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

no problem mate, my less than clear sentence structure has already got a couple of people off side in this thread, im new to online posting and im finding you need to be very clear about what you are saying as its easy for people to take things the wrong way.

so anybody out there in support of my suggestion on a reduction in the +points available on a hot bout, if someone could pm with info on how to make a poll that would be great even just so i can have a good laugh at the 99% against 1% for result??

I like that idea about the hot bouts. Make it two extra points for being on the right side of the bout instead of double, but any fights that are within a certain range, like 60%-40% or closer, become hot bouts. They're worth less, but there would be more of them and it would more or less balance out.

I guess I just don't like the idea that started with the premise that people aren't intelligent if the don't agree with one persons opinion.This is not fact based discussion, as it is unprovable, so know matter how I fell about the current system , i wouldn't cal it unintelligent. In fact I think it's fine, as we all have the exact same chance as each other, and their is no way for it to be manipulated.

---

Posted by hippysmacker

I guess I just don't like the idea that started with the premise that people aren't intelligent if the don't agree with one persons opinion.This is not fact based discussion, as it is unprovable, so know matter how I fell about the current system , i wouldn't cal it unintelligent. In fact I think it's fine, as we all have the exact same chance as each other, and their is no way for it to be manipulated.

---

I definetly wouldnt call the current system unintelligent either and if thats the way my posts have came across then thats deffinetly not what i meant.

I think there has been some confusion born from my following statement:
"
So what happens to the poor guy who actually knows what he is talking about but picks mcfedries over cote?"

By what i said i most definetly did not mean the person who picks cote doesnt know a what they are talking about. What i meant was the person who can see the fight is razor close and exactly how each fighter could if they were to win would win but plumps for the wrong guy (in this example mcfedries), he gets 0 points but someone else with the same sort of knowledge goes the other way and gets 22.

What im trying to highlight is at for want of a better word the "elite" end of the spectrum were pickers know preety much exactly how things are going to go down or at least how they should go down, when a bout is super close it seems a disparity to me to have so many points on offer.

also i shoul clarify when i say intelligent in the context of "intelligent picker" what i am really meaning is the more knowladeable picker. Intelligent was the wrong word to use and seems to of unwittingly got people off side.

Man this site rocks..I like the wager system and the scoring system.I always hate when people change good things.

I mean i dont think anyone should get points for picking the right round or method if the fighter you pick to win doesnt win.I mean if you have a Fight like Tank Vs Kimbo im assuming that the majority of the people have that Fight ending by Ko/TKO....So if i pick Kimbo to win by rd1 Ko and hes loses by a rd1 KO why should i get any points..Just cause based on their styles im guessing itll end in a KO.

Oh yeah not to be a douche...but you could of atleast spelled intelligent right in your topic .Oh well maybe a typo.

I actually have Tank winning via flying inverted combination gogoplata and heelhook, but I see your point.

I only read the first post, but i think it is a terrible idea. You win some you lose some, build a bridge and get over it.
Its not rocket science to predict how most fighters win there fights and it would just over complicate something that is simple. You wants some points for predicting if cote won it would of been by tko?? come on

---

Posted by randompunter

I only read the first post, but i think it is a terrible idea. You win some you lose some, build a bridge and get over it.
Its not rocket science to predict how most fighters win there fights and it would just over complicate something that is simple. You wants some points for predicting if cote won it would of been by tko?? come on

---

Why is it people feel the need to continually focus in on only one of my suggestions but yet totally ignore the other two?

My main gripe is with the hot bout system, the other two suggestions were things i wanted to put out there and see what people thought of.

Could a mod please pm me with info on how to make a poll or point me in the direction of said info as i would like to make a thread dedicated to the hot bout topic as it seems if you include more than one point in a thread people totally ignore all points except the most controversial one which coincidently also happens to be the one that its easiest to make a smart allec comment about...i wonder why that is??

Also whats all this "win some you lose some and build a bridge and get over it" nonsense?

How many times do i have to reiterate my suggestions are not born out of a desire to "win" on every single bout they are simple one humble member suggesting some ways that the game may be changed for the better.

---

Posted by 40ouncetofreedom

Man this site rocks..I like the wager system and the scoring system.I always hate when people change good things.

I mean i dont think anyone should get points for picking the right round or method if the fighter you pick to win doesnt win.I mean if you have a Fight like Tank Vs Kimbo im assuming that the majority of the people have that Fight ending by Ko/TKO....So if i pick Kimbo to win by rd1 Ko and hes loses by a rd1 KO why should i get any points..Just cause based on their styles im guessing itll end in a KO.

Oh yeah not to be a douche...but you could of atleast spelled intelligent right in your topic .Oh well maybe a typo.

---

Yeah thats definetly a douce thing to say, seems to be a real obcession with correct spelling on this site, the fact is i suck at spelling, i also type fast and couldnt give a rats whether i mispell the odd word here or there, people get the overall point im trying to make.

You make a good point using the tank kimo fight as an example but i would like to make the point that the conversation has moved on from my original post, through discussion i have already conceeded that my suggestion for points being awarded to both fighters regardless of winner as long as the losing fighter wins via chosen method would not make the game better and infact over complicate things so why do people keep having to make comments about it?

cant we move on with the discussion?

From now on i would respectfully ask that the topic of the conversation revolves around the hot bout system, either that or if a mod wants just delete this thread and i will start a new one solely focussed on hot bout discussion.

