Utba

[Bronx Bomber 15]

Happy New Year all!
I can't decide on the Honeymooners or the Twilight Zone marathons myself...

[Lee]

Originally Posted by Bronx Bomber 15

Happy New Year all!
I can't decide on the Honeymooners or the Twilight Zone marathons myself...

We watched the Twilight zone marathon, I can;t seem to ever get sick of that series.

[bigMatt]

Originally Posted by Lee

We watched the Twilight zone marathon, I can;t seem to ever get sick of that series.

Us too - last night Marx Brothers, today Twilight Zone.

Oh if all of life's choices were so easy.

[kenyan_cheena]

I have a suggestion I'd like to put out there for discussion in relation to the way we do the standings in the UTBA.

I was thinking we could base them on the actual overall result of each matchup, not the total wins, losses and draws for each team. The way it is now, it will be possible that Bears Unstable defeats Bonner Springs in the final matchup of the season and still not win the division, as the Beavers will have won more individual fights overall.

[kenyan_cheena]

This is what I mean. Based on wins and losses of the team matchups, the standings look like this:

1 Bear's Unstable (East) [7-1-0]
2 Bonner Springs Bald Beavers (East) [6-1-1]
3 Tile Hill Top Team (East) [4-3-1]
4 The Dublin Guards (East) [2-6-0]
5 Left Jab Inc (East) [1-7-0]

1 Tomato City (West) [6-2-0]
2 Muckboys (West) [4-4-0]
3 Boxing Kangaroos (West) [3-5-0]
4 Brazilian Barbarians (West) [3-5-0]
5 McCune Mitt Slingers (West) [2-6-0]

1 IceTeaBoxing (North) [8-0-0]
2 Hebron Haymakers (North) [5-3-0]
3 Undisputed Champions (North) [4-3-1]
4 Oakland Assassins (North) [3-5-0]
5 Chilton Roughnecks (North) [0-8-0]

1 Cawkney Crusaders (South) [7-1-0]
2 MexiVilles (South) [3-3-2]
3 Juggernaut (South) [3-4-1]
4 Punching Bags (South) [3-5-0]
5 The Nobodies (South) [2-6-0]

[Romdawg88]

That might be the fairest way to do it and use points scored as a tie breaker but any serious discussion on wether to change standings or not so be done after this season since I don't think it would be fair to change how we do it right before the end of the season.

[kenyan_cheena]

Originally Posted by Romdawg88

That might be the fairest way to do it and use points scored as a tie breaker but any serious discussion on wether to change standings or not so be done after this season since I don't think it would be fair to change how we do it right before the end of the season.

Yep, I was thinking of beyond the current season.

[Romdawg88]

Originally Posted by kenyan_cheena

Yep, I was thinking of beyond the current season.

Cool, I like what you came up with and it would be the fairest way to go. It's not fair to the Bears that they probably have no shot at the playoffs even though they have had such a great season.

[SAL]

Originally Posted by kenyan_cheena

I have a suggestion I'd like to put out there for discussion in relation to the way we do the standings in the UTBA.

I was thinking we could base them on the actual overall result of each matchup, not the total wins, losses and draws for each team. The way it is now, it will be possible that Bears Unstable defeats Bonner Springs in the final matchup of the season and still not win the division, as the Beavers will have won more individual fights overall.

This will be worth voting on after this season.
I like the idea!
And for tie-breakers:
1) Best divisional record first
2) Romy's suggestion of using total points, use as a 2nd tie-breaker.

[kenyan_cheena]

Originally Posted by SAL

This will be worth voting on after this season.
I like the idea!
And for tie-breakers:
1) Best divisional record first
2) Romy's suggestion of using total points, use as a 2nd tie-breaker.

You could also use head-to-head record.

[Claybor]

I like the fact that the more individual wins you get the more points you get. I know its a "team sport", and most team sports are based on the entire game, but I liked the fact that this one is different. We make it worthwhile to win big, it becomes a very different game if winning by 1 is equal to winning by 20. Just my opinion, and honestly not a strong one. If we go the other way thats fine with me too.

[kenyan_cheena]

Originally Posted by Claybor

I like the fact that the more individual wins you get the more points you get. I know its a "team sport", and most team sports are based on the entire game, but I liked the fact that this one is different. We make it worthwhile to win big, it becomes a very different game if winning by 1 is equal to winning by 20. Just my opinion, and honestly not a strong one. If we go the other way thats fine with me too.

I was thinking about that, also. The current method makes scoring as many wins as possible very important and rewards the teams that do this.

Maybe we could come up with some sort of system that takes both factors into account. Perhaps it could be something like this: five points for a team win, two for a draw, plus bonus points for passing a certain score within the matchup or for a close loss (say, five points or less).

It's something to look at during the off-season, but it should not have any bearing on the current one.

[Romultiltus]

Originally Posted by kenyan_cheena

I was thinking about that, also. The current method makes scoring as many wins as possible very important and rewards the teams that do this.

Maybe we could come up with some sort of system that takes both factors into account. Perhaps it could be something like this: five points for a team win, two for a draw, plus bonus points for passing a certain score within the matchup or for a close loss (say, five points or less).

It's something to look at during the off-season, but it should not have any bearing on the current one.

