Bringing back the old wagering system...

MMAPlayground.com » Community » MMA Playground Game Talk » Bringing back the old wagering system...
POLL: Should we bring back the old wagering system?
Yes 29% (11)
No 47% (18)
Not Sure 24% (9)
LightsOut33093
10/7/07 8:46:23PM
I think we should bring back the old wagering system. There may have been more problems but I found the old wagering system much more fun. I also find it ridicilous that the leader currently has $60,000+, the winner every season is gunna be the person crazy enough to wager all their money on the heavy underdog; whats the fun in that?
babalu2720
10/7/07 9:22:07PM
I'm not sure because I obviuosly had more success with the old wagering system, but it did take a lot of time. work, and out hustling. If we bring it back we have to day that u can not bet on both fighters in the same fight...sorry B Goetz that was a real smart stratagt, but it was a little shady...I like that the new system is so easy and pretty fair, but I agree with Lightsout all you need to do is strike it rich with an underdog and u win an absurd amount of money....I'm undecieded but would not mind either system
tuvok500
10/7/07 9:22:22PM

Posted by LightsOut33093

I think we should bring back the old wagering system. There may have been more problems but I found the old wagering system much more fun. I also find it ridicilous that the leader currently has $60,000+, the winner every season is gunna be the person crazy enough to wager all their money on the heavy underdog; whats the fun in that?



i think that the big problem is when a guy with a huge among of money is recruit by a team, and completely false the ranking.

we should have a system of ranking who give less importance to money, like 45% of the score from the record , 45% of the score for the point and only 10% of the score for the bankroll.

or simply dont put the bankroll in the score calculation for the ranking of the teams.
so , this ways , the best team would be on top because of there knowleage not because of there luck or stupid risky move.

and also, i thing that the % record should be change to include the non pick fight, like if a guy only choose 3 fight in an event and got them all, he has a 100% record, but in reality the guy is only 3 win and 6 or 7 lost, and the % record should be adapted to that problem, so the guy would have a % record of 30% or so for the event instead of 100%.

i know i am no longer in the bankroll discusion but it is a package i think.


babalu2720
10/7/07 9:24:03PM

Posted by tuvok500


Posted by LightsOut33093

I think we should bring back the old wagering system. There may have been more problems but I found the old wagering system much more fun. I also find it ridicilous that the leader currently has $60,000+, the winner every season is gunna be the person crazy enough to wager all their money on the heavy underdog; whats the fun in that?



i think that the big problem is when a guy with a huge among of money is recruit by a team, and completely false the ranking.

we should have a system of ranking who give less importance to money, like 45% of the score from the record , 45% of the score for the point and only 10% of the score for the bankroll.

or simply dont put the bankroll in the score calculation for the ranking of the teams.
so , this ways , the best team would be on top because of there knowleage not because of there luck or stupid risky move.

and also, i thing that the % record should be change for include the non pick fight, like if a guy only choose 3 fight in an event and got them all, he has a 100% record, but in reality the guy is only 3 win and 6 or 7 lost, and the % record should be adapted to that problem, so the guy would have a % record of 30% or so for the event instead of 100%.

i know i am no longer in the bankroll discusion but it is a package i think.





Lightsout wasn't really complaining about the Fight Camp rankings he was just saying this in genearl, you do have some points though...
jgordon85
10/8/07 4:08:45AM
i think they should bring back the old wager system.it was more fun i like it better. it made it more interesting.
disorderlyvision
10/8/07 8:27:14AM
i miss taking my friends $ and rubbing it in their face.
LightsOut33093
10/8/07 8:50:02AM

Posted by disorderlyvision

i miss taking my friends $ and rubbing it in their face.



me too, but usually it was my friend (babalu2720) winning the money
babalu2720
10/8/07 10:41:12AM

Posted by LightsOut33093


Posted by disorderlyvision

i miss taking my friends $ and rubbing it in their face.



