Suggestions for a change to the game system (title changed to satisfy the haters)

Okay totally removed all of my original points as it seems most people around here only read the initial post of a thread with the sole intention of picking apart the what the thread starter so they can make a smart ass coment and look like a funny guy.

The point i would like discussed:

Does anybody feel that double points on a hot bout is excessive.

If so how would you change the system?

some suggestions to get the conversation started:

+2 points per hotbout (to bring hot bouts in line with the underdog system?) with multiple hotbouts per card?

+5 pts per hotbout with only one hotbout per card?

it pays to be smart, all you really can say on this... if you get it wrong you shouldnt get points imo

---

Posted by tap_or_snap

The points system is a mess, especially the hot bout situation.

When a fight is razor close as the hot bouts usually are the guy in the know can see ways that either fighter can pheasable win yet faced with a such a close call the intelligent picker goes with the fighter he considers to have the slight edge.

Take last nights cote-mcfedries bout as an example, the intelligent picker could see a mile off that in all probibiliity this fight wasn't going to go long and was going to end in a ko/tko for either guy either in the first or at latest in the second.

So what happens to the poor guy who actually knows what he is talking about but picks mcfedries over cote? Well he gets 0 points.

Now the guy who knows f@&k all about mma who picks cote as he has had more air time recently? He gets 10 points minimum and up to 22 depending on how lucky he was with his round and method picks.

Having double points on a close bout is ridiculous, infact i feel the closer a bout the less points that should be available.

Lets use last nights fight night again and use the top 3 bouts as an example (cote-mcfedries, burkman-swick & n.diaz-robinson).

I have been a hardcore fan for 3 years now and condider myself to know what i am talking about. i personally saw all three of these bouts as razor close, i could see the exact ways that each fight could go down yet i went 0-3 on these 3 and scored 0 points as i went for the wrong guy on each.

The fact that the 3 winners won in exactly the way i predicted they would if they were to win counts for nothing yet the dumb ass who knows sweet f@&k all about mma can take away between 20-44 points depending on how lucky he is with his method picks just from picking the 3 guys who have had the most coverage over the last six months (in this example all 3 "higher profile" guys won).

My proposal to a change to the picking system would to be for people to not only pick the winner and winning method but to pick first who they feel has the greater chance of winning and then pick the method and round for each fighter if they were to win.

That way even if you pick the wrong guy if you pick the correct method and/or round of the winner you still get some points for your knowledge.

I also feel that the points available should be determined by how close a fight is, eg if a fight is very close you get moderate points for both guys, if a fight is very one sided you get few points for picking the obvious guy yet high points if you pick the outsider and he comes through.

The points available could easily be determined by the percentages of the cumulative picks of every picker which for the fight winner at least are readily available on the stats page. it also would be very easy to put together a stats page for method and round cumulative pick percentages and have points available determined from this.

I personally feel while mma playground is a fun little endeavour in reality until the points system is overhauled it will never be a true reflection of who actually knows best.

---

There's lots of space out there on the "internets". No one is stopping you from starting up a perfect MMA predictions website.

i lost on the drew fight and i picked by KO/TKO, but i got it wrong and its all good i will try to do better next time all you can do

---

Posted by emfleek

There's lots of space out there on the "internets". No one is stopping you from starting up a perfect MMA predictions website.

---

Financiall and time comitments are stopping me actually, i cant afford to pay several hundred to several thousand pounds a month to a web space provider or committ the amount of time required to run a site like this as unlike most of you unemployed internet losers i work full time and dont live at home sponging off my parents.

This is the place to discuss your views on the game system, the new parley system would not of come into being if it was not for people discussing how to make mmaplayground better.

To sumerize my reply to the two posts above I enjoy mmaplayground and have made this thread only to try and make the site better, if all you can add is a one sentence smart ass comment then dont bother replying at all

---

Posted by tap_or_snap

Financiall and time comitments are stopping me actually, i cant afford to pay several hundred to several thousand pounds a month to a web space provider or committ the amount of time required to run a site like this as unlike most of you unemployed internet losers i work full time and dont live at home sponging off my parents.

