DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Administrator Announcements >> DPL Season 2
Pages:   ... ...
Showing posts 226 - 250 of 773, (reverse)
AuthorThread
04/08/2010 12:46:45 PM · #226
Originally posted by langdon:

Originally posted by neophyte:

I'd like to participate. How do I get on the list of Free agents?


You can head to the Free Agent Registration page, but you will likely fair better at this point by creating your own team and inviting users from the free agent pool. You can even invite some users, collectively come up with a name, and change it before the season goes live.


TY!
04/08/2010 12:52:21 PM · #227
I don't know what happened to the "quote" button, but based on the previous to last Langdon's post, maybe the best tweak option is to have divisions of 12 teams (two conferences of 6) and have the first 2 teams of each conference qualify for play-offs. That evens up everything and keeps the same schedule with any multiple of 12. This would also solve the "so close" issue mentioned by Wendy, since all 2nd's automatically classify for play offs.

Message edited by author 2010-04-08 12:54:41.
04/08/2010 01:28:49 PM · #228
maybe this has been answered before, but I am not quite clear on this rule:

4 - How does the scoring work?

There are two parts to this:

* Team Member Scores - Each week, there are two challenges - member (Sunday) and open (Tuesday), to which all (DPC member) team members can enter either or both. The 4 best scores from the best 4 team members are averaged together to make the Team Score for that week.
...


is it 4 best overall scores (which can be from 4, 3 or even 2 team members) or we need to identify 4 best members first (how? based on their best scores in that week?) and then take their best scores for the week?
04/08/2010 01:32:43 PM · #229
Originally posted by LevT:

maybe this has been answered before, but I am not quite clear on this rule:

4 - How does the scoring work?

There are two parts to this:

* Team Member Scores - Each week, there are two challenges - member (Sunday) and open (Tuesday), to which all (DPC member) team members can enter either or both. The 4 best scores from the best 4 team members are averaged together to make the Team Score for that week.
...


is it 4 best overall scores (which can be from 4, 3 or even 2 team members) or we need to identify 4 best members first (how? based on their best scores in that week?) and then take their best scores for the week?


and is it still top 4 even though we can have 10 on a team? Can we use top 5 instead so it's more representative of a team?
04/08/2010 01:33:33 PM · #230
Originally posted by LevT:

[i]4 - How does the scoring work?...

is it 4 best overall scores (which can be from 4, 3 or even 2 team members) or we need to identify 4 best members first (how? based on their best scores in that week?) and then take their best scores for the week?

The team score for each round will be the average of the top four scores from four different team members. In other words, a team member's top score is all that can be used in each round, even if a member has the two top scores in a round for the entire team.

ETA: And, in DPL, it will be the average of the top four percentiles, rather than scores.

Message edited by author 2010-04-08 13:40:00.
04/08/2010 01:38:35 PM · #231
Originally posted by LevT:

maybe this has been answered before, but I am not quite clear on this rule:

4 - How does the scoring work?

There are two parts to this:

* Team Member Scores - Each week, there are two challenges - member (Sunday) and open (Tuesday), to which all (DPC member) team members can enter either or both. The 4 best scores from the best 4 team members are averaged together to make the Team Score for that week.
...


is it 4 best overall scores (which can be from 4, 3 or even 2 team members) or we need to identify 4 best members first (how? based on their best scores in that week?) and then take their best scores for the week?


What I understand from the phrase "The 4 best scores from the best 4 team members" is the best 4 scores from 4 different team members, then, as you said: step1) identify 4 best members first based on their best scores; step 2) average those 4 best scores. Please correct me if I am wrong.
04/08/2010 01:41:36 PM · #232
Originally posted by hahn23:


ETA: And, in DPL, it will be the average of the top four percentiles, rather than scores.


Is this right? I thought the percentiles were going to be used for the seeding only.
04/08/2010 01:43:38 PM · #233
Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by hahn23:


ETA: And, in DPL, it will be the average of the top four percentiles, rather than scores.


Is this right? I thought the percentiles were going to be used for the seeding only.


From what I read, it's the percentiles. So a tougher challenge is scored evenly with the easier challenge. It makes them fair when compared challenge to challenge.\\

From the first post in this thread: "- Scoring will be based on percentiles "

Message edited by author 2010-04-08 13:44:25.
04/08/2010 01:51:27 PM · #234
Wow, glad to come back from lunch and find there are options to either postponing or limiting the teams to 24 or 48! Thank you Langdon and everyone.

04/08/2010 01:53:08 PM · #235
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by hahn23:


ETA: And, in DPL, it will be the average of the top four percentiles, rather than scores.


Is this right? I thought the percentiles were going to be used for the seeding only.


