I've suggested the idea that points should be proportional to percentages in the past and then when Cornish brought it up I supported the idea but right now I'm of the mind that the percentages are basically subjective to opinion and often favour the name fighter so basing points off them imo is a bad idea.
Also, like many have said not just in this thread but others in the past that simplicity and being able to score as you watch without the aid of a scientific calculator is part of the charm of the site. God knows most people cant even manage this, just check out some of the play by play threads, people post what points they got then when the results come up they end up with 10-20 points less than what they said they had.
My personal gripe with the scoring system is that I think bonuses for underdogs or double points on hot bouts are unnecessary and truthfully imo ruin the site.
With regards the hot bout I think its a complete joke, the notion is that the hot bout should be the most competitive fight but by virtue of the fact that picks are subjective and often name fighter favoured it often doesn't end up that way, take the last ufc as an example, to the knowledgeable player fisher-Stephens was clearly the toughest fight to pick but by virtue of the stats Stephens got a +2!!??
Then there's the situation when by some small miracle the most competitive fight has ended up the hot bout, then you have a situation were the closest to 50/50 fight on the card offers by far the biggest pay out, totally counter productive to a system that's supposed to favour the best picker.
The mods pedal this ridiculous notion that the double points is there to create some disparity but when you have ten events counting to a season more than enough disparity already exists, yes you may have 17 people tieing for first place on a specific event if the hot bouts were scraped but at the end of the season there would be a clear winner, until we have 2 million people consistently making picks there is no need for a system like this.
With regards the underdog bonuses, as far as I'm concerned standard points for the dog picker is reward enough in itself considering 80%+ got no points from that fight.
Also I totally hate the +2 for everything right, you already get +2 for getting the extra component, over 50% more points for someone who gets the round, method and winner than someone who gets just the method and winner imo is too much (7 vs 11 which makes 3.5=50% for the mathematically illiterate).
Lastly, this may be me being OCD but I don't like the fact that the max points is an odd number, id rather see 6,2,2 or 6,3,1 (winner, method, rnd) for a per fight total of 10 with no bonus for everything right (its only 3 components for gods sake, defo doesn't warrant a bonus, especially as the round is often a luck heavy component).
Oh and one last thing, b4 svartorn comes in and tells me if I don't like the way things are run here I should start my own site, if I had the spare time or disposable cash I totally would but until then, sorry but I'll just have to stick to bitching about the way the playground is run thanks