General Fantasy Sports

View the Forum Registry


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: Discussion for Battle Royale scoring for Season IV

Posted by: Mattinglyinthehall
- Leader [1629107] Tue, Aug 10, 2004, 16:33

Here is a more complete version of the suggestion I threw together in the Season IV. I'll call it a discussion for now in case anyone has any good ideas for further tweeking.

Winner gets 30 points.
2nd gets 25
3rd gets 24
4th gets 23
5th gets 22
on down to 17th place and everyone lower than that gets 10 points.

If the battle royale is the main event, only the final 25% of contestants (rounded up) will get the extra main event points, with a minimum of 2 wrestlers (I can't imagine a 5-man battle royale but just in case). So, in a...
10-12 man royale, the final 3 get ME points.
13-16 man royale, the final 4 get ME points.
17-20, the final 5.
21-24, the final 6, etc.

This scoring is not intended to replace the scoring format we use for the Royal Rumble.
The Rumble has it's own scoring system that includes points for the number of wrestlers eliminated and entry rank. The recap sources we use don't always keep strict records for regular battle royales (especially regarding who eliminated who) so I don't think we'd be able to follow through on using a sytem like we do for the Rumble. Also, the Rumble is a special, once-a-year event that deserves to be scored more meticulously and with a greater potemtial number of points involved for those who do well.
1Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 217351118
      Thu, Aug 12, 2004, 08:42
Doesn't appear to be much interest. I guess we could choose not to address it now, but there are a few flaws in the scoring in that certain potentialities are really not addressed.
2Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Mon, Aug 23, 2004, 09:18
BUTT
I'll raise this one last time before Season IV starts, and since no one had anything to add to or question about it, I'll call it a FORMAL PROPOSAL


I vote Yea.
3Mike D
      Sustainer
      ID: 41831612
      Mon, Aug 23, 2004, 09:24
Scoring proposed seems a little higher than I prefer at first glance. But I'm trying to make sense out of what our current scoring is (and I have looked at the link(s). I guess it's okay though since the only way to score as much as you have in post 1 is to finish higher than 16th place, meaning the battle royal itself has to have more than 16 people to get those points, which doesn't happen often. Am I reading that right?
4Farn
      ID: 36651269
      Mon, Aug 23, 2004, 09:44
yea
5Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Mon, Aug 23, 2004, 09:52
In this proposal the winner only gets 30 points for winning the battle Royale (plus of course any other aplicable points, like if it happens to also be the main event or if a title is on the line), which is the same as the current rules allow.

Basically, the differences are:
1. This establishes rules for a battle royale with any number of participants (the current rules only apply for events with 20 people or less).
2. It limits the second place score to 25 points. With the current system, second-place scoring depends on how many participants in the event. In a 20 man royale, second place gets 29 points, only one less than the winner. In this proposal, 2nd place will always get 25. 3rd place will always get 24, etc.
3. It limits the number of participants who will receive main event points. I didn't like the idea that that the early-exit jobbers get ME points along with the winner.
6Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Tue, Aug 24, 2004, 08:48
BUTT

I know I said post 2 was the last time but I feel envigorated by the few responses this has gotten so far so I will once again remind the leage of this issue. Is it perhaps that I am missing some obvious flaw in this proposal? It kind of seems like a no-brainer improvement over the current rules which were thrown together on the fly and are really incomplete.
7GoatLocker
      Sustainer
      ID: 060151121
      Tue, Aug 24, 2004, 17:54
Yes
8Species
      Leader
      ID: 07724916
      Tue, Aug 24, 2004, 18:27
Yes
9Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Wed, Aug 25, 2004, 08:55
OK that's 4. We're getting there.

I think I can I think I can


Please take some time and look over the little scoring proposal that could
10Mike D
      Sustainer
      ID: 41831612
      Wed, Aug 25, 2004, 08:58
Yes

However, I think the scores are still too high. When is a battle royal actually significant anymore? Other than the Royal Rumble, which has its own scoring, battle royals have lust their luster, IMHO. People get thrown into them, and then are eliminated quickly and without thought. There are exceptions, but I think the scoring should go down even more. Something we can maybe consider after this vote is concluded if there is any interest.
11Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Wed, Aug 25, 2004, 08:59
You think a battle royale winner should get less than 30 points?
12Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Wed, Aug 25, 2004, 09:25
When is a battle royal actually significant anymore?

