Octopus Overlords

Gwartok/Hispanic/igbe/Remus: I'm out of town starting tomorrow afternoon, so if you want confirmation that your picks get here, submit them prior to then, por favor.

Zaxxon wrote:OMG an Ironman entry is in 1st place!!111!!

Were I to have submitted an Ironman Entry, this would've been the only week I would've used 5 locks, and maybe *any* locks. Tough decision...

~Neal

The Meal wrote:

Zaxxon wrote:OMG an Ironman entry is in 1st place!!111!!

Were I to have submitted an Ironman Entry, this would've been the only week I would've used 5 locks, and maybe *any* locks. Tough decision...

~Neal

I made 5 locks every week for my Ironman entry. Whether that was bravery or stupidity (or both!) we'll know soon enough.

As I'm pretty sure we've shown in past analysis, it's pretty tough to make the playoffs without a pretty consistent Lock bonus. So I guess it's wise stupidity.

Zaxxon wrote:As I'm pretty sure we've shown in past analysis, it's pretty tough to make the playoffs without a pretty consistent Lock bonus. So I guess it's wise stupidity.

Uh, yes and no. It'd be interesting, at the end of the season, to compare IE's point totals with and without the locks. It's entirely possible that future-week locks in an IE have a negative expectation (especially if you force yourself to make five each week).

I don't disagree with forcing yourself to make five locks each week when picking serially giving you your best opportunity to make the playoffs. But there's a clear positive expectation for doing so, when you're aware of injury situations, team morale, momentum, etc.

~Neal

True. But even if the expected result of locks in an IM entry is lower than in a serial entry (which everyone should agree it is), one's goal is presumably to make the playoffs, which doesn't necessarily mean that the goal is to have the highest expected result.

By way of a horribly-put example since I'm at work, if the expected result when not using locks is X +/- 10, and the expected result when using locks is X-5 +/- 25, and the playoff barrier is X + 15, then one would conclude that using locks is the wise choice, even though the expected result is lower.

Ralph-Wiggum wrote:

The Meal wrote:

Zaxxon wrote:OMG an Ironman entry is in 1st place!!111!!

Were I to have submitted an Ironman Entry, this would've been the only week I would've used 5 locks, and maybe *any* locks. Tough decision...

~Neal

I made 5 locks every week for my Ironman entry. Whether that was bravery or stupidity (or both!) we'll know soon enough.

I didn't make any locks in my ironman entry. Thought about doing the first week or so but decided that future weeks would just be a crap shoot and might be more harmful thenm good. I also probably rushed through those picks more then I would have liked as I just went week to week making picks without taking into account expected wins/loses fro each team for the year. And trying to go with locks would have taken much too much time this week. Time will tell.............

The more I think about it, the more I could see the argument for making locks with the ironman entries. If you convinced yourself that you knew a team was going to play under .500, then you should lock the game against them each week. I would be hesitant about doing the reverse (knowing a team was going to finish above .500 and then picking for them each week), as it's easier for a team to unexpectedly tank (say your starting QB was unexpectedly found to be trafficing in illegal hamster fights) than it is for a team to unexpectly pull itself out of the dregs. (Yes, teams unexpectely finish above .500, but generally not from the group assumed to be bottom-5 in the league.)

I understand the point Zaxxon makes about expecting to need positive variance in your picks to finish in the top half of the pool (and thus making it into the playoffs), but I don't think an Ironman Entry is one that should focus on needing longshots to come through to be a viable ticket to the playoffs. If anything, it's one's fallback position, allowing them to be a bit more reckless in the early weeks of the season (picking their own longshot locks with their live picks) trying to build an early season lead, knowing that they've got an ultra-conservative ticket to fall back on in the case of making the playoffs.

Folks with an extra IE should be able to evaluate their expected performance in future weeks (relative to how teams are actually playing) to gauge whether or not they can afford to take more risks (or need to take more risks!) with their live entry. Putting extra uncertainty into their IE entry defeats that purpose, IMO.

If the pool were set up such that only the top 1/3rd of all entries makes the playoffs, then I'd 100% agree with the suggestion of building more longshots and variance into one's ironman entries.

