last man standing and 2 picks

Christopher Krolak wrote:

I had 4 players undefeated in first place going into the weekend, 3 of the 4 players lost 1 of 2 games this weekend, the 4th player lost both games.  I would expect the 3 players to continue in 1st place bracket until last man is standing, and the 4th player who lost both picks to be eliminated, but standings currently show all 4 players demoted to 2nd place bracket. 

Hi Chris... The last man standing setting only gets invoked after the week completes, which doesn't happen until all games picked in your leaague have completed. So, after the results are in for the Monday night game everything should clear up. I'm looking though on how to improve the standings to not show this intermediate state.

Fred 

"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers!"

Christopher Krolak wrote:

thanks for the explanation Fred.  How about not doing any sorting until all games are played?  That may be less confusing to players than the ~real-time sorting. 

Yea, the problem is that real-time sorting is what a lot of other managers wanted and I don't want to back that out. Its going to be a little tricky to make this work. The code will need to know ahead of time that there are no players left to win first in order to keep those players in the 1st place bracket. Still need to think some more on this one...

Fred 

"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers!"

For me, real-time win / lose information is valuable but I can do without the real-time sorting.  If you had a league option to defer sorting until the end of the week, I could use that option for my league and all would be happy?  :)

For my game specifically, I see 4 players in 1st place.  3 players lost one game and one player (Ginger) lost both games so I think Ginger should be eliminated for having 2 losses, please confirm.

Also please cofirm how the 2nd place bracket will be decided. I currently have 3 players in 1st place with one loss each and one player in 2nd with 1 loss.  I'm assuming that the players in 1st place still have a chance at 2nd place as long as their losses are <= the number of losses for 2nd place teams, but I want to confirm that with you.  

Another item for my wish list, can we improve the win/loss indicator when multiple picks are being made?  Currently it shows red if one or both picks have lost, and the players find themselves having to go back to the game results for each player to figure out who lost which game.  Ideally the standings would show specifically which of the game(s) were won vs. lost

Thanks Fred. 

Christopher Krolak wrote:

For me, real-time win / lose information is valuable but I can do without the real-time sorting.  If you had a league option to defer sorting until the end of the week, I could use that option for my league and all would be happy?  :)

For my game specifically, I see 4 players in 1st place.  3 players lost one game and one player (Ginger) lost both games so I think Ginger should be eliminated for having 2 losses, please confirm.

Also please cofirm how the 2nd place bracket will be decided. I currently have 3 players in 1st place with one loss each and one player in 2nd with 1 loss.  I'm assuming that the players in 1st place still have a chance at 2nd place as long as their losses are <= the number of losses for 2nd place teams, but I want to confirm that with you.  

Another item for my wish list, can we improve the win/loss indicator when multiple picks are being made?  Currently it shows red if one or both picks have lost, and the players find themselves having to go back to the game results for each player to figure out who lost which game.  Ideally the standings would show specifically which of the game(s) were won vs. lost

 

Thanks Fred. 

 

Hi Chris,

So the way I have the two-pick requirement programmed is any one loss represents ONE loss for the week. That is also how it's described in the help for the feature (so, the current standings reflect the website-established rule for that feature). If your league rule is that two losses eliminates the player, you would have to go in and set her status to 'out-of-lives'. My argument for the way its currently programmed is that if you treat hers as two losses then she moves from 1st to eliminated without a chance in the 2nd place bracket, which seems a little harsh. The one possible tweak to the logic would be an exception case where an undefeated person with a two loss week becomes ineligible for the last man standing option to move forward, but would still be allowed in the 2nd place bracket as a one loss player. This is what would have happened if not for the last-man-standing being invoked because of everyone losing.

Good question on how the 2nd place bracket will sort out. What happens with last man standing is that all the players who moved back into the 1st place bracket were granted an extra life, but not an extra win. I believe if they they lose again they move to the eliminated bracket, which is I think what you are also saying. I need to confirm this is what will happen.

I just added to the todo list your last suggestion.

Fred 

"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers!"

Fred,

Thanks for the clarifications.  I see the game rules are clearly spelled out (1 for 1 is the same as 0 for 2 in the standings) so I'll just have to go back through my league and make sure I didn't misrepresent the actual rules that are being applied. 

I think an option to count each loss would be helpful.  I enable the 2 picks per week to accelerate attrition when we get late in the season beause I prefer to have the champion decided based on losses instead of the SOV tie breaker.  Counting 1 for 1 to be equivalent to 0 for 2 in the standings may not provide the desired acceleration in attrition when coupled with the "last man standing" option because instead of most everyone winning with 1 pick per week, we now have most people losing with 2 picks per week, and as a result the standings aren't really impacted.  Please consider this as a long term enhancement.

Thanks,  Christopher 

Christopher Krolak wrote:

Fred,

Thanks for the clarifications.  I see the game rules are clearly spelled out (1 for 1 is the same as 0 for 2 in the standings) so I'll just have to go back through my league and make sure I didn't misrepresent the actual rules that are being applied. 

I think an option to count each loss would be helpful.  I enable the 2 picks per week to accelerate attrition when we get late in the season beause I prefer to have the champion decided based on losses instead of the SOV tie breaker.  Counting 1 for 1 to be equivalent to 0 for 2 in the standings may not provide the desired acceleration in attrition when coupled with the "last man standing" option because instead of most everyone winning with 1 pick per week, we now have most people losing with 2 picks per week, and as a result the standings aren't really impacted.  Please consider this as a long term enhancement.

Thanks,  Christopher 

How about this. If a player misses both picks and 'last man standing' is set, they don't get the extra life to advance in the 1st place bracket. With such a change, Ginger would have dropped to the 2nd place bracket. There would be one exception case, where all remaining contenders miss both picks, in which case I would have to be sure to advance those players.

Fred 

"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers!"

Christopher Krolak wrote:

with your proposal, how would Ginger rank vs. the one player left in the 2nd place bracket?  I'm proposing that Ginger would fall out of the game with 2 losses.

Ok, after thinking about the motivation behind the setting (attrition) it does make sense to have a player who misses both picks have two lives subtracted. Now the question is, do I implement now or wait? I prefer to do it now, but would it cause an issue with your league since the rule on this would change during the season? There are only a couple other leagues that are affected. If you are good with the change before this weekend I can notify them of the change. If a manager doesn't want it, they'll have the option to manually add a life to the player (by changing status form out-of-lives to active).

Fred 

"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers!"

Merry Christmas Fred,

One player (Ginger) from my league lost in week 14 but remained in the first place bracket because the other 3 players also lost a game.  Now in week 16, Ginger lost for the second time, the other 3 players won.  I'm assuming she should be eliminated from the game but the standings have here alone in a second place bracket now.  Please confirm.

Thanks,

Christopher

Christopher Krolak wrote:

Merry Christmas Fred,

One player (Ginger) from my league lost in week 14 but remained in the first place bracket because the other 3 players also lost a game.  Now in week 16, Ginger lost for the second time, the other 3 players won.  I'm assuming she should be eliminated from the game but the standings have here alone in a second place bracket now.  Please confirm.

Thanks,

Christopher

Merry Christmas Christopher!

That's correct, she should have been eliminated. I'll take care of that now by setting here to out-of-lives, then work on the test site to fix the root cause.

Fred

"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers!"