World Cup

[PowerBug]

So, Cairo vs Strikers?

Correct! Belarus didn't score enough, so Strikers play Cairo in Rd 3.

[Ringo]

British XV's scores without home ground advantage for those through to second round,

Hebden Bridge Hedgehogs 1598
Bilston Bunnies 1650
Bradford Badgers 1455
Oxford Owls 1367
Hastings Hurricanes 1575
Swansea Breakers 1835
Nottingham Hoods 1583
Winchester Werewolves 1758

[LaHug]

Wtf?! How did Strikers (and other Asians) score so highly?! What kind of crazy scoring system do they have? :o
I scored the tiniest bit above the average that got me my seed, Strikers scored miles above their average.
Disappointing way to bail out as it wasn't a poor performance from my Bison :(

[Jay]

Wtf?! How did Strikers (and other Asians) score so highly?! What kind of crazy scoring system do they have? :o
I scored the tiniest bit above the average that got me my seed, Strikers scored miles above their average.
Disappointing way to bail out as it wasn't a poor performance from my Bison :(

Sorry LH. Thats what happens when you have Sidey getting x1,5 though ;D

[Colliwobblers]

Asians :)

get around em'

[PowerBug]

So Cairo Sands look like they'll score about 1450,

Cairo Sands   1450

Just sayin' :P

[Holz]

Asians :)

get around em'

They will have their down weeks and out they go.

[Nige]

So Cairo Sands look like they'll score about 1450,

Cairo Sands   1450

Just sayin' :P

Good call!

So, Cairo vs Strikers?

Correct! Belarus didn't score enough, so Strikers play Cairo in Rd 3.

Woooo! Bring it you Lankans!

[nostradamus]

A tough week coming up for The Russian Roulettes, we come up against the Manila Folders who are in red hot form

Really need my midfield......Ablett, Swan, Griffen & ROK.......to gun it to stand any chance l think

[Nails]

I was thinking and I think I might have one issue with the weighting... we probably won't be able to work it out...

But anyway, I'd say generally as the season wears on there are more injuries and more XVs teams struggling to field a full team.

The weighting does take into account the 14 teams in XVs and the different scoring amounts and whatnot...

But the one thing I don't think it truly compensates for is the depth. As we all know the Eagles have a best lineup. This is brought back by some of the weighting but I don't think it truly accounts for the depth. The better players EXVs have in depth in the early rounds aren't getting used much due to minimal injury, but it is giving them a benefit in these later rounds.

Maybe I'm wrong though, or am I confused? IDK

[Holz]

I was thinking and I think I might have one issue with the weighting... we probably won't be able to work it out...

But anyway, I'd say generally as the season wears on there are more injuries and more XVs teams struggling to field a full team.

The weighting does take into account the 14 teams in XVs and the different scoring amounts and whatnot...

But the one thing I don't think it truly compensates for is the depth. As we all know the Eagles have a best lineup. This is brought back by some of the weighting but I don't think it truly accounts for the depth. The better players EXVs have in depth in the early rounds aren't getting used much due to minimal injury, but it is giving them a benefit in these later rounds.

Maybe I'm wrong though, or am I confused? IDK

It is a point I have thought about but in the case of the eagles is not really true. The reason why I shot up the ladder is I traded away allmy depth iI actually only have 5 forwards, 1 decent ruck and 6 good mids my backline defence is insane though. I'm just lucky I haven't had many injuries I think the most I ever haves had is 3 starters out and when that happens I had to play 2 defenders in the utility spot.

[LaHug]

One thing I'm curious about is how the average for each comp changes per round. For example, I know a while back (before this comp started) there was an awesome round for SC but it was a poor round for DT. Obviously, this would mean Worlds teams scored higher on average while the EXV teams scored lower.
My query is, would it be better to do scaling on a per round basis? That way, if we have a week where scoring is particularly week in one comp but particularly strong in another, we wouldn't have something like the top scorer for the week in Euro losing to a team who was only the 6th best WXV team that week, just because it was SC friendly and the opposite for DT.
I know nothing about the other scoring systems but I'm sure they have good weeks and bad weeks while other comps have the opposite as well.

If this is completely stupid or doesn't even make sense, feel free to shut me down or disregard :)

[Holz]

One thing I'm curious about is how the average for each comp changes per round. For example, I know a while back (before this comp started) there was an awesome round for SC but it was a poor round for DT. Obviously, this would mean Worlds teams scored higher on average while the EXV teams scored lower.
My query is, would it be better to do scaling on a per round basis? That way, if we have a week where scoring is particularly week in one comp but particularly strong in another, we wouldn't have something like the top scorer for the week in Euro losing to a team who was only the 6th best WXV team that week, just because it was SC friendly and the opposite for DT.
I know nothing about the other scoring systems but I'm sure they have good weeks and bad weeks while other comps have the opposite as well.

If this is completely stupid or doesn't even make sense, feel free to shut me down or disregard :)

That is a good idea maybee the scaling should be comp average for the season + comp round average divided by 2.

[LaHug]

One thing I'm curious about is how the average for each comp changes per round. For example, I know a while back (before this comp started) there was an awesome round for SC but it was a poor round for DT. Obviously, this would mean Worlds teams scored higher on average while the EXV teams scored lower.
My query is, would it be better to do scaling on a per round basis? That way, if we have a week where scoring is particularly week in one comp but particularly strong in another, we wouldn't have something like the top scorer for the week in Euro losing to a team who was only the 6th best WXV team that week, just because it was SC friendly and the opposite for DT.
I know nothing about the other scoring systems but I'm sure they have good weeks and bad weeks while other comps have the opposite as well.

If this is completely stupid or doesn't even make sense, feel free to shut me down or disregard :)

That is a good idea maybee the scaling should be comp average for the season + comp round average divided by 2.

:) Anything to even it up in the case of freakishly good/bad rounds for a scoring system sounds good to me.

[ossie85]

Sc has the same amount of points each round, no such thing as a good or bad round.

Other scoring systems for sure though