Can I suggest an alteration to the scoring system? It seems to me that while picking the winner can be attributed to skill, predicting the score is more a matter of luck, and doesn’t deserve to be rewarded so highly. As an alternative:
Predict Result only = 1 point
Predict result and margin of victory = 2 points
Predict result and correct score = 3 points
By “margin of victory” I mean the goal difference, so if (say) South Africa plays France, and I predict a victory to SA by 5-1 ( I can dream can’t I??), then the following happens:
France wins (or draw) = 0
SA wins 1-0 = 1 point
SA wins 4-0 = 2 points
SA wins 5-1 = 3 points, the Second Coming happens and the Redeemed are removed from this earth to live in Paradise forever!!
While Grimpixies suggestion has merit, I’m trying to keep the scoring as simple as possible so that me head dosent explode. We have 21 people registered to play so far, with predictions in from 15, and I’m trying to keep it all as easy as possible for all concerned.
Sounds okay, grimpixie but there are a couple of problems;
1- Unless I’m misreading things, It looks to be biased against those predicting draws (I guess we could build in a rule to the rule but see point 2),
2 - 48 games X 30 ish players (or more !) = 1440. With 4 possible already existing outcomes (correct score, correct winner, score draw of another number of goals, lose…I think ?) - although I’m not great with excel spreadsheets - I’d guess that was complex enough.
That’s a lot of work here already. And that’s just the collation. After that comes the regular tabulation (every few days) and successfully rendering the tables on this page.
I’ll leave it with Twisty but unless he’s an Excel guru and a coding wizard, I’d think it probably best to leave as is. Nice idea, though !
1 31-May France vs Senegal 4-0
2 01-Jun Republic of Ireland vs Cameroon 2-1
3 01-Jun Uruguay vs Denmark 2-1
4 01-Jun Germany vs Saudi Arabia 3-0
5 02-Jun England vs Sweden 2-1
6 02-Jun Paraguay vs South Africa 2-0
7 02-Jun Argentina vs Nigeria 3-1
8 02-Jun Spain vs Slovenia 2-1
9 03-Jun Croatia vs Mexico 0-1
10 03-Jun Brazil vs Turkey 2-1
11 03-Jun Italy vs Ecuador 3-0
12 04-Jun China PR vs Costa Rica 0-1
13 04-Jun Japan vs Belgium 1-2
14 04-Jun Korea vs Republic Poland 1-1
15 05-Jun Russia vs Tunisia 2-0
16 05-Jun USA vs Portugal 1-3
17 05-Jun Germany vs Republic of Ireland 1-1
18 06-Jun France vs Uruguay 2-0
19 06-Jun Cameroon vs Saudi Arabia 2-0
20 06-Jun Denmark vs Senegal 2-0
21 07-Jun Sweden vs Nigeria 1-2
22 07-Jun Spain vs Paraguay 2-1
23 07-Jun Argentina vs England 2-1
24 08-Jun South Africa vs Slovenia 1-2
Actually LC, once you have the details in Excel, it is as easy to score using grimpixie’s suggestion as the original.
I assume Twisty will be simply entering the score from the relevant match, having already set the spreadsheet up to calculate points and league positions. That’s how I’d do it. If he doesn’t know how, I’m more than willing to code the s’sheet but I must chicken out of entering everybody’s predictions.
That means that (subject to your good point about draws), there is no practical reason not to adopt this scoring system. I still defer to the granddaddies of the game if they simply don’t like it however.
Count me in, but I won’t be able to post for a day or so.
BTW, you guys seem to think this is going to be one hell of a goalfest. Lots of 4 or more goal games in the first round. Looks like an opening for a doom & gloom merchant. (and if I stuff up, I’ll see lots of entertaining soccer, wacko!)
With regards to my scoring suggestion - I briefly thought of the bias against draws, but then forgot about it. A little analysis during my lunchbreak reveals the following - in France '98, of the 64 games that were played, just 19 ended in draws, 16 in the group games, and three in the knockout rounds that were then decided by penalties (see below). IOW, 29.7% of the games were draws, which means that a result is more than twice as likely as a draw. (In USA '94 there were even less, just 11 out of 52 = 20.4%, while Italy '90 had 13 out of 52 = 25%) This suggests that the bias might not be as great as it seems.
A counter suggestion for dealing with the draw might be to award 2 points for a correct prediction of a draw, with a third for the correct score…
I will defer to TwistOfFate in this matter, as he is the one who will have to implement the scoring system.
A further question - in the knockout rounds, how are we going to deal with penalty shoot-outs? Just treat it as a victory with the number of goals as finally scored including penalties? Or say it was a draw?
::thinks - did I just waste the second sunny lunch break in London’s written history calculating the number of draws? - sigh::
then, if I predict a draw and the result is a draw I get 2 points, since the result and difference are correct. If the the end score was spot on (0-0, 1-1, 2-2, etc), then I get 3 points. So you might argue it’s biased in favor of draws, since a draw would be a minimum of two points. Or am I misunderstanding something?
In the original, simple scoring format predicting a draw would be less weighted, e.g., a draw without the correct score is only 1 point; otherwise 3 points.
My reckoning on the matter is that the score at the end of 90 minutes play.
If you pick the match to be a win, and it goes to penalties, you get no points. if you think its going to be a draw, you get 3 points for the score draw/no score draw prediction, and one point for the correct 90 minute prediction.
I can dream can’t I??), then the following happens:
