The big surprising upset for me was beating Lucky to get to the finals (nothing against stevep who managed his team flawlessly) but if memory serevs me well Lucky had a killer rotation and I never thought I'd get past him to get to the finals with the starters he threw every game.
...good memories indeed :)
C2
PC Tour History
28 posts
• Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
by edgecitytx » Tue Jan 27, 2009 10:52 am
Lucky, how wonderful to hear from you! My wife and I are fine, thanks so much for asking! Things are great here in Austin, how about the frozen North? I'm still at the same email address if you ever have time to drop me a line.
I'm still playing 20-25 teams a year, just don't put as much time into it as I used to, so I do all right, but nothing more. Still using the tricks you and Qk taught me, though.
We all miss you and people still quote your expertise all the time. The Legendary Luckyman!
I think I won that first tour because my spot starters confused your simulations. Do you remember making fun of all the starters I had?
Take care, friend. Always good to see you here.
edge
I'm still playing 20-25 teams a year, just don't put as much time into it as I used to, so I do all right, but nothing more. Still using the tricks you and Qk taught me, though.
We all miss you and people still quote your expertise all the time. The Legendary Luckyman!
I think I won that first tour because my spot starters confused your simulations. Do you remember making fun of all the starters I had?
Take care, friend. Always good to see you here.
edge
- edgecitytx
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by MARCPELLETIER » Tue Jan 27, 2009 5:21 pm
Actually, I liked some of your SPs tremendously. Graves, who was your #1, was perhaps my favorite pitcher in that year-set.
What I didn't like from your team, I seem to remember, was your roster having 27-28 players. In those days, I swore only to minimal rosters...23 players, if I remember well those days. So it appeared to me back then that you were wasting some 3M in dead water. 6 wins, as I would have thought in those days.
But, no wonder in part because of your team, I came to appreciate over time the contribution of having a plentiful bench. Not least: it prevents Hal from making the stupidiest decisions.
Cummings, I probably have the worst playoff record of all-time...8 games under .500...so I was decidedly an underachiever in playoff times...
I don't play anymore. I come once a while in this time of year to see who are the new kings...but seems like they haven't started the final tour...geeee.
See ya folks!!
What I didn't like from your team, I seem to remember, was your roster having 27-28 players. In those days, I swore only to minimal rosters...23 players, if I remember well those days. So it appeared to me back then that you were wasting some 3M in dead water. 6 wins, as I would have thought in those days.
But, no wonder in part because of your team, I came to appreciate over time the contribution of having a plentiful bench. Not least: it prevents Hal from making the stupidiest decisions.
Cummings, I probably have the worst playoff record of all-time...8 games under .500...so I was decidedly an underachiever in playoff times...
I don't play anymore. I come once a while in this time of year to see who are the new kings...but seems like they haven't started the final tour...geeee.
See ya folks!!
- MARCPELLETIER
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by the splinter » Thu Feb 12, 2009 9:23 am
wow! The legend lives! good to see your posts again marcus...please come back and help elevate the level of play for all of us.
- the splinter
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by cristano11 » Sat Mar 07, 2009 12:40 am
i cant believe that hal allowed miggies niggies miggies niggies dos and miggies niggies numero tres to all go thru as team names unblocked... those were the days... it took up to numero quatro to finally catch on and block spicki from using it...
- cristano11
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
Re: Tour History
by uncle ny » Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:11 pm
[quote:ddb0f66975="mesquiton"]
One Tour is too small a statistical sample for reliable conclusions about true relative skill (vs. luck), regardless of format. Results over 3 Tours are still too small a sample for big conclusions, especially with so many missing scores and different managers, but comparisons have at least a little bit more statistical validity among those 6 former finalists with scores available for all 3 Tours.
They rank (among themselves) as follows:
[b:ddb0f66975]1. uncle ny[/b:ddb0f66975] (10.7 avg rank, 2 finals, one Tour Champ)
[b:ddb0f66975]2. cristano1[/b:ddb0f66975] (11.0 avg rank, 2 finals, no Tour Champs)
[b:ddb0f66975]3. spicki17[/b:ddb0f66975] (16.7 avg rank, 2 finals, no Tour Champs)
[b:ddb0f66975]4. hendrix08[/b:ddb0f66975] (23.7 avg rank, 1 final, no Tour Champs)
[b:ddb0f66975]5. Detroit-Tigers[/b:ddb0f66975] (26.3 avg rank, 1 final, no Tour Champs)
[b:ddb0f66975]6. Coffeeholic[/b:ddb0f66975] (35.3 avg rank, 1 final, no Tour Champs)[/quote:ddb0f66975]
I disagree. I think your chart above has a helluva lot of statistical validity!
Let's play ball!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :P :lol: 8-) :D :) :shock:
One Tour is too small a statistical sample for reliable conclusions about true relative skill (vs. luck), regardless of format. Results over 3 Tours are still too small a sample for big conclusions, especially with so many missing scores and different managers, but comparisons have at least a little bit more statistical validity among those 6 former finalists with scores available for all 3 Tours.
They rank (among themselves) as follows:
[b:ddb0f66975]1. uncle ny[/b:ddb0f66975] (10.7 avg rank, 2 finals, one Tour Champ)
[b:ddb0f66975]2. cristano1[/b:ddb0f66975] (11.0 avg rank, 2 finals, no Tour Champs)
[b:ddb0f66975]3. spicki17[/b:ddb0f66975] (16.7 avg rank, 2 finals, no Tour Champs)
[b:ddb0f66975]4. hendrix08[/b:ddb0f66975] (23.7 avg rank, 1 final, no Tour Champs)
[b:ddb0f66975]5. Detroit-Tigers[/b:ddb0f66975] (26.3 avg rank, 1 final, no Tour Champs)
[b:ddb0f66975]6. Coffeeholic[/b:ddb0f66975] (35.3 avg rank, 1 final, no Tour Champs)[/quote:ddb0f66975]
I disagree. I think your chart above has a helluva lot of statistical validity!
Let's play ball!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :P :lol: 8-) :D :) :shock:
- uncle ny
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by maligned » Tue Oct 20, 2009 4:45 am
Interesting that advancement through the semifinal round seems to require a lot of luck. Last year, 1/3 of the regular season Top 12 advanced to the finals, then 1/3 of the 13-24 finishers, then 1/3 of the 25/36 finishers.
Could determination of the finals somehow be a synthesis of regular season and semi-final results? It appears this year that nearly half of the eligible participants are given semifinal positions. This seems like a bit much. Some of the past finals years, the finalists almost all had career winning % of .530 or higher. This makes for a very strong finals.
The drama of the semifinals allows more owners to stay engaged longer, but perhaps a regular season #36 finisher should have to have a very special performance to move into the final 12.
Great thread, by the way.
Could determination of the finals somehow be a synthesis of regular season and semi-final results? It appears this year that nearly half of the eligible participants are given semifinal positions. This seems like a bit much. Some of the past finals years, the finalists almost all had career winning % of .530 or higher. This makes for a very strong finals.
The drama of the semifinals allows more owners to stay engaged longer, but perhaps a regular season #36 finisher should have to have a very special performance to move into the final 12.
Great thread, by the way.
- maligned
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
28 posts
• Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Return to --- Player's Championship
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest