Prediction Competition - January 2022
Dec 31, 2021 17:45:23 GMT
finsobruce and yellowperil like this
Post by robbienicoll on Dec 31, 2021 17:45:23 GMT
Happy new year to everyone! Before I post the monthly spiel, in the spirit of the occasion I’ve outlined a few rules changes below (based on my own feelings and feedback) which will start as of 2022. All new entrants and returnees are most welcome to join for a resolution you’ll enjoy keeping!
1. Regarding inputting an entry that predicts a phantom party, the process of removing that prediction and then attributing faults based on how short the calculation falls of 100 remains but will be capped at 20. This does not include the extra 10 for an incorrect winner, or the faults scored from the other parties/individuals who are in the contest. This should mean that those making a relatively minor mistake aren’t completely disadvantaged for the monthly competition, though still take care!
2. Capping at 100, which was a suggestion from Greenhert. I seem to remember the original change to scrap this had been made after a series of horrendous results in early 2018, because most entrants would have been tied despite having wildly different attempts. However, I’m also aware that penalising entrants for an attempt higher than those who did not is unfair. I’m therefore going to re-introduce a 100-fault cap unless in the event of 50% of entries scoring over 100. I’ll keep this on my radar and see if improvements can be made.
3. For the exceptionally rare occasion where there is a tie in weeks or months, there will be a tiebreaker by the number of individual contest prediction winners (for that week or month respectively).
4. Greenhert also suggested that in voided contests (such as Pleck in December) the equivalent competition should also be voided. I’m of the view that if the by-election happened and happened fairly then it’s fair game for the competition, so I’m keeping this one as is.
Feedback welcome as always.
1. Regarding inputting an entry that predicts a phantom party, the process of removing that prediction and then attributing faults based on how short the calculation falls of 100 remains but will be capped at 20. This does not include the extra 10 for an incorrect winner, or the faults scored from the other parties/individuals who are in the contest. This should mean that those making a relatively minor mistake aren’t completely disadvantaged for the monthly competition, though still take care!
2. Capping at 100, which was a suggestion from Greenhert. I seem to remember the original change to scrap this had been made after a series of horrendous results in early 2018, because most entrants would have been tied despite having wildly different attempts. However, I’m also aware that penalising entrants for an attempt higher than those who did not is unfair. I’m therefore going to re-introduce a 100-fault cap unless in the event of 50% of entries scoring over 100. I’ll keep this on my radar and see if improvements can be made.
3. For the exceptionally rare occasion where there is a tie in weeks or months, there will be a tiebreaker by the number of individual contest prediction winners (for that week or month respectively).
4. Greenhert also suggested that in voided contests (such as Pleck in December) the equivalent competition should also be voided. I’m of the view that if the by-election happened and happened fairly then it’s fair game for the competition, so I’m keeping this one as is.
Feedback welcome as always.
