BigFooty Fantasy Tennis League

[SELFCONFESDAFLNERD]

My team

 

[Wolfs]

My team

 

[X_box_X]

 

[Amazing Bombers]

 

[BobbyMorri]

Happy with how the first day went. Kanepi and Bencic both beat their seeds so they could do a nice big deep run. Krunic was my only loss.

I seem to have a lot more depth than anyone else's squad. mainly because i dont have a Nadal or a Fed. So I am really relying on Svitolina to do well so I don't fall too far behind.

Hopefully I dont put the Grand Slam champion on the bench like i did for the French Open last year.

 

[Wolfs]

I should probably join the league but w/e

 

[Aussie_boy]

Have no idea if this team is any good or not but it can't be that bad can it.

 

[pepsi]

Can we stop our league now? I've somehow nabbed top spot after day 2.

 

[X_box_X]

I don't like the way Fantasy Tennis doesn't compensate you if your player wins because your opponent retires mid-match. I have Busta in my team and he goes through because his opponent retired three games into the second set. You get points for aces, total games won, and straight sets victories - I miss out on those points now.

 

[BobbyMorri]

I don't like the way Fantasy Tennis doesn't compensate you if your player wins because your opponent retires mid-match. I have Busta in my team and he goes through because his opponent retired three games into the second set. You get points for aces, total games won, and straight sets victories - I miss out on those points now.

The reward is another match to get those things i guess.

The funny thing is that you get rewarded for longer matches rather than short ones. So Svitolina 3 set match has been more helpful to me than a straight set 6-0 6-0 win. If i read the points system right.

 

[X_box_X]

The reward is another match to get those things.

That is a very naive way of looking at things. You're not going to win the competition by advancing through the rounds because your opponent keeps retiring.

 

[SELFCONFESDAFLNERD]

I don't like the way Fantasy Tennis doesn't compensate you if your player wins because your opponent retires mid-match. I have Busta in my team and he goes through because his opponent retired three games into the second set. You get points for aces, total games won, and straight sets victories - I miss out on those points now.

I understand the scoring system is far from perfect and your argument about missing points is valid but I really don't know what the solution is. Scaling points based on how far into the match the withdrawal occurred is the only solution I can think of and that has its issues because it requires lots of assumptions. Do you have any ideas how they could improve the system?

 

[JackNah_8]

I'm glad I didn't pick Konta

 

[X_box_X]

I understand the scoring system is far from perfect and your argument about missing points is valid but I really don't know what the solution is. Scaling points based on how far into the match the withdrawal occurred is the only solution I can think of and that has its issues because it requires lots of assumptions. Do you have any ideas how they could improve the system?

You have 16 players in total. There's no need to name any players on the court. Simply your eight highest scorers should be the only ones that contribute towards your overall score.

Again, it's not perfect.

Either that, or at least give a player who wins via a retirement the minimum points. They have won the game, so they should at least be given points as though they have won the minimum 18 games (for men) or 12 games (for women), unless of course those players have already won more games than that, then they should receive the minimum points necessary to give them full points for a victory.

I.e. A player who wins via retirement with the following scoreline:
6-4, 6-2, 5-7, 3-6, 1-0*

They have won a total of 21 games prior to their opponent retiring. They require another 5 games minimum to be won - at least give that player extra points for those five extra games. Afterall, a retiring is an official victory, so why can't they officially award points for having won an extra five games?

 

[SELFCONFESDAFLNERD]

You have 16 players in total. There's no need to name any players on the court. Simply your eight highest scorers should be the only ones that contribute towards your overall score.

Again, it's not perfect.

I actually like the idea that you need to choose who you think your best 8 scorers will be. It adds an element of strategy as theoretically you can gain more points by doing more research on H2Hs etc. That said, it also requires more luck which is obviously the negative. All fantasy games I've played have both starting positions and bench positions so I'm used to it but that's not an argument for/against it.