This is the place to discuss your views on the game system, the new parley system would not of come into being if it was not for people discussing how to make mmaplayground better.

To sumerize my reply to the two posts above I enjoy mmaplayground and have made this thread only to try and make the site better, if all you can add is a one sentence smart ass comment then dont bother replying as i will just tell you to go f@&k yourself.

---

i can see a banned coming lol

---

That way even if you pick the wrong guy if you pick the correct method and/or round of the winner you still get some points for your knowledge.

---

UFC does that with their Fantasy game. It's how I always rank around the top 100 even with lots of wrong picks.

---

Posted by DCRage

---

That way even if you pick the wrong guy if you pick the correct method and/or round of the winner you still get some points for your knowledge.

---

UFC does that with their Fantasy game. It's how I always rank around the top 100 even with lots of wrong picks.

---

I have had a look at the ufc game and decided against playing it as i consider all the exact minute of a round and exact submission thing to be over the top. From when i looked (two events ago) it was very different from my suggestions so i cant take your point seriously.

In regard to someone ranking high but getting picks wrong well i see no problem with that as the only way they would rank high on my system is if they correctly picked the winners method and round and they would still rank lower than the guys who got the winner and method &/or round.

This could easily be reinforced within my system by placing more emphasis points wise on winner than method and round.

I think my system is superior than what is in use at the moment, if people want to argue with it thats fine at least do it intelligently. disect my system and explain why the current one is better, dont just post a smart ass one line quote of either, "if you dont like it go else where" or "another site does as you suggest and its shit for it"

---

Posted by loonytnt

---

Posted by tap_or_snap

Financiall and time comitments are stopping me actually, i cant afford to pay several hundred to several thousand pounds a month to a web space provider or committ the amount of time required to run a site like this as unlike most of you unemployed internet losers i work full time and dont live at home sponging off my parents.

This is the place to discuss your views on the game system, the new parley system would not of come into being if it was not for people discussing how to make mmaplayground better.

To sumerize my reply to the two posts above I enjoy mmaplayground and have made this thread only to try and make the site better, if all you can add is a one sentence smart ass comment then dont bother replying as i will just tell you to go f@&k yourself.

---

i can see a banned coming lol

---

If i get banned for intelligently arguing my point then this isnt a site i want to be part of.

Im taking a break now as i have things to do, i will revisit this thread later tonight or tomorrow evening, hopefully by then there will be someone who has made an intelligent point that i can actually discuss with.

---

Posted by tap_or_snap

The points system is a mess, especially the hot bout situation.

When a fight is razor close as the hot bouts usually are the guy in the know can see ways that either fighter can pheasable win yet faced with a such a close call the intelligent picker goes with the fighter he considers to have the slight edge.

Take last nights cote-mcfedries bout as an example, the intelligent picker could see a mile off that in all probibiliity this fight wasn't going to go long and was going to end in a ko/tko for either guy either in the first or at latest in the second.

So what happens to the poor guy who actually knows what he is talking about but picks mcfedries over cote? Well he gets 0 points.

Now the guy who knows f@&k all about mma who picks cote as he has had more air time recently? He gets 10 points minimum and up to 22 depending on how lucky he was with his round and method picks.

Having double points on a close bout is ridiculous, infact i feel the closer a bout the less points that should be available.

Lets use last nights fight night again and use the top 3 bouts as an example (cote-mcfedries, burkman-swick & n.diaz-robinson).

I have been a hardcore fan for 3 years now and condider myself to know what i am talking about. i personally saw all three of these bouts as razor close, i could see the exact ways that each fight could go down yet i went 0-3 on these 3 and scored 0 points as i went for the wrong guy on each.

The fact that the 3 winners won in exactly the way i predicted they would if they were to win counts for nothing yet the dumb ass who knows sweet f@&k all about mma can take away between 20-44 points depending on how lucky he is with his method picks just from picking the 3 guys who have had the most coverage over the last six months (in this example all 3 "higher profile" guys won).

My proposal to a change to the picking system would to be for people to not only pick the winner and winning method but to pick first who they feel has the greater chance of winning and then pick the method and round for each fighter if they were to win.

