Suggestions for 2017/18?

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

23 hours ago, Bristolatic said:

Indeed it was correct, hence my hasty edit acknowledging the fact. You see, I'm happy to admit my mistakes. It's the honourable thing to do. Lessons can be learnt from such things. Dave and I would be correct as in ”Dave and I went to the pub", ie Dave went to the pub, I went to the pub. You youngsters, honestly.

 

Dave and me went down the pub is correct. 

 

Dave and I went down the pub is also correct, although somewhat strained and affected. The idea that only this latter example is correct is a buggery bear trap set somewhere back in time in a public school. 

 

[lookersstandandy]

8 hours ago, 24hoursfromtulsehill said:

 

Dave and me went down the pub is correct. 

 

Dave and I went down the pub is also correct....

 

 

....thing is, Dave wouldn't tarnish his reputation associating with you.

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

12 hours ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

....thing is, Dave wouldn't tarnish his reputation associating with you.

 

Dave's reputation and my reputation are cemented...we're the only two people (are we even human?) who've climbed the high mountain in both the amateur and professional eras of predicting. You've won fuck all ever. Dave has nothing to prove; I have nothing to prove. The correct approach...if you want to avoid making a cringey fool of yourself...is to lavish upon us the usual dues of deference and awe. Feel free to wave at us from down there on the valley floor! We might not see it, but we're grateful all the same, in an indifferent sort of way.

[lookersstandandy]

2 hours ago, 24hoursfromtulsehill said:

 

Dave's reputation and my reputation are cemented...we're the only two people (are we even human?) who've climbed the high mountain in both the amateur and professional eras of predicting. You've won fuck all ever. Dave has nothing to prove; I have nothing to prove. The correct approach...if you want to avoid making a cringey fool of yourself...is to lavish upon us the usual dues of deference and awe. Feel free to wave at us from down there on the valley floor! We might not see it, but we're grateful all the same, in an indifferent sort of way.

 

The mere fact that you perpetually make reference to your "mountain climbing" is tacit recognition that you are insecure about the validity of your achievements..... whereas Dave is silent on the matter, confident in his. I'm beginning to feel sorry for you, you poor lost troubled soul.

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

20 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

The mere fact that you perpetually make reference to your "mountain climbing" is tacit recognition that you are insecure about the validity of your achievements..... whereas Dave is silent on the matter, confident in his. I'm beginning to feel sorry for you, you poor lost troubled soul.

 

You're reading something that isn't there...for which I blame the Tory education system you vote for.

 

I'm just pointing out how far behind you miserable wankers are and always will be...to help and motivate you. If you can't see that, you will remain where you are now on the great granite pyramid of predicting, which is near the bottom, struggling and sometimes even going backwards down toward the valley of shame with the likes of rudemedic.

[lookersstandandy]

12 minutes ago, 24hoursfromtulsehill said:

 

......for which I blame the Tory education system you vote for.

 

 

 I was educated at a comprehensive in Tameside...... you couldn't get less elitist if you tried. 

Edited May 30, 2017 by lookersstandandy

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

3 hours ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

 I was educated at a comprehensive in Tameside...... you couldn't get less elitist if you tried. 

 

Run down by years of Tory misrule...which you voted for.

[Bristolatic]

Only on OWTB can a thread about predicting football results end up being a political football. 

 

I suppose being in the politics arena for so long has resulted in one of our number developing an inability to separate fact from fiction. 

 

One can only shake one's head and feel sorry for the lad. Maybe.

Edited May 30, 2017 by Bristolatic

[lookersstandandy]

 

2 hours ago, 24hoursfromtulsehill said:

 

Run down by years of Tory misrule...which you voted for.

 

....but I attended in the 80's.... after we'd seen the lionshare of the previous two decades with a Labour administration....?

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

1 hour ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

 

....but I attended in the 80's.... after we'd seen the lionshare of the previous two decades with a Labour administration....?

 

What? This is a psychological trick isn't it? Where you blame someone else for the failings of the Tories. Deep Chiswick this.

[leeslover]

If only Mr and Mrs Tulsehill Senior hadn't voted for Mrs Thatcher...

[lookersstandandy]

43 minutes ago, 24hoursfromtulsehill said:

 

What? This is a psychological trick isn't it? Where you blame someone else for the failings of the Tories. Deep Chiswick this.

 

I'm neither blaming one party, not obfuscating for another.... I'm merely pointing out the gaping holes in your chronology!