From what I read, it's the percentiles. So a tougher challenge is scored evenly with the easier challenge. It makes them fair when compared challenge to challenge.\\

From the first post in this thread: "- Scoring will be based on percentiles "


I'm curious on the percentiles... Does the SC have the exact percentiles with which to calculate? There could be issues with the rounding. For instance, in the orange challenge the 2nd and 3rd place winners are both showing a percentile of 99%. Yet the second place winner should be given a higher score than the third place winner.
04/08/2010 01:58:44 PM · #236
Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by hahn23:


ETA: And, in DPL, it will be the average of the top four percentiles, rather than scores.


Is this right? I thought the percentiles were going to be used for the seeding only.


From what I read, it's the percentiles. So a tougher challenge is scored evenly with the easier challenge. It makes them fair when compared challenge to challenge.\\

From the first post in this thread: "- Scoring will be based on percentiles "


I'm curious on the percentiles... Does the SC have the exact percentiles with which to calculate? There could be issues with the rounding. For instance, in the orange challenge the 2nd and 3rd place winners are both showing a percentile of 99%. Yet the second place winner should be given a higher score than the third place winner.


I don't think it matters really. That would only be one of the four scores calculated.

To matter each team facing off would have to tie on all four percentiles. It's no different than if you had a 99% in one challenge and an opponent had 99% in another challenge. Just because they are in the same challenge doesn't affect anything.

So Team A's top four is: 99, 75, 66, 65 for an average of 76.25.
Team B's top four is: 99, 80, 57, 57 for an average of 73.25.

The fact that each team had a 99 or team B had a 57 on two different challenges (or the same) does not really matter.
04/08/2010 01:59:59 PM · #237
You guys are doing way to much math for my blood....and I'm an engineer....I leave all that math stuff to the Langdon and his merry band of SC.
04/08/2010 02:05:53 PM · #238
Originally posted by vawendy:



and is it still top 4 even though we can have 10 on a team? Can we use top 5 instead so it's more representative of a team?


That is a very interesting point Wendy. But I suppose they are keeping it at top 4 because the team score is calculated from 4 different members. Considering the number of members could be as low as 7, it makes sense to take provision for lack of entries from 3 members.
04/08/2010 02:09:29 PM · #239
Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by vawendy:



and is it still top 4 even though we can have 10 on a team? Can we use top 5 instead so it's more representative of a team?


That is a very interesting point Wendy. But I suppose they are keeping it at top 4 because the team score is calculated from 4 different members. Considering the number of members could be as low as 7, it makes sense to take provision for lack of entries from 3 members.


Still, nobody is forcing a team to be only 7. I think we are going to find that in a large # of weeks the same 4 members' entries will count on most teams week in and week out. This makes the other 6 feel like they are less on the team and also makes it easier to "stack" a team (a la Ribbon Hogs).

If there is still time to change I propose actually top SIX scores. Teams with only 7 members should think about adding more members.
04/08/2010 02:10:04 PM · #240
Originally posted by vawendy:

I'm curious on the percentiles... Does the SC have the exact percentiles with which to calculate? There could be issues with the rounding. For instance, in the orange challenge the 2nd and 3rd place winners are both showing a percentile of 99%. Yet the second place winner should be given a higher score than the third place winner.

The DPL will be using 4 decimal places to calculate percentiles, so 2nd and 3rd place would be 99.9942% and 99.9884%.
04/08/2010 02:10:08 PM · #241
Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by vawendy:


and is it still top 4 even though we can have 10 on a team? Can we use top 5 instead so it's more representative of a team?

That is a very interesting point Wendy. But I suppose they are keeping it at top 4 because the team score is calculated from 4 different members. Considering the number of members could be as low as 7, it makes sense to take provision for lack of entries from 3 members.

I'm surprised at this also...thought the increase in team members would bump up the number of scores counted to 5 or 6. Wasn't there a conversation regarding this aspect at some point when DPL 2 was being discussed?
04/08/2010 02:10:34 PM · #242
Originally posted by langdon:

Originally posted by vawendy:

I'm curious on the percentiles... Does the SC have the exact percentiles with which to calculate? There could be issues with the rounding. For instance, in the orange challenge the 2nd and 3rd place winners are both showing a percentile of 99%. Yet the second place winner should be given a higher score than the third place winner.

The DPL will be using 4 decimal places to calculate percentiles, so 2nd and 3rd place would be 99.9942% and 99.9884%.


Thanks! I figured that must be the case, but I was curious.
04/08/2010 02:11:13 PM · #243
The Free Study entries are NOT counted in the DPL2 correct?
04/08/2010 02:12:19 PM · #244
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by vawendy:



and is it still top 4 even though we can have 10 on a team? Can we use top 5 instead so it's more representative of a team?


That is a very interesting point Wendy. But I suppose they are keeping it at top 4 because the team score is calculated from 4 different members. Considering the number of members could be as low as 7, it makes sense to take provision for lack of entries from 3 members.