That way even if you pick the wrong guy if you pick the correct method and/or round of the winner you still get some points for your knowledge.

I also feel that the points available should be determined by how close a fight is, eg if a fight is very close you get moderate points for both guys, if a fight is very one sided you get few points for picking the obvious guy yet high points if you pick the outsider and he comes through.

The points available could easily be determined by the percentages of the cumulative picks of every picker which for the fight winner at least are readily available on the stats page. it also would be very easy to put together a stats page for method and round cumulative pick percentages and have points available determined from this.

I personally feel while mma playground is a fun little endeavour in reality until the points system is overhauled it will never be a true reflection of who actually knows best.

---

Man, it was Cote the logic choice !!

and about the ufc.com point system, i am sorry but winning point for the good rd when you have the wrong winner is ridiculous, same for the detail and time ending.

don't cry for nothing man, this site point system is by far the best i have ever seen, and ufc.com point system is just a joke.
how can you win point when your guy lose !!?? lol

the detail and rd ending are only available for you if you have the right winner.

I'm a dick. My bad.

Alright, I can see your points. I think that the point system is great tho. OK lets look at the "Hot Bout" It should be worth more as it is the hardest to pick. Now it is about who you think will win not if you think it will be close or not. I am sure that many people do get lucky BUT it is no fluke that the same people always score high and the same elite camps always do well.

As an example: Last night I had a feeling that Crane would win but after looking at all the information, I chose Pellegrino and it worked although I felt Crane had a big chance. If I look at the Drew/Cote fight I knew it would be a good fight that would most likely end in knock-out but when I looked at Cotes more well rounded game, great striking, and awesome chin, I went with him and he won.

Yes, last night the "higher profile" guys won most of the fights but that was not the case at all at 80. It is all about trying to find the guy that you think has the edge and taking him to win. MMA is a very unpredictable sport that can end at any moment which is not the case with most other sports.

I do belive that some people get lucky but the true fans who know what they are talking about and do lots of researching and discussion into their picks do well consistently and is a good measure of who is the best at handicapping MMA.

I can see where your coming from tap_or_Snap, but the reality is there are always going to be people who don't know much about the sport, but make picks and get lucky. I'm always torn between a few different fighters on each event, but thats part of the fun. Obviously if there is a fight between a striker and grapler, the odds are if the grapler wins it will be by submission, and if the striker wins it will be by KO. Just because you no the obvious ways each guy tends to win, doesn't mean you should get rewarded if you picked the guy who lost. It's like gambling, if you bet on a close game, and your team doesn't win, you don't get a pay out for knowing the game could have gone either way. I think the system in place is good because it's simple, and shouldn't be over complicated. Over a ten event season the cream will rise to the top.

basshandsome & ochi-cinco, thank you for bringing some intelligence to the table and actually arguing my points rarther than senselessly flaming me for suggesting change.

One thing i want to make clear is that i am making three distinct suggestions here any of which could be adopted, im not suggesting its my way or the highway, i just wanted to make that clear.

ill summarize my suggestions below:

1. the removal of double points for hot bouts.

2. points awarded being determined in direct proportion to the cumulative percentiles of picks made by all players

& lastly and obviously the most controversial

3. the implementation of a system by which players pick a winner both fighters round and methods seperately with points still being allocated even if an individual gets the fight call wrong as long as they are correct with either the method &/or the round.

Please take this in to account and argue each point individually rarther than just focussing in on the last most controversial point.

---

Posted by tuvok500

Man, it was Cote the logic choice !!

and about the ufc.com point system, i am sorry but winning point for the good rd when you have the wrong winner is ridiculous, same for the detail and time ending.

don't cry for nothing man, this site point system is by far the best i have ever seen, and ufc.com point system is just a joke.
how can you win point when your guy lose !!?? lol

the detail and rd ending are only available for you if you have the right winner.

---

Whether cote was or was not the obvious choice is besides the point, it was an example not the point of the post (that said i do disagree with you, i feel mcfedries and cote had both an almost equal chance of winning).

Im not crying im making a suggestion in an attempt to make the game better, if you dont like it thats fine but dont make out like im whinging when im not.

