So we've been having a lot of controversy over the rules change I made. The strategizing can be fun for some, but I am getting the impression that it is taking fun out and causing confusion for many.


One part of the confusion is when a guy goes "all in", he secures that guy to himself. If anyone else wants that person on their team, they can't really do it because should that driver win the race, they have no way of winning themselves.

Also, if another person wants to go "all in" wit hthe same picks someone else had, they can do it but they won't get credit for a victory. The reason is that the tie breaker rule, whcih was in effect last year when you had to have three separate picks, meant that whoever posted the picks first won the race and won the position. You still get the points for that guy, but you just dont' get credit for a win should you be in that position.

A lot of people are going "All in" because it seems to be the only way to win races. It hurt some people at Bristol, but three out of four races this year have been won by the "All in" rule.



But I want to consider keepign "double donw" and allow you to pick a guy twice, but have to have three picks. This would allow you to take that guy you really want twice, but then you could just pick a second driver to give your a team a little bit of a diversity.

For instance.

If someone picks

1) Dale Jr
2) Dale Jr
3) Kevin Harvick

You can pick

1) Dale Jr
2) Dale Jr
3) Tony Stewart


and just hope that Stewart finishes ahead of Harvick and Jr wins the race (which won't happen).


All in is just pissing people off though. No one got mad last year. And "all in" rule will most likely be dropped by Martinsville because I'm not going to let a rule that is not letting people have fun and enjoy the fantasy league stand any longer. The question though, is should we keep double down?

EDIT!!!!

WHAT IF WE JUST CHANGE THE TIE BREAKER RULE????

All we have to do is just change that rule. If all of your picks were the same and in the same order, then you share victory. If they were different picks and still tie, then we still go back to that first pick rule.

If it becomes a problem with copycats, then we will deal with that.

 

I say just leave it alone, yeah sure all in is prob what itll take to win races but u cant always go all in & expect to win a segment or the overall thing

 

I didn't think it would be a big factor at the start of the season. It has worked for some but there have been others that lost because of it. I'm fine with leaving it as is even tho i voted for the 2nd choice.

 

I think, and always have thought, that "all in" is a cheap way to get a win, win a segment or a championship. I still think it is the most effective way too. Ultimately, it is easier to pick 1 guy who will have a good day than it is to pick 3 guys - none of which can have a bad day.

You don't think "all in" can win a segment or a championship? Are you even keeping score? No one else has lead this thing yet this year and I've been "all in" everytime. If you don't want to change the rule than I will have my fun proving "all in" works. But I do find it more fun to pick 3. Every week, at home, I still actually pick 3 playing the game with my wife. Just for fun (which is all this should ever be). And I can tell you, straight up, that I wouldn't have won crap or been leading crap if my "home" picks were what counted here. Picking 3 is tough! But as long as "all in" exists, I will continue to use it. I don't want to loose to someone who is utilizing the rule and I think the game loses meaning if I'm not playing to win.

And I think it is only fair to let me win this segment before changing the rules. Otherwise it looks like we are changing the rule to stop me from winning and that hardly seems fair.

 

Want me to compile all my stats on Jr and how he falls apart in the summer every year and see how all that works out for you still?

You have your fun, I'll have mine.......... we'll see how it works... I do recall Brent telling us Junior would win the championship last year, and we see how that worked out,



Boy has this rule opened a can of worms!

 

Personally I'd rather get rid of All-In. It leaves almost no chance for people who play the game of picking 3 drivers win.

 

It does but it's just going to take the right way. I just don't think it is good points racing.


Brent up there is trying to back me into a corner. Since I made the rule, he has been telling me how bad the rule is. Now he is challenging me to leave it and he'll win the championship with it....

See, if I change the rule now, Brent is going to say I'm trying to screw him out of a championship. The reality is, he has been the biggest opponent until now


The tie breaker rule that everyone is freaking out about hasn't even had to be invoked yet for a win.

And while 03JGMonte walked away looking pretty good after going all in Keselowski, three guys got screwed over in that "big one" crash that took out Kyle Busch, Carl Edwards, and hurt Kevin Harvick.....

 

Leave it alone , I won Las Vegas picking three different drivers ..

 

Here's a new idea. Chaos erupted over the tie breaker rule. Just change the tie breaker rule. If you pick the same, you win the same. However, if the picks are different, we still go back to the old rule of breaking ties by going by whose first pick scored more points.




Share Victory. Share Defeat

 

I voted for 3 drivers 2011 rules. We have a member wanting a rule change but after this segment. Because it would benefit them better. Dont see how, but they think so. Not throwing any thing negative, I just dont understand how. I realy dont need an explanation either. Still. Going back to 2001 rules after this segment would not be all that bad. Rather it be after this week end. Easier on everybody at this point. Especialy for thoughs who don't visit the site that often. They could miss the change.