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

14 hours ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

I'm neither blaming one party, not obfuscating for another.... I'm merely pointing out the gaping holes in your chronology!

 

Okay. Let's call it the Chiswick lag, which is a bit like the fiscal lag. Anything bad happening dates back to when Labour were in. Anything good happening dates to whenever the Tories were in.

[lookersstandandy]

2 hours ago, 24hoursfromtulsehill said:

 

Okay. Let's call it the Chiswick lag, which is a bit like the fiscal lag. Anything bad happening dates back to when Labour were in. Anything good happening dates to whenever the Tories were in.

 

....but I'm not saying Tories this, Labour that..... you are....! I merely pointed out the issue / any issue, is not binary.

 

You see, your problem - like so many others who wish to define themselves by their political ideologue, irrespective of the spectrum - is that you would vote for the same political party regardless of whom leads it, it's manifesto, or is standing as your local representative. This for me encourages complacency and an entrenchment into dogma, where you are unable to listen, learn anything new and instill modernity into your thinking.

 

I, on the other hand, approach the issue with much more nuance. I don't see the world through one lense.... I can find myself agreeing with the left, the right and the centre ground, across differing issues. I therefore approach the ballot box having made a decision - not always the same decision - based on what I see before me at that time.

 

Politics isn't football, you don't support a team no matter what.... you are allowed to move around using a balanced approach. You should try it, you might like it.

 

Now, get yourself back in the Prediction League Championship and show us why you deserve to be considered in the same bracket as Dave Collinge!

Edited May 31, 2017 by lookersstandandy

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

21 hours ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

....but I'm not saying Tories this, Labour that..... you are....! I merely pointed out the issue / any issue, is not binary.

 

You see, your problem - like so many others who wish to define themselves by their political ideologue, irrespective of the spectrum - is that you would vote for the same political party regardless of whom leads it, it's manifesto, or is standing as your local representative. This for me encourages complacency and an entrenchment into dogma, where you are unable to listen, learn anything new and instill modernity into your thinking.

 

I, on the other hand, approach the issue with much more nuance. I don't see the world through one lense.... I can find myself agreeing with the left, the right and the centre ground, across differing issues. I therefore approach the ballot box having made a decision - not always the same decision - based on what I see before me at that time.

 

Politics isn't football, you don't support a team no matter what.... you are allowed to move around using a balanced approach. You should try it, you might like it.

 

Now, get yourself back in the Prediction League Championship and show us why you deserve to be considered in the same bracket as Dave Collinge!

 

I tell you what. I'll stop voting with the tribe as soon as the chinless wonders down in Chiswick do the same.

[lookersstandandy]

17 minutes ago, 24hoursfromtulsehill said:

 

I tell you what. I'll stop voting with the tribe as soon as the chinless wonders down in Chiswick do the same.

 

What, like this you mean....?

 

Years	MP	Party
1992–1997	Nirj Deva	Conservative
1997–2001	Anne Keen	Labour
2001–2005	Anne Keen	Labour
2005–2010	Anne Keen	Labour
2010-2015	Mary Macleod	Conservative
2015-	Ruth Cadbury	Labour

 

 

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

14 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

What, like this you mean....?

 

Years	MP	Party
1992–1997	Nirj Deva	Conservative
1997–2001	Anne Keen	Labour
2001–2005	Anne Keen	Labour
2005–2010	Anne Keen	Labour
2010-2015	Mary Macleod	Conservative
2015-	Ruth Cadbury	Labour

 

 

 

That's Brentford and Isleworth, of which Chiswick is a part. In the two Chiswick wards - Chiswick Homefields and Chiswick Riverside - there are two Tory voters to every one non-Tory voter.

[JoeP]

How about we give an extra point for correct first goal-scorer??

[Stevie_J]

I'm struggling for time at the moment and still need to sort out last season's prize money, amongst other things.  I will try to get this sorted this week.

 

On the suggestions, my personal view is that the points system is pretty good as it stands but I'm not averse to the idea of changing them if there's a consensus that something needs to be fixed.  I read a suggestion that HT score shouldn't be worth the same number of points as FT.  In reality, it isn't - if you correctly predict the FT score, you pick up the FT points, plus the correct number of goals points, plus the result points - 6pts in total versus the 2pts for the HT prediction.

 

I've never been keen on the sliding scale for attendance points as it would mean points for the least shit predictions when everyone's miles off.

 

I'll get round to reading them all properly soon.

[HarryBosch]

Closest attendance...

