Originally posted by DigiMark007
We should really just work the polls into the matches themselves. This is Way too many threads pinned at the top right now.I think he means for the losers, to determine who gets to battle again....not an actual tiebreak for the matches themselves.
With 4 judges per match there could still be a tie.
I think we should only have 3 judges (like in Boxing). That way there's no way for a tie.
i never understood the even number of judges either, but i wanted to know what the tie-breaker was. it REALLY shouldn't be the polls because we have absolutely no idea whether voters even bothered to read ANY of the posts in the fights. i lost polls last tournament too, but won the match. they are simply too arbitrary and easily skewed.
Originally posted by illadelph12
With 4 judges per match there could still be a tie.I think we should only have 3 judges (like in Boxing). That way there's no way for a tie.
I'd prefer to increase to 5 rather than decrease to 3 ... less responsibility on any individual judge ... the judges should also PM there votes and reasons to DG and have him post them all at the same time.
And not bad Roldz.
🙂
Ok, This is why polls are a bad idea for deciding the outcome of the matches:
Originally posted by Neo2000
Entity wisn because of Sabretooth. Healing factor is one of the most effective things you can have in comicdom.
Guy probably hasn't read the thread (and is probably the Judge) he just wanders in, reads the character names and then posts.
😬
Not saying I don't think Entity can win, but if he does it isn't simply because he drafted Sabretooth.
Polls are bad for deciding the outcome of the match. Case in point:
Originally posted by Neo2000
Entity wisn because of Sabretooth. Healing factor is one of the most effective things you can have in comicdom.
No offense to this poster, but this explanation of his reasoning is 'lacking' to say the least.
Also, polls can be corrupted. All it takes is some spare time and a few extra accounts and you can sway the poll. That's why I don't feel the poll should have any bearing on the winner or loser, just the point system towards a loser's ability to move on to round 2.
Originally posted by Scoobless
I'd prefer to increase to 5 rather than decrease to 3 ... less responsibility on any individual judge ... the judges should also PM there votes and reasons to DG and have him post them all at the same time.And not bad Roldz.
🙂
I think 3 judges is better. With 5 judges it's more likely to have the old vote in proxy decision (i.e., the patented "I'm to busy to read everything over myself so I side with the majority of the other judges). The more judges per battle the more time conflicts and schedules you have to deal with. 3 is a perfect number. No chance for a draw and a small enough contingent so the process doesn't get dragged out too long.
Originally posted by illadelph12
I think 3 judges is better. With 5 judges it's more likely to have the old vote in proxy decision (i.e., the patented "I'm to busy to read everything over myself so I side with the majority of the other judges). The more judges per battle the more time conflicts and schedules you have to deal with. 3 is a perfect number. No chance for a draw and a small enough contingent so the process doesn't get dragged out too long.
Agree with this. 🙂
