LogFAQs > #949503589

Congrats to all those who advanced! I'm happy to just watch the divisional round with no stake in who wins. Hooray, neutrality!

Since I missed the tiebreaker discussion in the last topic, here's my 2 cents:

I thought the tiebreakers were fine, and I don't think TB1 read at all as if the second closest would be correct if no one got the closest. In my mind, nobody getting TB1 right just means we all 'tied' at getting that tiebreaker wrong, so it moves onto the next tiebreaker.

I think the important thing is to have TBs that "increase in scope", if you will, so that the set of possible answers to the TB questions gets bigger as you go further down. I assumed that was why you picked what you did for TB3 - because while, yes, it was technically possible to tie that one as well, picking a single number out of hundreds of possibilities (let's say, 80-300+ yards) is nigh-impossible to tie compared to, effectively, picking a single number out of 6 (which of the 6 games will have the greatest margin) or out of 12 (which of the 12 teams has the highest rush yards).

If there was a mistake, it may just have been doing 2 "team-scope" TBs for the both TB1 and TB2. I like having TB1 be team-based as it fits with the competition the rest of the year, but perhaps TB2 should then be player-based, so that there are maybe 20-30 different options (how many players in all games combined will have at least 40 rec yards? etc.), and then TB3 is yards-based, so there are hundreds of different options.

The other key thing to note is whether the chosen TBs are discrete or relative. Discrete ones, like picking the teams, can just be "right" or "wrong". But relative TBs, like the yards guesses, can be compared by distance from the correct answer. Maybe TBs 2 and 3 should be relative ones, to reduce the possibility of a tie all the way down.

---

- TKS -
The Witness