---

Posted by tap_or_snap

From now on i would respectfully ask that the topic of the conversation revolves around the hot bout system,

---

I haven't read the entire thread. From what I have read, it seems to have gotten a bit off topic. My 2 cents are to completely get rid of the hot bouts. The hot bout is defined as the "fight which has the closest number of people picking each combatant as the winner". It just doesn't make any sense to me to award double points in this situation. This is usually a closely contested bout, with many variables that could change the outcome. NOBODY can accurately predict these on a consistent basis. I hate to bring this word up, but I don't want "luck" to play any part of this game.

---

Posted by CWall33

---

Posted by tap_or_snap

From now on i would respectfully ask that the topic of the conversation revolves around the hot bout system,

---

I haven't read the entire thread. From what I have read, it seems to have gotten a bit off topic. My 2 cents are to completely get rid of the hot bouts. The hot bout is defined as the "fight which has the closest number of people picking each combatant as the winner". It just doesn't make any sense to me to award double points in this situation. This is usually a closely contested bout, with many variables that could change the outcome. NOBODY can accurately predict these on a consistent basis. I hate to bring this word up, but I don't want "luck" to play any part of this game.

---

Don't get me wrong... I like the way the point system is right now and wouldn't object to it staying the same forever...BUT if anything was to be changed, I agree it should have to do with the hot bout. I don't think we should simply get rid of it. Maybe make is a +2 system and have more of them - someone said that earlier and I think that sounds like a pretty good idea. It is just so easy to have the 22 point swing on some of these close fights, which ruins any chances of having a good night point wise. You could nail every other fight on the card and still end up not doing that well just from getting one fight wrong.

On the other hand, this is a really cool game and the hot bout thing is just another fun aspect of it. I know I'm extremely happy when I nail that fight, but extremely pissed when I miss it. I guess you win some and lose some.

i think the point that someone made earlier about the hot bout helping to clear up any logjamming for each event has been missed. there would be a ton of people with identical scores if the hot bout wasnt double the points, plus it knocks about 50% of the people out of the ruinning for top score of the night. just to touch on the idea of getting points for picking the method and round but not the fighter correctly: it just doesnt make sense, if you dont pick the winner why does it show you are more knowledgable than someone else because you picked the round or method? when you pick the round and method you are picking that based on the fighter you chose to win, so why would points be awarded to you for picking the wrong guy when he loses in the round you pegged him to win in? its really pretty nonsensical.

The Hot pick is fine, as long as it is a close bout. It is not unfair at all, because all players have an equal opportunity at guessing it right.

What you should focus on is "reducing luck" as a factor in the game. Otherwise, if the playing field is even, then game on...

---

Posted by cowcatcher
plus it knocks about 50% of the people out of the ruinning for top score of the night.

---

That is the most sound argument against the Hot Bout. Someone with a slightly worse ratio of correct endings vs. wrong endings can still win for the night.

Given two equal points guys (without the hot bout), you can have the same amount of correct endings, but one person can win because he picked the Hot Bout correctly.

So, given the numbers on this board, there are bound to be guys with relatively equal scores (without the hot bout) where one guy from behind wins because he got the HB right.

Interesting...

Moral of story? Get the Hot Bout correct...

---

just to touch on the idea of getting points for picking the method and round but not the fighter correctly: it just doesnt make sense, if you dont pick the winner why does it show you are more knowledgable than someone else because you picked the round or method? when you pick the round and method you are picking that based on the fighter you chose to win, so why would points be awarded to you for picking the wrong guy when he loses in the round you pegged him to win in? its really pretty nonsensical.

---

Yeah, that doesn't make sense. You must get the fight winner correct first, everything else is secondary.

I like the system as it is. It sets an emphasis on one bout that is likely to garner people to pick equally on both fighters.

Dude, MMAPG is nearing 20,000 people playing this game. Changing the rules isnt exactly easy at this point... For every valid point you have that applies to your current situation, youve got 5 people who will disagree, and start a thread just like this one stating how it isnt fair...

You can see the infinite regress that would follow...

(Waynes World, Waynes World)

I agree, ditch the hot bout. The less luck has to do with it, the more the results are reflective of skill in picking fights correctly.

---

Posted by Brick

I agree, ditch the hot bout. The less luck has to do with it, the more the results are reflective of skill in picking fights correctly.

---

But it takes skill to pick a really close fight, its nice to have hot bouts because it doesnt really take the same skill to make the correct pick of the Almeida/Yundt fight as the Mir/Lesnar fight; should get rewarded for making the correct pick of the toughest fight.

"should get rewarded for making the correct pick of the toughest fight. "

You do get rewarded already; you get points, those who picked incorrectly do not. If it a close bout and hard to pick, that means lots of people (ideally about half) would have picked incorrectly. Therefore your correct pick is already inherently more valuable because it is more rare.

---

Posted by Brick

"should get rewarded for making the correct pick of the toughest fight. "

You do get rewarded already; you get points, those who picked incorrectly do not. If it a close bout and hard to pick, that means lots of people (ideally about half) would have picked incorrectly. Therefore your correct pick is already inherently more valuable because it is more rare.

---

Good point...

quit whining.

---

Posted by throwmeahotone

quit whining.

---

quit bringing up 4 month old threads.