I agree the whole select exact minute and exact method style of the ufc system is a joke and i am not suggesting that the mmaplayground system should be brought into line withe the ufc system. But then you would of known that if you had actually read my post properly.

My argument for why someone arguably deserves some points (key some not a shit load) for picking the method and round is because it favors those with an in depth knowledge of whats going on.

---

Posted by Basshandsome

Alright, I can see your points. I think that the point system is great tho. OK lets look at the "Hot Bout" It should be worth more as it is the hardest to pick. Now it is about who you think will win not if you think it will be close or not. I am sure that many people do get lucky BUT it is no fluke that the same people always score high and the same elite camps always do well.

As an example: Last night I had a feeling that Crane would win but after looking at all the information, I chose Pellegrino and it worked although I felt Crane had a big chance. If I look at the Drew/Cote fight I knew it would be a good fight that would most likely end in knock-out but when I looked at Cotes more well rounded game, great striking, and awesome chin, I went with him and he won.

Yes, last night the "higher profile" guys won most of the fights but that was not the case at all at 80. It is all about trying to find the guy that you think has the edge and taking him to win. MMA is a very unpredictable sport that can end at any moment which is not the case with most other sports.

I do belive that some people get lucky but the true fans who know what they are talking about and do lots of researching and discussion into their picks do well consistently and is a good measure of who is the best at handicapping MMA.

---

Your right, the more knowledgeable guys do more often than not do the best but just because that is the case doesnt mean the system cant be improved. I feel implementing one or all of my points would make the system more sound.

In regard to your statement that a hot bout should be worth more points as it is harder to pick well i feel that depends on which way you look at it.

On one hand yes you could say the bout is very close so correctly choosing the fighter with the edge is worth some extra points but on the other hand one can argue as i am that if i fight is very close its very easy for a knowledgeable individual to consistently score 0 points on these fights while others pull in huge points which i feel is quite a disparity and doesnt help to promote a fair game.

If people want extra points for making a tough call i would suggest + 2 points in line with the +2 an individual scores for correctly picking an underdog would be a more iteligent and fair system.

---

Posted by ocho-cinco

I can see where your coming from tap_or_Snap, but the reality is there are always going to be people who don't know much about the sport, but make picks and get lucky. I'm always torn between a few different fighters on each event, but thats part of the fun. Obviously if there is a fight between a striker and grapler, the odds are if the grapler wins it will be by submission, and if the striker wins it will be by KO. Just because you no the obvious ways each guy tends to win, doesn't mean you should get rewarded if you picked the guy who lost. It's like gambling, if you bet on a close game, and your team doesn't win, you don't get a pay out for knowing the game could have gone either way. I think the system in place is good because it's simple, and shouldn't be over complicated. Over a ten event season the cream will rise to the top.

---

I think saying " Just because you no the obvious ways each guy tends to win, doesn't mean you should get rewarded if you picked the guy who lost" is a little narrow minded. The fact that someone has the savy to know "the obvious ways each guy tends to win" shows some knowledge and arguably deserves rewarding, even if with minimal points (key word arguably, this is just a suggestion and undoubtable the weakest and least convincing of the points i have suggested).

In regard to your gambling analogy well thats what the dollar game is for, the pick system is about people competing on knowledge so i dont see why it shouldnt be more complex than a standard wager system.

apparently i don't know f$%k about mma cuz i picked cote

u had me at "hello" until that point.

I think what you are suggesting, to a large degree, removes the risk from the picks. And that's exactly what makes it exciting.

---

Posted by scoozna

I think what you are suggesting, to a large degree, removes the risk from the picks. And that's exactly what makes it exciting.

---

Exactly, end of thread....THE END. Seriously, this site has a good points system in place.

I would recommend that the site does not allow us to view the stats of the events until the event is over. Therefore, for each event we will not know who the underdog is or who the favorite of each fight is. Also, the hot bout will not be mentioned as well. Therefore, there will be less bias. For instance, many members on here tend to side with the favorites, especially when it is a hot bout. I believe this would make the game far more challenging if we are not allowed to view the percentage of people who are picking a certain fighter. I am sure a lot of people will be against this, which is fine. Yet, it would make the game more challenging. I personally like that I am able to view the stats for each event, yet I think it would make the game more challenging. Then, for the wagering system we would use the official odds.