Either that, or at least give a player who wins via a retirement the minimum points. They have won the game, so they should at least be given points as though they have won the minimum 18 games (for men) or 12 games (for women), unless of course those players have already won more games than that, then they should receive the minimum points necessary to give them full points for a victory.

I.e. A player who wins via retirement with the following scoreline:
6-4, 6-2, 5-7, 3-6, 1-0*

They have won a total of 21 games prior to their opponent retiring. They require another 5 games minimum to be won - at least give that player extra points for those five extra games. Afterall, a retiring is an official victory, so why can't they officially award points for having won an extra five games?

I do like your idea but to play devil's advocate, and to use your example, how do you know how many of those 5 games will be won on serve and how many on breaks? Also, as BobbyMorri said, part of the reward is that the player moves onto the next round and while I agree that should not be the only advantage - it should be reflected in the points too - it should be given some weight. For instance, what if a male player was up 6-4, 6-2 , 5-2* and then retired hurt? Should their opponent be given all the points for winning the 5 games in the 3rd set and the points for the next 2 sets as well? I'd argue they probably shouldn't. My point is that no matter what you implement there will still be significant issues.

As a final comment I agree that something should be set in place but I have no idea what that should be. I have thought about it and have a couple more ideas but ill leave it at that because none of them are perfect.

 

[Amazing Bombers]

Happy with Karlovic, only owned by 3.3% of teams as well.

 

[BobbyMorri]

Good news.

I am leading atm

Bad news.

I will have lost 4 of my players by tomorrow, including a 20% player. So i wont stay top of the league for long.

 

[SELFCONFESDAFLNERD]

With Bencic & Gasparyan withdrawing from next rounds matches I'm going to struggle big time. After trades I'll only have 4/8 players competing I think I made major errors with my starting team and will likely trade as hard as possible early to attempt to rectify them

 

[Amazing Bombers]

With Bencic & Gasparyan withdrawing from next rounds matches I'm going to struggle big time. After trades I'll only have 4/8 players competing I think I made major errors with my starting team and will likely trade as hard as possible early to attempt to rectify them

Same here, hopefully doesn't hurt us too much.

 

[Gee Dub]

The good news is that I seemed to have nailed a speculative bargain selection in Tennys Sandgren. The bad news is that he is sitting on my bench. I guess I wasn't to know a bloke who had only won 2 games in his whole life would explode at the AO but I can still complain right?

 

[JackNah_8]

The good news is that I seemed to have nailed a speculative bargain selection in Tennys Sandgren. The bad news is that he is sitting on my bench. I guess I wasn't to know a bloke who had only won 2 games in his whole life would explode at the AO but I can still complain right?

wow you picked Tennys! What a great pick up, I have never heard of this guy.

 

[Gee Dub]

wow you picked Tennys! What a great pick up, I have never heard of this guy.

I actually thought he was a lot younger than what he is. For some reason thought he was a young up and comer rather than a 26 year old battler. Was banking on some Americans getting wildcard during the American hardcourt swing so picked up him and Smyczek.

 

[Wolfs]

I have Nadal, Kerber and Berdych still going. The latter two are key players and the former is captain.

I had Fucsovics on the bench as well as Marterer

 

[EFL Boy]

I have Nadal, Kerber and Berdych still going. The latter two are key players and the former is captain.

I had Fucsovics on the bench as well as Marterer

Great selection re Berdych. Real POD & I considered him a tad, just looked elsewhere in the end.

I've got remaining....

Nadal (c)
Grigor (20%)
Svitolina (20%)
Angie

Frustratingly I've had a couple players pull out of week 2 so had to use all my trades this week.

 

[Wolfs]

Great selection re Berdych. Real POD & I considered him a tad, just looked elsewhere in the end.

I've got remaining....

Nadal (c)
Grigor (20%)
Svitolina (20%)
Angie

Frustratingly I've had a couple players pull out of week 2 so had to use all my trades this week.

Had him in my normal players but since he's my fav men's player, I was biased lol. Great that it worked out.