Fantasy Disc Golf – The 2012 Season **Official Thread**

[Brall]

Originally Posted by Avus

Thanks brall for running this.

you're welcome and thanks to everyone for taking it easy on me.

i've never ran anything in my life except quickly from angry dogs.

p.s. i realize that the disclaimer quote in my last post directs you to the wrong league but you get my drift

[Avus]

This was my first fantasy anything so I didn't really know how it was going to work out.


For those guys sending me discs

I will be out of town starting June 30th-July8th so don't worry about getting anything out fast. I move right before I leave and I would hate for discs to get lost by waiting in the mail box too long.

[jcrab66]

if i would of gotten in before the memorial i woulda had a really good shot at cashing in this!

[turbosteve]

How do you ship a package internationally?

[JSurmann]

Originally Posted by stevetclark

How do you ship a package internationally?

You put an international address on it....or you can just buy something in that persons country and have it shipped directly to them.

[biscoe]

Originally Posted by harr0140

I would say MPO only, its not like we play fantasy AAA baseball.
If you want women in the event, then cut it fromt he 100 points ssytem to people beat instead.

Regardless I like the people beat option for MPO better than 100 points because every tourney is not weighted the same then. It all comes down to how many people are at each tournament.

i agree with MPO only.

i strongly disagree with people beaten though- that will make the whole thing about worlds. if it's possible to use the 100 point base and double weight USDGC and worlds that would be my preference.

thanks Brall!

[harr0140]

Originally Posted by biscoe

i agree with MPO only.

i strongly disagree with people beaten though- that will make the whole thing about worlds. if it's possible to use the 100 point base and double weight USDGC and worlds that would be my preference.

thanks Brall!

Shouldn't the biggest event of the year be worth the most points?

I guess I can see your point but maybe the way to do it would be to limit the salary caps more so that you need to reach deep from some picks maybe. I don't enjoy picking the same top pros every week. I would like to get down into some of those 1000 rated players or guys on the verge of breaking out.

Like last year i picked wysocki early and rode his ratings bumps for a bunch of tourneys!

Ill play no matter what way the rules get decided, its fun either way, but making the FPO count equally the same as MPO is not right considering anyone can decide between 5 ladies and not miss out on many points. The only people hurt are the ones who end up with noshows. I would have been in 2nd if I didnt pick blair, fortunately a lot of others picked her too.

[biscoe]

getting rid of the women and setting a cap of something like 1020-1025 per player will force people to do some thinking about their mpo picks- the fact that you could basically pick the last place woman each week and have lots of ratings points left over for mpo made it too easy to just take the top dogs last season.

[harr0140]

Originally Posted by biscoe

getting rid of the women and setting a cap of something like 1020-1025 per player will force people to do some thinking about their mpo picks- the fact that you could basically pick the last place woman each week and have lots of ratings points left over for mpo made it too easy to just take the top dogs last season.

Agreed. That is what I did, and int he final event it cost me but only because of a noshow.

In the tournament earnings format the loophole is that you only want to select the 4 best players and leave one spot open, you can then still have a top notch sub in case one of your picks doesnt show, but typically the top pros are the only ones cashing, so if you were to water down your picks by dropping the ratings down, you end up winning less overall. I hope that disappears in whatever league that was an issue.

[bneely]

Thanks Brall for running the league. See y'all next tour!