---

Posted by tap_or_snap

Im not made at all that i miss picks, i couldnt care less if i was 0-100 what makes me mad is i take some time out of my day to try and add something to a site i enjoy and all i get for my efforts is a bunch of people making smart arse comments trying to make me look a prick.

my suggestions were born solely out of an attempt to make this site better and had nothing to do with me not doing well recently, ive had the views i have since i started her and just had a spare five minutes so thought i would put them out there.

lesson learned big mistake, ill save my viewsfor people who matter in future.

---

Don't do that. I gave your idea some real consideration before I posted a reply. It's a worthy discussion.

I was thinking along the lines of how the wagering is "handicapped" for the favorite. But when I realized that that is a convention used by the bet makers to even out the liability I realized that it only benefits them, not the bettors. I'm willing to accept that for the wagering system, but not the picking system. That way we have the best of both worlds. And they both have a degree of risk involved.

Ok, I deleted about half this thread, but I'm going to try and address the threadstarters points and a few others brought up.

First of all, this site is designed toward the serious MMA fan, as opposed to the casual fan. Reason being, most casual fans don't surf the internet, research fights, review records, or any of the other stuff the hardcore site-users do to make educated picks. This is obvious if you play the UFC Fantasy game. Case in point, my ranking for the last event UFN 12 was 245th place out of 7438 people on here. On the UFC site, it was 59th place out of 12,000 people. Their game is for casual fans and their scoring system is a complete mess, whereas ours works pretty damn well at this point.

Hot bouts: Being as this site is built for the hardcore fan, the hot bout is the most heavily contested bout amongst the site-goers. Whether its because its a very close fight i.e Cote vs. McFedries, because it has to do with stylistic match-ups i.e Sylvia vs. Coture, or it has to do with heavy unknowns, i.e Lesnar vs. Mir, it will take a sharp mind and keen eye to make sure you're on the right side of this bout. Therefore its worth more points to you to be able to pick these fights out. While a casual fan might be able to make a decent guess on this fight, if all they're doing is guessing, they're not going to go far otherwise, as the hot bout is only a 5th of the available points. Just look at the top scores at the end of a season, and most guys who do well in Primary League also do well in Secondary League, which shows this has more to do with skill than luck.

Points for outcomes, regardless of victor: While some fights would be interesting with this feature, most would not. Lets say Fedor were to fight Tank Abbott. You pick Fedor to win the fight overall. If Fedor wins, you think it'll be via 1st round Sub. The only realistic way Tank is winning is via 1st round KO. What did this prove, other than someone has a punchers chance? The UFC fantasy game has a similar system, and its an absolute mess.

Underdogs: The system we have right now is great I think. If you call an underdog, you get two extra points. That doesn't sound like much, but you're also getting the points that other players missed by going with the favorite, so its a huge boon if you can call an upset. The percentages idea is ok until you get into the area of heavy underdogs. Like in the above example, it might be worth your while to pick Tank Abbott to KO Fedor, because maybe 1% of the site will go that route, and you'll get a ridiculous amount of points for calling a fluke. That doesn't show a knowledge of MMA, so much as a willingness to gamble, which is already covered by our wagering system.

Wolfman also made a good point:

---

I would recommend that the site does not allow us to view the stats of the events until the event is over. Therefore, for each event we will not know who the underdog is or who the favorite of each fight is. Also, the hot bout will not be mentioned as well. Therefore, there will be less bias. For instance, many members on here tend to side with the favorites, especially when it is a hot bout. I believe this would make the game far more challenging if we are not allowed to view the percentage of people who are picking a certain fighter. I am sure a lot of people will be against this, which is fine. Yet, it would make the game more challenging. I personally like that I am able to view the stats for each event, yet I think it would make the game more challenging. Then, for the wagering system we would use the official odds.

---

Cool idea, but for one big thing.

Most places don't have betting odds for all the fights on the card, so it would be hard to get odds for the undercards. We'd also have to agree on a sportbook to use. The other thing being that sportbooks are very house-friendly and don't put up reasonable odds. So making money on this site would be like making money in real life via sports gambling. Really ******* hard.