~Neal

The Meal wrote:I understand the point Zaxxon makes about expecting to need positive variance in your picks to finish in the top half of the pool (and thus making it into the playoffs), but I don't think an Ironman Entry is one that should focus on needing longshots to come through to be a viable ticket to the playoffs. If anything, it's one's fallback position, allowing them to be a bit more reckless in the early weeks of the season (picking their own longshot locks with their live picks) trying to build an early season lead, knowing that they've got an ultra-conservative ticket to fall back on in the case of making the playoffs.

That's an interesting way to look at it. I hadn't thought about it that way. However, given that the unexpected inevitably happens every season, I don't know that it's fair to look at an IM entry as conservative. It may have looked that way at the outset, but by midseason I think it's likely to prove to look much different. We'll see how this inaugural season plays out.

Folks with an extra IE should be able to evaluate their expected performance in future weeks (relative to how teams are actually playing) to gauge whether or not they can afford to take more risks (or need to take more risks!) with their live entry. Putting extra uncertainty into their IE entry defeats that purpose, IMO.

Point taken.

If the pool were set up such that only the top 1/3rd of all entries makes the playoffs, then I'd 100% agree with the suggestion of building more longshots and variance into one's ironman entries.

I think the nature of the Ironman effectively does set it up that way. To state the obvious, assuming that the ability to change one's picks each week is an advantage, then IM entries are at a disadvantage compared to regular entries, and thus have less than the 50% chance of playoff qualification that a regular entry does. Given the low rate of IM entries even with a 50% discount on entry fee, I think the group as a whole agrees that IM entries are at a significant disadvantage.

Zaxxon wrote:I think the nature of the Ironman effectively does set it up that way. To state the obvious, assuming that the ability to change one's picks each week is an advantage, then IM entries are at a disadvantage compared to regular entries, and thus have less than the 50% chance of playoff qualification that a regular entry does. Given the low rate of IM entries even with a 50% discount on entry fee, I think the group as a whole agrees that IM entries are at a significant disadvantage.

True enough. But having two entries, one IE and one Live *should* give the picker an overall advantage over someone who only has Live entries. That's only the case if you take advantage of the situation, however. It'd be pretty stupid, as an example, to make your Live picks match your Ironman picks.

Now if someone put forth an Ironman set of picks with lots of locks in them, then it seems logical for them to make their Live picks in a more conservative fashion (unless your Ironman picks are tanking and they clearly aren't going to get you into the playoffs).

My expecation is for the IEs to be behind the Live Entries. The NFL has lots of parity, and expecations formed after only the post season will be different than expecations formed after the mid-season.

Personally, I think it more logical to try to make your IE your middle-of-the-road picks, and adjust your Live picks on the fly based on how well your IE set is doing. It's just as legit to try to get really lucky with your IE predictions and then adjust your Live picks based on how you expect your IEs to finish up. But chances seem exceedingly slim that your preseason-based longshots may give you your best shot at the post-season. The thought that preseason-based conservative picks may get you into the post-season seems better grounded to me.

Of course, conservative picking may involved making five locks each week. My previous post gave what I think is the best lock scheme for such a scenario. (If you think the Raiders are going to go 4-12, then if you lock against them each week, you can expect to earn 8 lock points from those picks. Someone making Live picks may be hesitant to lock against them the week that the Lions are on the field against them {which'd make this a better example if these two teams played in Week 7, and one had a better feel for how Detroit is going to fare this season}, and so by picking and choosing one's Live locks, one may be able to to better than to net 8 points with an anti-Raider strategy.)

I do think there were/are strategic ways to utilize having a Ironman and a Live set of locks to work for the picker. It'd have been more useful for those folks with both sets of entries to flesh that strategy out prior to submitting their IEs, however.

~Neal

WOOOO!!!!!!!! (despite a Bear loss...)

Player Ttl Rglr Season Pts
koanicriddle 29
Zaxxon 27
JC Anejo 26
Mr. Lem 26
The Meal 25
Chris Gwinn 25
gwartok 25
msteelers 25
GuidoTKP 24
JC Anejo IM 24
Monkeyskunk 24
pr0ner 24
Captain Cave 23
Ralph-Wiggum 23
Kurth 23
Mr. Bob 23
noxiousdog 23
Quipp 23
Remus West 23
Smutly 23
spicyj 23
Ralph-Wiggum IM 23
hispanicgamer 22
godhugh 22
Miss Taken 21
Soulbringer 21
Big Jake 21
Gromit 21
Pete Rock 21
Pete Rock's Wife 21
Hell's Taco 21
igbe 21
Moghedian 20
Mithridates 20
tine 19
Moghedian IM 18
Bensley 18
Mitma 16
pyperkub 16
theohall IM 16
$iljanus 13
Jeff V 13
theohall 11

Crux wrote:Indianapolis
Denver
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Kansas City
Jacksonville
Minnesota
New England (lock)
Oakland
San Diego
Seattle
Washington
Dallas
St. Louis

With two games left to play.