Still, nobody is forcing a team to be only 7. I think we are going to find that in a large # of weeks the same 4 members' entries will count on most teams week in and week out. This makes the other 6 feel like they are less on the team and also makes it easier to "stack" a team (a la Ribbon Hogs).

If there is still time to change I propose actually top SIX scores. Teams with only 7 members should think about adding more members.


agreed on both counts
04/08/2010 02:13:02 PM · #245
Originally posted by Dirt_Diver:

The Free Study entries are NOT counted in the DPL2 correct?


Not according to the FAQ. Member (Sunday) and open (Tuesday) are the only ones mentioned in the answer to the scoring question.

Message edited by author 2010-04-08 14:13:43.
04/08/2010 02:18:37 PM · #246
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by vawendy:



and is it still top 4 even though we can have 10 on a team? Can we use top 5 instead so it's more representative of a team?


That is a very interesting point Wendy. But I suppose they are keeping it at top 4 because the team score is calculated from 4 different members. Considering the number of members could be as low as 7, it makes sense to take provision for lack of entries from 3 members.


Still, nobody is forcing a team to be only 7. I think we are going to find that in a large # of weeks the same 4 members' entries will count on most teams week in and week out. This makes the other 6 feel like they are less on the team and also makes it easier to "stack" a team (a la Ribbon Hogs).

If there is still time to change I propose actually top SIX scores. Teams with only 7 members should think about adding more members.


I fully agree with the concept. A good compromise would be, provided all teams end up with 9+ members, to take top five, thus leaving provision for up to 4 non participants in a given week. I am afraid top 6 could cause many zero's being averaged.
04/08/2010 02:21:00 PM · #247
Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by vawendy:



and is it still top 4 even though we can have 10 on a team? Can we use top 5 instead so it's more representative of a team?


That is a very interesting point Wendy. But I suppose they are keeping it at top 4 because the team score is calculated from 4 different members. Considering the number of members could be as low as 7, it makes sense to take provision for lack of entries from 3 members.


Still, nobody is forcing a team to be only 7. I think we are going to find that in a large # of weeks the same 4 members' entries will count on most teams week in and week out. This makes the other 6 feel like they are less on the team and also makes it easier to "stack" a team (a la Ribbon Hogs).

If there is still time to change I propose actually top SIX scores. Teams with only 7 members should think about adding more members.


I fully agree with the concept. A good compromise would be, provided all teams end up with 9+ members, to take top five, thus leaving provision for up to 4 non participants in a given week. I am afraid top 6 could cause many zero's being averaged.


If we do stick with the top 4 I think an additional criteria should be added. Since the overall team average percentage can't exceed a certain number then the average of the 4 scorers shouldn't be allowed to exceed that average either. Why have a team of 10 if only a minority of the scores count. 6/10 would be my preference. This would encourage participation which is why we're doing this anyway, right?

Message edited by author 2010-04-08 14:23:45.
04/08/2010 02:24:49 PM · #248
I'm pretty sure that the scoring system is already set up and Langdon doesn't have any intention on changing it. After all, the challenges start next week.


04/08/2010 02:25:57 PM · #249
Originally posted by cpanaioti:

Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by vawendy:



and is it still top 4 even though we can have 10 on a team? Can we use top 5 instead so it's more representative of a team?


That is a very interesting point Wendy. But I suppose they are keeping it at top 4 because the team score is calculated from 4 different members. Considering the number of members could be as low as 7, it makes sense to take provision for lack of entries from 3 members.


Still, nobody is forcing a team to be only 7. I think we are going to find that in a large # of weeks the same 4 members' entries will count on most teams week in and week out. This makes the other 6 feel like they are less on the team and also makes it easier to "stack" a team (a la Ribbon Hogs).

If there is still time to change I propose actually top SIX scores. Teams with only 7 members should think about adding more members.


I fully agree with the concept. A good compromise would be, provided all teams end up with 9+ members, to take top five, thus leaving provision for up to 4 non participants in a given week. I am afraid top 6 could cause many zero's being averaged.


If we do stick with the top 4 I think an additional criteria should be added. Since the overall team average percentage can't exceed a certain number then the average of the 4 scorers shouldn't be allowed to exceed that average either.


That defeats the purpose of a competition if you limit what the team can score in that competition. If you want more people's scores to count, it would probably change things up too much, but you could make the teams pick which 4 shots will be competing for the first challenge of the week, and for the second challenge you have to pick a different 4.
04/08/2010 02:26:04 PM · #250
Originally posted by Dirt_Diver:

I'm pretty sure that the scoring system is already set up and Langdon doesn't have any intention on changing it. After all, the challenges start next week.


So much for encouraging participation.
Pages:   ... ...
Current Server Time: 11/26/2020 06:59:33 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 11/26/2020 06:59:33 PM EST.