Pick SPG Update - And Annoyance

by Killion on Jan 30, 2009 2:40 PM CST

So after last night's "game".. here is the leader board:

chrome	37 points
MikeVanAcker	34 points
Tobo	29 points
ChicoMaki	27 points
jfbrens	21 points
chinesebeatle	21 points
swenny916	17 points
martini	17 points
Donuts	16 points
delorean80	15 points

Chrome is still in the lead but others are close behind him. Here's the issue though... Lots of people just picking the Will Not Happen option for all penalties and goals. Which is fine for now, that's an option and most often it pays off pretty well. Lots of people do it.

Here's a problem though - it's boring as fuck.

It takes some of the fun out of the game in my opinion. Sure you're more likely to get a point picking WNH than actually getting the right player but it's the equivalent of always betting Red and never taking a chance on any of the more satisfying options. (Come on! Bet straight up!).

So I'd like to no longer accept points in our little contest that come from the Will Not Happen option.. but I want your opinion on it. Do you think we should only count points from actual players picked?

I just don't want to see everyone start betting this option and make the game monotonous. At least 7 people picked straight Will Not Happen for all goals last night. Lets make this a little more fun.

I won't take any points away from people so far but I'll leave this poll up for a week and let the results determine the game from here on out.

So we can contiue to count points from the WNH option, we can disallow them from now on or a third option is to allow players to pick WNH only once per game (that'll count for goals and shots). You decide:

Poll

What should we do with the "Will Not Happen" option in the SPG Contest?

Points count

2 votes

Points don't count

7 votes

Players can only pick it once per game

21 votes

30 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 6 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I agree

I’ve been putting WNH after seeing that that was how everyone else in the top spots were getting the points. And what do you know, now i’m in the top 10. I completely agree with not allowing the WNH points from here on out. I’m just picking it now to stay competitive. Just my opinion.

by delorean80 on Jan 30, 2009 3:07 PM CST reply actions

Yeah I agree with it too even though

that’s how I’ve stayed for so long.

Once I realized you got points for that, it became pointless to pick anything else.

It’s like if you played roulette with all bets paid equally. Would you pick 19 or Red?

I’d say let WNH count for a point for one period in penalties and goals. It’ll definitely make things more interesting, even if I lose my vaunted 3 point lead to some Corsi studying stathead.

by chrome on Jan 31, 2009 12:08 AM CST reply actions

So I wrote that without reading through the rest of your post.

And here I thought my roulette analogy was brilliant.

by chrome on Jan 31, 2009 12:11 AM CST up reply actions

Good call

I’d been selecting WNH, but switched for the Kings game, realizing I had to hit some luck and make a move, ‘cause gaining a tiny point at most every now and again wasn’t going to close the gap in time. Bad time to re-evaluate my risk-taking strategy.

Just to be clear, then: everyone has to have a minimum of 5 actual players chosen for penalties and goals in periods 1 to 3, leaving only one possible WNH choice? Does this new rule stay in effect for potential Overtimes and Shootouts, too?

by ChicoMaki on Jan 31, 2009 11:02 AM CST reply actions

What's the verdict

I also have been picking WNH, what have we decided on this? I don’t want to have points/goals disallowed like in the Sharks game…

by Illini08 on Feb 7, 2009 3:25 PM CST reply actions

I know I'm late to the game on this...

… but WNH has been a huge pain in the ass all season, not just for Hawks fans. I think I’m going to kill WNH altogether next season. Or perhaps for this year’s playoffs?

Pick SPG for your chance to win probably nothing.

by xiix on Feb 11, 2009 3:25 PM CST reply actions