Chance vs. Skill

[JOELKING]

You may agree, or not.

Strato, is played with dice, any dice game(s) is crapshot, you either got your rolls, or you don't, but telling me that is skilled, maybe, or maybe not. If its skilled, a small pct of skill involved.. If there was hard nose evidence pointing and proving it then i would believe it more that strato is more skilled.. There is one thing that do have in common with chess and even bridge if i am not mistaking, that is math, what Leehaak, pointed out, it does bring an interesting side if your good with numbers, you good at chess, and i believe the same with strato, and even bridge.. I believe math has ALOT to do with strato. but skill, i am still debating it. also t oadd something else, playing the online version of strato, when half the times HAL doesnt accept managers setting to the fullest, has a big part of the outcome of chances, However, playing face to face ( i never done that before) i would beelive the skill will be more involved..

[visick]

First and foremost...

You need to have the "right" players for your park. You are going to play 81 games @ home and you need to win as many games there as you can.
ie. Having a SP that gives up BPHR's in a hitting park or a hitter that is BP dependant in a pitchers park.

Secondly...

You have to be able to win some games on the road against your divisional foes. That may mean carrying an extra SP or 2 that may not be a good fit for your park, but a good fit against your divisional rivals.
Even carrying an extra bat could help as well.

Finally...

Like devilrage said, you either get rolls or you don't. Your team could be perfect for your park and have enough players to win games on the road BUT...if you don't get any rolls of the dice in your favor, you're screwed.


I had a Coors team recently that I thought could take the whole thing. The divisional parks were Fenway, aother Coors and a Turner. I had a Valentin/McCann platoon @ C, Kent @ 1B, Castillo @ 2B, Furcal @ SS and Cabrera @ 3B. My OF was Floyd, A. Jones and Abreu. Helms and Piedra were the DH's.

I went cheap with my SP's: Glavine, J. Johnson, Hampton, Sosa and Papelborn. Wood was there to spot start vs. the heavy right teams. My pen was deep with Heilman, Cotts, Hermanson, Geary and Sanchez.

My team ERA was 4.95 with a 1.57 WHIP. Decent ERA for Coors but a bit too high WHIP IMHO. I batted .274 as a team with an OBP of .347 and a slugging of .477.

This team went 17-4 the first week of the season and then 61-80 the rest of the season. I was amazed night after night watching this team lose 2 out of 3 or getting swept.

If the rolls don't come your way, you will lose.

[rgimbel]

yes if you played the same league 100 times the best team would end up with the best winning percentage lets say .567 that being said the range in his seasons could look like this

worst season 81-81
best season 103-59

the worst team could have a .407 winning perct with his range like this
worst season 57-105
best season 82-80

so there could be a season where the team that is put together best according to solicharos theories loses more games than the team that is totally put together wrong

a dice game

[geekor]

[quote:40ddd99c9a="Coffeeholic"][quote:40ddd99c9a="geekor"][quote:40ddd99c9a="tersignf"][i:40ddd99c9a] [b:40ddd99c9a]Again, comes down to knowing the cards, the game, and your opponents. There is no substitute[/b:40ddd99c9a][/i:40ddd99c9a].[/quote:40ddd99c9a]

haha I have indesputible evidence against that, but I'm not allowed to share it :oops: :roll: :cry:[/quote:40ddd99c9a]

What'cha talkin' 'bout Willis?[/quote:40ddd99c9a]

maybe my theoretical rant wasn't as theoretical as I claimed :P