense. Could have happened once but I doubt 4 times.

@Gil right now at Illinois it took me 48 AP to unlock a ship for a guy with neutral preferences and 35 AP to unlock a ship on a guy I had 5 VGs on and 1 G on.

At my peak it was 42 for a guy I had 1 VG on and 33 for a guy I had 3 VGs and 1 G on. Pretty different. Looks like 43-44 AP as the base instead of 48 or something which is about 9-11% effort.... which is how many letter grades? 1 or 1.5?

7.0.3

I've heard you say that you rarely give 1-19 visits. I do understand your point behind this. But a few things to say....

1) that can't be true as often as you say. Let's say you have enough to go all in on two players this time around (based on your amount of openings). After doing so, I'm sure have a random amount of money left to offer 1, 7, or 12 HV to a third player. Whatever the remaining budget allows. That's not all in. I'm sure you'll use it at that point on an additional target if needed. Which kinda leads me to point #2

2) not everyone recruits the same. In the land of dice rolls, who's to say it's not better to go 15 HV on 3 rolls? Rather than 20 HV on 2 rolls. I'm not arguing for OR against it myself. I'm just getting to D1 so I don't have experience there we'll say. But I can tell you that I'll definitely consider trying it that way. I'm currently in the middle of a "WELL documented across the site" 1-for-17 roll losing streak. I lost 10, won 1, have lost 6 more. So for me, I want as many rolls as I can get! (And I don't mean a trailing 20/80 situation roll. A roll with intent to win). And I'm SURE I'm not the only person to ever think of this as a possibility/idea/strategy. Especially with odds being stretched. A "real" 20/80 roll would be something like 4 HV to 16 HV if all other factors were equal. But in HD, 4 HV doesn't get you in the roll at all against 16 HV. Even if it was a 100% fact that doing 20 HV every single time you can is the best strategy, I still feel like not everyone would do it. There's just so many coaches that play many different ways. And not everyone plays the way that you (or i) see as "the best way".

Just rambling.....

One more thing, I'm 0-3 in D1 rolls so far. One of them was for a 5* that's 20 miles away from home, I led on him from day one, as the only team that offered and ever moved above very low. Continued to pump AP (other schools could've been pumping AP as well. But it didn't "appear" that way). Late signer. For 21 cycles I led. Cycle 22, the last of RS1, a better school offered, but only moved up to low. When RS2 begins, the better school drops the bomb, and the recruit signs with him immediately and he's gone. I led 60/40.

Hindsight, why not go 16 HV next time? Leaving myself money for a back up. Maybe I lose the roll while trailing 40/60 instead. Either way, I'd have a solid shot at the recruit.

I tend to agree with this.

@top the issue is that teams struggle to get into a roll with me at A++ or A+++ or whatever. Battling a team 1 1/3 - 2 letter grades ahead of you is massively different that a team near your prestige level. You're just trying to get into a roll at all!

If it's a B+ battling me those 4 extra HVs might not be taking them from 53 to 60 like in the example you cited, but instead 17 to 24, which is actually 0 to 24.