Cincinnati
San Francisco

19 points so far this week if I'm not mistaken.

Zaxxon, please check your email today for two locks I'm adding for tonight's games (I still have two available).


Thanks!

Excellent! Like a crocodile I'm just lurking near the bottom waiting to pick off those above me!

Haven't yet updated the spreadsheets because I'm having some issues with the chart:

Week 1
Top Dog Koanicriddle, JC Anejo
Dumbass Theohall
Avg Scr 24.51
Avg Scr / Gm 1.53
Leader Koanicriddle, JC Anejo

Player Ttl Rglr Season Pts
koanicriddle 31
JC Anejo 31
gwartok 30
The Meal 29
Chris Gwinn 29
Monkeyskunk 29
pr0ner 29
JC Anejo IM 28
Zaxxon 27
msteelers 27
Captain Cave 27
Ralph-Wiggum 27
Kurth 27
noxiousdog 27
Quipp 27
Smutly 27
Ralph-Wiggum IM 27
hispanicgamer 27
Mr. Lem 26
GuidoTKP 25
Mr. Bob 25
Remus West 25
spicyj 25
Big Jake 25
Hell's Taco 25
godhugh 25
Moghedian 24
Gromit 23
Miss Taken 23
Mithridates 23
Pete Rock 23
Pete Rock's Wife 23
tine 23
Soulbringer 21
igbe 21
Bensley 21
pyperkub 21
Mitma 20
Moghedian IM 18
theohall IM 18
Jeff V 17
$iljanus 15
theohall 13

Stupid Philly's stupid punt return team.

Crux = 23. Sadness.

How long has this thread been in here? I've been watching EBG for the last 2 days waiting to see how I did.

gwartok wrote:How long has this thread been in here? I've been watching EBG for the last 2 days waiting to see how I did.

Since Thursday.

Since registration closed, to comply with the new FGF rules.

Eagles and Ravens inability to hold on to the rock makes Guido sad ....

I'm just hoping that my sitting at the top with JC isn't just beginner's luck... and there was definitely some luck involved with at least one of my locks (Denver).

Week 2 picks are IN!

~Neal

Week 2 picks are in......Hopefully as good as last weeks

Picks are in, and the locks were much easier this time.

Picks are in.

Submixficated!!!

Substandarded!

Bowed down before NOD.

picks in.

Well, that's unexpected. Week two picks were sent yesterday.

I fucking hate football. And punt returns. And my wife. At least we're tied, so she can't talk that much trash.



This week's picks have been submi.....subter.......sublim.........oh they just fucking suck again.

At least I'll get to spend all of Monday tailgating for the MNF home opener, as I will be attending the game. It will be entertaining to see the Eagles take out their frustration on a division rival. Tailgating starts at 8am. Game starts at 8:30pm. <<rubs hands together in anticipation>>

Week 2 picks submitted.

Crux's Week 2 Picks

Carolina (lock)
Cincinnati
Jacksonville
NY Giants
Pittsburg (lock)
San Francisco
New Orleans
Indianapolis (lock)
Seattle
Minnesota
Dallas
Baltimore
Chicago (lock)
Denver (lock)
New England
Philadelphia

Week 2 picks submittified.

PeteRock wrote:I fucking hate football. And punt returns. And my wife. At least we're tied, so she can't talk that much trash.



This week's picks have been submi.....subter.......sublim.........oh they just fucking suck again.

At least I'll get to spend all of Monday tailgating for the MNF home opener, as I will be attending the game. It will be entertaining to see the Eagles take out their frustration on a division rival. Tailgating starts at 8am. Game starts at 8:30pm. <<rubs hands together in anticipation>>

You're going to the Eagles/Redskins game, and aren't inviting me, a Redskins fan, along? FOR SHAME.

Still missing a lot of picks. Submixify!

I'm back and I'll get my picks in tonight.

Picks sent!

Subsmushed!