me too, but usually it was my friend (babalu2720) winning the money



Damn right u best keep ur place...lol...and I'm suprised more people haven't sounded off on this
DoTheMMAth
10/8/07 11:06:56AM

Posted by LightsOut33093

the winner every season is gunna be the person crazy enough to wager all their money on the heavy underdog



If you wager all your money on a heavy underdog every single fight, you're bound to slip up at least once in 10 events. Even in hindsight, there's no way I can imagine myself putting down ALL my money on Kongo, then putting all my money on Jardine over Liddell as did our current earnings leader. I seriously would have never seen that coming. The earnings leaderboard has been so varied after every single event that it's quite possible (and even probable in my mind) that the person who winds up winning will get there with a more "slow and steady" approach. But hey, it's a game and we'll see what the leaderboard looks like after 4 more events are complete My guess is that it will look completely different than it does now.

Re the old wagering system: we've kicked the idea around a bit but don't have an answer on that yet. The problem is that the old system was far from abuse-proof, and it's no fun to spend hours of your personal time after each event sifting through everyone's bets and investigating them all to see if the person is legit or if they're using secondary accounts or rigging bets with friends on the site. We're now giving away prizes to wager winners as well, which makes it even more important to keep the system free of abuse and cheating. As it is, things are a little confusing with 2 leagues on the site, therefore having 2 separate bankrolls. Adding in a 3rd bankroll wouldn't help that confusion much.
loonytnt
10/8/07 6:25:19PM
i like it the way it is, it works great and i make a lot of money because i read and watch the fighter to see if they are in shade, what they are workin on, not takeing the fight like they should, its a lot, if you wanna win big
babalu2720
10/8/07 7:15:51PM

Posted by loonytnt

i like it the way it is, it works great and i make a lot of money because i read and watch the fighter to see if they are in shade, what they are workin on, not takeing the fight like they should, its a lot, if you wanna win big



The second part of what u said works with both systems knowing if the fighter is in shape doesn't only work with the current system, so it is irrelavent to the discussion, but I know what you mean
LightsOut33093
10/8/07 8:55:38PM

Posted by babalu2720

I'm suprised more people haven't sounded off on this



yea c'mon ppl speak up
mkiv9secsupra
10/8/07 9:41:35PM

Posted by tuvok500


and also, i thing that the % record should be change to include the non pick fight, like if a guy only choose 3 fight in an event and got them all, he has a 100% record, but in reality the guy is only 3 win and 6 or 7 lost, and the % record should be adapted to that problem, so the guy would have a % record of 30% or so for the event instead of 100%.






we should give a draw for all the fights not picked...so all the cherry pickers will have that ugly record of 10 - 0 - 45
tepid55
10/8/07 11:49:13PM
The old system was much easier to use. I would like to see the old system put into both leagues.
tepid55
10/16/07 1:47:35PM
I also preferred the odds guidelines rather than set odds.
fat2rak005
10/19/07 2:26:34AM
i really dont like when someone gets rich quick on an underdog, but what can you do?
rcg916
10/26/07 1:15:41PM
I dont run the site, therefore I defer all these types of decisions to the guys that actually have an investment in said product. Just because its more fun doesnt mean its better for the game/site overall.

Not necessarily commenting on either side, btw. I like both, and would be fine with either way.
fedorwins1
10/26/07 8:38:02PM
I liked it, it made for a good rivalry and you could get better odds.
zephead
10/27/07 9:54:26AM
I liked the old system better too. But sitting behind a computer half the night catching people cheating wasn't fun. A few ruin it for everyone.
MaxOne
10/29/07 7:57:51PM
so you used to be able to have bets on the side w/individuals?
i was trying to figure that out because some of the discussions i've read gave me that impression...


I don't know the old system but I dig the way it's set up now.

side bets would almost need to be from a different bank roll to keep it from affecting rankings plus that'd take away the insentive to cheat...it's stupid that people would cheat but whatever...
Related Topics