Although I'm not opposed to changing the current system, I think it is fine the way it is. Based on the example of wins as opposed to points, here's how it would affect the West (if it was in play this season)

Tomato City would still be in 1st place (w/ a 6-2-0 record) w/ the Muckboys now in 2nd place (w/ a 4-4-0 record). As it sits now, the Muckboys only trail by 16 points heading into the last 2 weeks of the season. If Tomato City were to lose both remaining matches and the Muckboys win out, the both would end w/ 6-4-0 records. Since Tomato City won the head-to-head matchup, I'm guessing that they would go to the playoffs, even if the Muckboys pile up more points.

I think the current system will allow more teams to have shot at the playoffs regardless of the team record. (Just look at the very close South division). It is unfortunate that the Bear's may well be left out of the playoffs, but just like in other sports, not everyone can make it. Look at the NFL this season - the NFC is horrible and is sending 8-8 teams to the playoffs while the AFC has much more deserving teams left out in the cold.

As in everything w/ the UTBA, majority rules and if a vote results in a change, I will have no problem (although I vote for status quo right now)

[bigMatt]

I wasn't going to weigh in at first, in case this year was the year that we decided to change things. I figured I had a bit of a "vested interest."

Since we are talking beyond this season, I just want to say that I like the scoring the way it is currently. While I certainly understand KC's point, I'm with Claybor in that individual wins to me are the best indicator of the quality of the overall team. And I agree with Dave, despite what this season looks like, I think it more often than not gives teams better opportunity to "sneak up" in the standings, even after they've suffered some head to head losses with other squads.

If I'd change anything at all in the scoring, I'd actually go the other direction, suggesting performance points as the determinator of standings. But truth is, I think it works great right now.

[bear]

I know that I have a vested interest in making the playoffs, but when I built my team in the draft I was aware of the league rules and tried to draft a team, that would perform well, given these rules. Prior to this season we voted on the possibility of expanding the playoffs to include more teams and I know that I voted against the idea so I can't really gripe about anything like not making the playoffs given the league rules. My only gripes are with some of my draft day decisions. Second guesssing myself on some of my decisions.

Bear

[CONN CHRIS]

The only change that I would like to see is awarding the same points for a unanimous decision as for a stoppage win. Or even 2.5 points for a UD if everyone still wants power to be king.

Christopher

[Romultiltus]

I looked over how the rankings would change if the points system was changed. Here is how the divisions end up.

Column 1: Win By KO = 3 (Current System)
Column 2: Win By KO = 2.5
Column 3: Win By KO = 2

EAST:

396.0 ... 354.0 ... 312.0 - Bonner Springs Bald Beavers
371.0 ... 324.0 ... 277.0 - Bear's Unstable
337.0 ... 305.0 ... 273.0 - Tile Hill Top Team
272.0 ... 239.5 ... 207.0 - Left Jab Inc
243.0 ... 220.0 ... 197.0 - The Dublin Guards

WEST:

357.0 ... 316.5 ... 276 0 - Tomato City
347.0 ... 304.0 ... 261.0 - Muckboys
337.0 ... 304.0 ... 271.0 - Brazilian Barbarians
319.0 ... 283.5 ... 248.0 - Boxing Kangaroos
268.0 ... 245.0 ... 222.0 - McCune Mitt Slingers

NORTH:

387.0 ... 351.5 ... 316.0 - IceTeaBoxing
342.0 ... 305.0 ... 268.0 - Undisputed Champions
330.0 ... 302.0 ... 274.0 - Hebron Haymakers
292.0 ... 260.0 ... 228.0 - Oakland Assassins
224.0 ... 206.0 ... 188.0 - Chilton Roughnecks

SOUTH:

365.0 ... 332.5 ... 300.0 - Cawkney Crusaders
347.0 ... 309.5 ... 272.0 - MexiVilles
341.0 ... 300.5 ... 260.0 - Juggernaut
286.0 ... 263.5 ... 241.0 - The Nobodies
257.0 ... 233.0 ... 209.0 - Punching Bags

Overall, the standings pretty much stay the same as they are now. There are only 2 exceptions in the 3rd senario where the 2nd and 3rd place teams swap positions.

As for me, I do not think changing the points awarded for a KO victory affects the outcome of the that much. All 4 divison leaders remain on top and the changes do not close the gap between them and the 2nd place team.

Just my 2 cents.

[Romultiltus]

Another trivial reason to keep the current scoring system in place involves the league history and stats.

As the league matures, we will be able to compare fighter's performances from season to season. Excluding the first season where there were only 7 rounds and 2 playoff teams, we can have a good pool of data to compare based on a few constants: 10 rounds per season, the current points system, etc.

I'm not sure if there are any other anal-retentive stat guys like me out there, but I think that the stats and comparisons make the UTBA more enjoyable and will leave the door open for good debate/discussion/trash-talking.

As the league moves on, there are a lot of other things that could be added once fighters start to retire - such as All-Time Records / Active Records and hopefully a UTBA Hall-Of-Fame.

[CONN CHRIS]

I was talking about leaving ko points awarded as they are and boosting UD wins from 2 to 2.5 or 3 so that slick fighters are rewarded similarly to power punchers. MD/SD wins would remain at 2 points and draws at 1.

[Romultiltus]

Originally Posted by CONN CHRIS

I was talking about leaving ko points awarded as they are and boosting UD wins from 2 to 2.5 or 3 so that slick fighters are rewarded similarly to power punchers. MD/SD wins would remain at 2 points and draws at 1.

Not a bad idea - I must have misunderstood your original post.

I still vote for no change, but this idea is more attractive than what I misread in the other post.