Incidentially, there have been 5 battle royales that I can count since we have started this league.

On 6/30/03, Gail Kim won a 7-woman battle royale for the Women's Championship.

On 1/29/04, Eddie Guerrero won a 15-man Royal Rumble-format battle royale to become the number one contender and earn a title shot against Brock Lesnar at No Way Out.

On 5/17/04, Kane won a 20-man battle royale to become the number one contender and earn a title shot against Chris Benoit at Bad Blood.

On 6/24/04, Chavo Guerrero won a 10-man battle royale to become the number one cruiserweight contender and earn a title shot against Rey Mysterio at The Great American Bash.

On 7/26/04, Randy Orton won a 20-man battle royale to become the number one contender and earn a title shot against Chris Benoit at Summer Slam.
13Mike D
      Sustainer
      ID: 41831612
      Wed, Aug 25, 2004, 09:27
Yes, slightly, but I can understand others feeling differently.

Singles pinfall win: +30
Singles DQ/count out win: +18
Tag Team pinfall win: +25
Tag Team DQ/count out win: +16


I think battle royals could be in between these somewhere---20? 22?---for a win. And then for the "losers":

Singles pinfall loss: +15
Singles DQ/count out loss: +10
Tag Team pinfall loss: +12
Tag Team DQ/count out loss: +10

Giving "losers" in excess of 20 points just seems high given the above. I realize if it really is like a 30 man battle royal, it takes a lot to finish 2nd (3rd, 4th even), but how many 30 man ones do we see?

Anyway, just enjoy discussing this stuff. Not a big issue to me for sure.

14Mike D
      Sustainer
      ID: 41831612
      Wed, Aug 25, 2004, 09:29
MITH, those are great examples, and I believe all are from PPVs----not sure about that first one. My thoughts were certainly tailored more toward Raw and Smackdown battle royals......to become top contender, etc...
15Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Wed, Aug 25, 2004, 09:41
None of those are from PPVs. All are from Raw or SD. If there are any PPV battle royales, I missed them. It's also possible I missed one or more TV show royales, but in my research those were all I found. And I like discussing this stuff, too, and think doing so is good for the league.

My line of thinking is that in a 1 on 1 match, all things being equal, your odds of winning are 50%. In a 10 man battle royale, the simple odds are 10%. The odds of finishing in the top 3 are only 30%. In a 20 man royale, the odds of finishing in the top 7 are only 35%.

So I see no issue with the top finishers getting more points than they might for a singles loss. It's a pretty prestigous thing to finish 2nd or 3rd in a 20 man event.

I also tend to think that since battle royales are less common than normal singles and tag matches and usually carry some significant prize or accomplishment for the winner, the scoring for the last man in the ring should be as significant as the winner of a singles match.

In any case, remember that this scoring proposeal is somewhat scaled back from the current version.
16Mike D
      Sustainer
      ID: 41831612
      Wed, Aug 25, 2004, 10:08
Great points, and my bad on the PPV issue, as I read them too quickly. You're starting to sell me on it. I know it is scaled back, and made sure vote yes for that reason.
17Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Wed, Aug 25, 2004, 10:13
I'm beginning to think that I should have made it 20 points for 2nd place, 19 for 3rd and so on, which I think would be a nice compromise for you and I and admittedly closer to ideal than this proposal, but I don't want to change the it now since it has taken this long to get half the league to respond.
18Mike D
      Sustainer
      ID: 41831612
      Wed, Aug 25, 2004, 10:15
Agreed. Post-draft we can maybe put it to a vote. I'd support it.
19Great One@Work
      ID: 18743207
      Fri, Aug 27, 2004, 10:45
Yes.

But thinking 2nd place should be down to 20 points and so on as mentioned a couple posts above...
20Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Fri, Aug 27, 2004, 10:55
Hmmm, that's 6 people who have voted yea, three of whom advocating the ratcheted-down scoring for second place and below by 5 points, as described in post 17. Maybe we can shift the proposal to that, unless anyone has any strong objections. Its in the league's best interest to have a system that the majority thinks is optimal, and I do think that that way is better than my initial proposal.
21Mike D
      Sustainer
      ID: 41831612
      Fri, Aug 27, 2004, 11:00
To borrow from Nike, "just do it."

22Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Fri, Aug 27, 2004, 11:05
OK, so here's the amended proposal, to which we currently have 3 Yea votes:
Winner gets 30 points.
2nd gets 20
3rd gets 19
4th gets 18
5th gets 17
on down to 12th place and everyone lower than that, who each get 10 points.

If the battle royale is the main event, only the final 25% of contestants (rounded up) will get the extra main event points, with a minimum of 2 wrestlers (I can't imagine a 5-man battle royale but just in case). So, in a...
10-12 man royale, the final 3 get ME points.
13-16 man royale, the final 4 get ME points.
17-20, the final 5.
21-24, the final 6, etc.

Current Yea votes:

MITH
Great One
Mike D
23Farn
      ID: 36651269
      Fri, Aug 27, 2004, 11:34
do it up.
24GoatLocker
      Sustainer
      ID: 060151121
      Fri, Aug 27, 2004, 12:33
Yep
25Bond,James Bond@work
      ID: 537172712
      Fri, Aug 27, 2004, 13:24
I like the amended proposal but since I'm a rookie at this I figure that my voice shouldn't weigh in as much as any of the veterans here.
26Farn
      ID: 36651269
      Fri, Aug 27, 2004, 13:31
agreed Bond. Along those same lines I think you should be forced to split your top talent between Mike D and I. I mean, you are new and all....
27Bond,James Bond@work
      ID: 537172712
      Fri, Aug 27, 2004, 13:32
Have you seen my team??? Certainly, we can come up with better names than "top talent" when it comes to my roster. LOL
28GoatLocker
      Sustainer
      ID: 060151121
      Fri, Aug 27, 2004, 13:52
Bond
And you really thought someone would tell you that you had all the "runts"

Cliff
29Bond,James Bond@work
      ID: 537172712
      Fri, Aug 27, 2004, 13:53
LOL
30Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 217351118
      Sat, Aug 28, 2004, 12:35
Species, Tree, Wiggs, Great One?
31Great One
      ID: 447332813
      Sat, Aug 28, 2004, 14:35
yes?
32Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 217351118
      Sat, Aug 28, 2004, 14:48
Oops, not Great One. Who am I missing... Kev!
33Tree
      ID: 76471215
      Mon, Aug 30, 2004, 11:42
ok, i'll have to catch up on this...
34Tree
      ID: 76471215
      Mon, Aug 30, 2004, 13:29
i'm torn. i like the idea in concept.

but i think 30 points, plus main event points for the winner, may be too many points. perhaps there shouldnt be main event points for a battle royal?
35Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Mon, Aug 30, 2004, 13:37
Tree, in the first place, I don't believe all battle royales are main events. I could look through the records of the royales I listed in post 12 to see how many were main events, but I know for certain that not all were.

30 + ME points for the winner is what we currently have for battle royale scoring. Further, according to the current rules, everyone involved in the royale gets ME points, not just the final 25%. Note that aside from scoring for the winner, points are ratcheted down for everyone involved in the royale.
36Tree
      ID: 76471215
      Mon, Aug 30, 2004, 13:49
hmmm..that shows you how much attention i pay to the actual scoring of this thing. lol.
37Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Mon, Aug 30, 2004, 13:52
Two of the Raw battle royales, 5/17/04 and 7/26/04, were main events. The women's royale on 6/30/03 was not.

The 1/29/04 Royal Rumble style battle royale on Smackdown was also a main event, but the Smackdown battle Royale on 6/24/04 wasn't.


38Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Thu, Sep 09, 2004, 09:39
Still only have 6 votes on this. I believe we need 7 to change a rule. Species, Tree, Wiggs and Kev still have not voted.
39wiggs
      ID: 507593021
      Thu, Sep 09, 2004, 10:31
the change is cool with me. sorry i didnt vote, I thought I did. :)
40Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 1629107
      Thu, Sep 09, 2004, 10:38
Excellent, that's 7. After the voting on the match stips is completed, I'll put together a new scoring rules thread.
General Fantasy Sports

View the Forum Registry


Self-edit this thread




Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour11
Last 24 hours11
Last 7 days22
Last 30 days76
Since Mar 1, 2007897448