BuzzerBeater Forums

There. Was it really so hard to provide another example?

Let me ask you this. If this was real basketball and that was the scenario - would you not agree that the team which won the easy conference would have an advantage in the finals?

But we have one thing that there isn't in NBA. I mean, promotion.
If the best team in the worst conference has an advantage to promote, then the difference between conferences will be bigger each season.

That is not necessarily the case at all. For one thing you have a demoted team taking its place. You also have teams being demoted and being replaced by teams from lower leagues that are potentially better than the ones demoted.

Your concern is limited in scope and is a relatively short term problem.

My concern comes from my own expierence, and the expierence of many other users. Here and in hattrick. Several strong teams can randomly coincide in one group (a conference in this case). And some teams, deserving to be in a higher division, stay in that group for several seasons.

This enthusiasm issue can only worsen the situation, since the teams in the strong conference have to lose enthusiasm to get into the finals, and can be beaten by a slightly worse team from the weaker conference.

And unfortunately, it is not a short term problem for some teams.

edti: and don't forget that some teams in strong conferences may have to fight for the home advantage against strong teams, while a good team in the weaker conference will have weaker rivals in the last matches of the regular season, and can play TIE.

Last edited by FCardelle at 10/5/2008 3:08:36 PM

I more thna understand what you are trying to say. Please take a quick look at my own league for confirmation.

However you are not telling me anything new. If it is not a short term problem for some teams then perhaps those teams are not "deserving to be in a higher division." Are you telling me that this superconference, season after season, keeps losing th final to whichever team happens to come out of the other one? Even though the team that won each past season was promoted out of the league? Sounds like an excuse to me.

Otherwise - It's called luck of the draw. It exists in every league of every sport in the world. Live with it.

and don't forget that some teams in strong conferences may have to fight for the home advantage against strong teams, while a good team in the weaker conference will have weaker rivals in the last matches of the regular season, and can play TIE.

Are you repeating this so I don't forget it? This was the point that launched the whole discussion, and as previously noted - does this not resemble a real sports situations to you?

I think there is something fishy about a system in which you can take it easy game after game (which, I should mention I'm doing right now) in order to attain a kind of super- enthusiasm. In reality, enthusiasm might drop if all a team does is take it easy all the time.

I'd also like to add that I'm often surised at the high ratings my team (and other teams as well) gets even when I go TIE. Something tells me the hit a team takes from going TIE should be stronger.

Last edited by Dr. Fader at 10/8/2008 2:08:11 AM

I think there is something fishy about a system in which you can take it easy game after game (which, I should mention I'm doing right now) in order to attain a kind of super- enthusiasm. In reality, enthusiasm might drop if all a team does is take it easy all the time.

I'd also like to add that I'm often surised at the high ratings my team (and other teams as well) gets even when I go TIE. Something tells me the hit a team takes from going TIE should be stronger.

ratings aren't modified by TIE or MOTS

That might be because it doesn't seem like the ratings takes a hit at all from choosing TIE. Or boost from CT.

So when the weaker team chooses NORMAL, and wins, without it being explained by the ratings, it becomes very difficult to understand what effect the choice of effort/enthusiasm really has.

If I knew that f.ex Offensive Flow and Outside scoring ratings decreased by lets say 10% choosing TIE, and increased by 10% choosing CT, combined with a certain tactic, (Choosing a different tactic would increase different ratings.), I would have a totally different feel for what choices to make based on the choices the opponent might make, and what effects this theoratically would have on the ratings.

Aren't the ratings supposed to show the teams skill on the court?
Or is it acceptable to see a team with Prolific rating in rebounding having fewer
rebounds in total than a team with Respectable in rebounding, just because the weaker team choose CT without the effects being shown in the ratings?

In HT the midfield rating increases based on the effort you put in, therefor it's easier to understand the effectt on your own team, and the opponents team.

When you tie you shooting percentage drops, and when you mots it rises.. it's not reflect in ratings, though

When you tie you shooting percentage drops, and when you mots it rises.. it's not reflect in ratings, though

No, this is not true.

So what TIE does exactly?
The one I gave you it's quite a common explanation in Italian help forum for the effects, so I guess someone noticed this behaviour from his/her team.