I like how we have a unique set of odds, as it allows for some really interesting betting opportunities, and our new parley system is really demonstrating how savvy some of our players are. Note: I'm not one of those players.

Well said Svartorm. I agree with you, the betting system does work well. I just figured if we are not allowed to look at the stats for each event, then people would just look at the wager odds and be able to determine who the big underdogs are. This is why I mentioned we should use a sports book for the betting odds. Yet, like you previously mentioned it would be hard to agree on a sports book and the undercard fights would be a nightmare to deal with. Anyways, good points and I think you addressed everything that needed to be addressed.

I just reread my previous post and noticed that I repeated my point too many times. lol Damn, I sounded like a broken record, I didn't mean to say "more challenging" that many times...

hehehe Its ok, some people enjoy the challenge of making the picks and some want it to be easier. The original set-up was no underdog bonus, TWO hot bouts, and you had to get the Round correct to get the points for the Method. If you didn't nail both hot bouts, you were screwed because it was so hard to get points otherwise. The system we got now is a vast improvement and works as far as game balance as well, but we're always up for suggestions.

props to svartstorm for ressurected my thread, i acted like an ass last night so apologies to anyone i upset, all i can say is i am only human and i just reacted badly to some unconstructive criticism.

apologies again, hopefully now some of my ponts can be debated intelligently as was my original hope.

got to get to work now but will log in later to see if anyone has raised any more good points.

One other function of the "Hot Bout" is to help alleviate some of the scoring gridlock that comes into play, especially on events where almost each bout has a heavy favorite (the picks for the TUF 5 Finale comes to mind). On events where almost everyone is picking the same winners, we're going to have a TON of similar scores. True, picking the correct ending and round adds detail to the score, but the hot bout and underdog bonus picks add a further level of refinement so that, although we have thousands of people playing, we seldom have a 1st place tie.

After having a good think and gaging reaction to my suggestions im in the current place in regard to my ideas;

While i still feel they are nice ideas im feeling that the suggestion for players to pick method and round for both fighters with points being scored even if the bout winner is not correctly selected and my idea for points available on each bout being calculated proportionally to a bouts closeness, wouldnt actually make the game better, infact they would detract from the simplicity of the current system which on reflection is the best part of the current system.

That said i am totally in support of the below ammendments sotake a look and tell me what you all think:

Obviously there seems to be some support for having a hot bout system but is there anyone else out there in support of a reduction in the amount of extra points available for correctly picking the winner?

I personally feel bringing the extra amount of points awarded in line with an underdogs +2 would be a better way of doing things than having double points available?

That way when there is more than one close fight on a card there could be multiple hot bouts rarther than just the one?

Also is there anyone else who thinks that getting +2 points for correctly guessing all three facets of the fight is a little unnacessary?

While sure its nice to reward someone for getting everything correct, points are awarded for getting each facet right so its not like people are receiving no reward for getting 3/3 as opposed to 2/3.

It just seems a little unfair to me that some scoring the correct winner, method and round gets over 50% more points than someone only scoring the winner and method.

I would rarther see 5pts for winner, 3pts for method and 2pts for rnd, i think that might be a better system.

Any supporters?

While I agree that method is more important than rnd; your first post comes off as another pissed of Cote hater.

---

Posted by Kpro

While I agree that method is more important than rnd; your first post comes off as another pissed of Cote hater.

---

well if thats the way it comes off thats unfortunate as my points have nothing to do with fighter hate, i actually am a fan of cote, ive been rooting for him since his first ufc fight against ortiz.

Again im not pissed at all, i really wish i had a perfect record on every fight i have picked as it seems thats the only way some people will take suggestions seriously.

Its a shame that it seems you cant make a point without people coming out and saying your only making that point because your a sore loser.

---

Posted by tap_or_snap

So what happens to the poor guy who actually knows what he is talking about but picks mcfedries over cote? Well he gets 0 points.

---

That was my bad.

I read your first post as "poor guy who actually knows what he's talking about AND picks McFedries over Cote"

My apologies.