Special K 22
02-07-2006, 02:36 AM
Ok, so myself and a bunch of people like to throw in a few bucks, fill out a bracket, and pay the top three with the most accurate predictions. As our current system stands you get one point for every first round win, 2 for every second round win, 4 for every third round win and so forth except you receive 35 points for picking the national champion. As it stands the current system really doesn't reward someone for picking an underdog so we want to change that. We had some ideas but I'd like to hear anyone elses opinion on the matter.
Idea one is to take the difference of the two seeds if the underdog were to win. For example, if you picked a fifteen seed to beat a two seed you would be rewarded with thirteen points. If you pick the favorite you only get one point. A nine seed beating an eight seed still only gets you one point and I believe that's fair as that wouldn't be much of an upset. Likewise if during the final four you had two seeds playing each other that were ranked the same in their respective brackets you would get one point for choosing the winner.
Idea two is to multiply the seed by the round. So say you wanted to go out on a limb and bet the sixteen seed to beat the one seed and won. You would then be awarded with sixteen points. If that sixteen seed then went on to beat the eight seed in the second round you would be awarded thirty-two more points to bring the total to forty-eight points. In my opinion, the down side of this system is that a sixteen seed beating a one seed is more of an upset then a sixteen seed beating an eight seed but you would get more points for the sixteen seed beating the eight seed. The advantage though is that if you pick a underdog to make it far in the tournament you are rewarded pretty substantially. For example, last year UW-Mil was a twelve seed and made it all the way to the sweet sixteen. Someone who would've picked them to do that would've received thrity-six points under this new system as opposed to three in the current one. Some downsides to this, in my opinion, are that someone who happens to pick an underdog to go far that does may very likely end up with more points than someone who had a more accurate bracket overall. Also, it may create too big of a total.
The third idea is a combination of the two. Take the difference of the two teams(if the underdog wins) and multiply it by a given factor for that particular round.
So with all that being said we are basically looking for a system where you are rewarded, but not overly rewarded, for correctly picking upsets. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Idea one is to take the difference of the two seeds if the underdog were to win. For example, if you picked a fifteen seed to beat a two seed you would be rewarded with thirteen points. If you pick the favorite you only get one point. A nine seed beating an eight seed still only gets you one point and I believe that's fair as that wouldn't be much of an upset. Likewise if during the final four you had two seeds playing each other that were ranked the same in their respective brackets you would get one point for choosing the winner.
Idea two is to multiply the seed by the round. So say you wanted to go out on a limb and bet the sixteen seed to beat the one seed and won. You would then be awarded with sixteen points. If that sixteen seed then went on to beat the eight seed in the second round you would be awarded thirty-two more points to bring the total to forty-eight points. In my opinion, the down side of this system is that a sixteen seed beating a one seed is more of an upset then a sixteen seed beating an eight seed but you would get more points for the sixteen seed beating the eight seed. The advantage though is that if you pick a underdog to make it far in the tournament you are rewarded pretty substantially. For example, last year UW-Mil was a twelve seed and made it all the way to the sweet sixteen. Someone who would've picked them to do that would've received thrity-six points under this new system as opposed to three in the current one. Some downsides to this, in my opinion, are that someone who happens to pick an underdog to go far that does may very likely end up with more points than someone who had a more accurate bracket overall. Also, it may create too big of a total.
The third idea is a combination of the two. Take the difference of the two teams(if the underdog wins) and multiply it by a given factor for that particular round.
So with all that being said we are basically looking for a system where you are rewarded, but not overly rewarded, for correctly picking upsets. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.