[youngen]

15 hours ago, HarryBosch said:

Closest attendance...

 

I think there is some merit in that. An extra 2/3 points for person with closest attendance in each league.

[rudemedic]

7 hours ago, youngen said:

 

I think there is some merit in that. An extra 2/3 points for person with closest attendance in each league.

Speak for yourself. The attendance points already skew the prediction league. It is noticeable that Harry brings this up because he would often benefit, especially if no attendance points are scored.  The skill isn't there for being able to predict that Joe and Jane Bloggs from somewhere down South haven't gone to the game, but they have been counted due to being a season ticket holder, or club X's official capacity is wrong so you can have an attendance over capacity despite some empty seats. Personally I'd take attendance points out of the competition all together, if you can't bet on it, then it shouldn't be in.

 

Can I clarify what the rule is for own goals? As the first goal scorer for Oldham has been own goal a number of times this season, usually in a game when we've got 1 goal. Personally I think there should be points for correctly predicting no Oldham scorer, which can apply for Oldham nil and own goals, not necessarily 3 but a bonus would give more skill in being able to predict no Oldham scorer as opposed to playing the percentages and picking a goal so you can predict a goal scorer.

[lookersstandandy]

12 minutes ago, rudemedic said:

.....Personally I think there should be points for correctly predicting no Oldham scorer, which can apply for Oldham nil and own goals.....

 

I mean, this is so niche, it suggests furious masturbating is the only cure.....

[stevesidg]

For attendance, how about also predicting number of away fans,?

 

i also think points for no scorer if we score nil would also be good. 

[Bristolatic]

On 6/1/2017 at 5:29 PM, HarryBosch said:

Closest attendance...  Currently, the spreadsheets calculate automatically which predictions earn 3, 5, or 20 points. To give points for the closest prediction would involve either (I think) removing the formulas and manually calculate every prediction, or introduce much more involved formulas. To be honest, I'm not very keen on either scenario from a calculation point of view.

 

On 6/2/2017 at 9:05 AM, youngen said:

An extra 2/3 points for person with closest attendance in each league. Similar to above, but it would mean an extra formula going in, otherwise the automatically calculated League table wouldn't work.

 

On 6/2/2017 at 4:48 PM, rudemedic said:

Personally I'd take attendance points out of the competition all together, if you can't bet on it, then it shouldn't be in. It can be done by removing the appropriate parts of the spreadsheets, but I personally like the idea of predicting attendances. It gives you another opportunity to pick up points by making a calculated (or otherwise) stab at something other than the score etc.

 

Can I clarify what the rule is for own goals? As the first goal scorer for Oldham has been own goal a number of times this season, usually in a game when we've got 1 goal. I think we've touched on this further back up the thread. From my point of view, I'm quite happy for points to be awarded if an Own Goal is predicted. Without causing problems with the system, it would have to stay at 3 points, the same as a named scorer. Personally I think there should be points for correctly predicting no Oldham scorer. Again, I think I dealt with this one earlier on and it wouldn't cause any calculation problems. As with own goals, it would have to be three points.

 

On 6/3/2017 at 6:44 AM, stevesidg said:

For attendance, how about also predicting number of away fans,? Sorry, Steve, but it won't work. A number of clubs (Latics included last season) don't always publish the number of away fans, so if we introduced it, it would falter the first time a club doesn't disclose. Undisclosed fans, no less. In fact, even if all clubs did give the numbers, it's another "extra" for the calculation formulas. 

 

i also think points for no scorer if we score nil would also be good. I've dealt with this one above.

I'm not opposed to changes per se, but they have to be workable. As I have posted earlier, the whole thing takes an hour and a half or more to compile and produce after each game and I don't really want it to take any longer than that. Where we have games on a Saturday and a Tuesday, I have to crack on fairly quickly to get it done without impinging on anything that Mrs B and I want to do. (Draw your own conclusions! ). If you combine all the bits in red above with the other bits in red nearer the beginning of the thread, I think it probably answers just about everything. I know Stevie_J hasn't had a chance to plough through it all yet, but we'll be having a chat at some stage to sort it all out.

 

Thanks for all the comments and suggestions and please don't think they'll get chucked out just for the sake of it. The whole thing has to work as seamlessly as possible and also has to be reasonably easy to change if I drop a bollock. (That's techno speak for "Oops, I seem to have made a bit of a blunder"). It's easy to make a mistake copying predictions and could cause all sort of consternation, buggeration, trouble and strife if it's too involved.