Yes, with same round 1 draft order as before
Yes, with new randomized round 1 draft order
Yes, either way is fine
FWIW I picked Johnson simply on the basis that he was pretty good as of mid 2010. I didn't even know that the database was mid-2009 (cheers Marcuss )
Marcuss's argument was a good one and one that in my foolishness I didn't consider, and so if we don't do a restart I get Johnson and then hope against hope that he suddenly reverts to awesome-Mitch, so that's fine. The question is however whether we do a restart.
Last edited by Spark; 14-04-2011 at 06:39 AM.
'cause in a clearing when the sunlight comes
exposing all the shadows in our intricate behaviour
i feel a sort of fading
we build our own unfolding.
Just realised if we're keeping the same order then just let those who feel undone by the change in DB repick. Saves alot of time imo.
Also... how many rounds are we having now? I'd suggest an even number.
16 seems reasonable to me.
I mean, to add to the debate. It was obviously pretty cheap of me to pick Swann of all people because he's obviously a pretty gun player now - but what if Cevno wanted to pick Swann? Or what if Himannv wanted to pick him? Or what if Cevno suddenly decided that he wanted to pick Watson on the back of his absolutely gun form and the fact that there's no longer a pressing worry to get a good wicketkeeper in because they were in short supply in the previous database? (which could also apply to marc, too).
We got lucky with Trott because GIMH is so high up that it makes no difference, but imagine if he hadn't been picked until say, the 10th pick. People higher up would be pretty "huh?" about that.
It's not just as simple as "oh I ****ed up (which I did) because the system wasn't fair, so let's restart" - that ****up is now on record and I can't do anything about it now, but there is more to the story than that.
If people don't want a restart - then we don't restart. If people do want a restart - then we will restart. It's as simple as that, I'm not going to force my will unduly on anyone.
Again, we're not in a rush - the new database isn't even completed yet and won't be for some time - and if we do restart, we waste a day. Big whoop. If I'd waited a day we'd have done this right the first time anyway. I don't imagine the top four picks (assuming we keep the same order) will be rushing to change those so I think I can pencil (but not pen, obvs) those in, saving us time.
Last edited by Spark; 14-04-2011 at 06:53 AM.
We either restart or go from here with no picks changing IMO.
Personally I picked Prior under the assumption it was to mid-2010 not mid-2009 but would benefit from this change. At the end of the day though I think a restart is probably fairer, but move Spark to last in the order
Of course people need to factor in that PEWS is involved so all the picking is in effect irrelevant as the competition won't actually start.
marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!
Anyone want to join the Society?
Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.
Fine with moving myself to the end of the order FWIW
And a fine point you make re: PEWS...
Haha, will admit that the main reason I'm so against re-starting is because for once I got a good first round position and got my number 1 target.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)