fantasy football.... is there any better online games right now?

I thought it meant ffbsensei.

In ELO system, incentives to play at high table is to keep your ELO points or is it because it is the only way to move up or both?

might be dumb but what is the point of a tanking session?

What is funny is that, looking at the site traffic (let democracy be the judge for once), ELO looked at a better system than the current one. So I do not believe that it is the $150 a month that Ryan makes that motivates him to keep it that way... Must be the drug.

hard to find an intuitive way to explain elo but basically, the lower the elo of your opponents, the more points you risk losing + the less points you can win.

It's a bit like going out with poor friends: if you want to have a few beers, you'll probably have to pay a few more rounds compared to the others to enjoy yourself.

If you go out with a bunch of rich and spoiled brats, you can probably get as many drinks without paying so many rounds yourself. Of course they would all want to go to a more expensive bar so this example sucks big time :)

About the tanking. Sometimes it was done just to funnel to other people like nowadays (donating some elo towards players trying for podium). But there was also a phoenix game: get as low as possible in elo and try and climb the ranks again (including trying to close the 200 or 300 point gaps in table limits).

As far as traffic is concerned: hard to judge the best system based on that. Traffic went down because of a combination of factors.

slightly off but your points gained and your rank are tied together, IE if you're number one ELO and you sit a game, you are EXPECTED to win, so the difference with winning that game is your gain +1 ELO, and your score increase might be nominal +lower number,, ,but a +1 to ELO score is HUGE, considering the 2nd place person, if they won a game, and remained in 2nd place (has to be a different game not the one the #1 wins) would only gain +.5 ELO score, and so forth and so on for #3, #4 & #5 (1/3, 1/4, 1/5)

<--confused as fuck

I don't remember exactly how long we had that system but at one point you had the elo ranks and then you had a monthly score that was based on accumulating points based on your elo rank at the start of each game.

So if you were first in elo and played a game, you won 1 point (regardless of who else sat and of the place you finished). Let's say you didn't win and dropped to 2nd highest elo, the next game you played, you gained 1/2 point. So 1st, 2nd, 5th, 20th, etc could play a game together and each would respectively win 1 1/2 1/5 and 1/20. I found it to be a tricky system myself (your score depended heavily on how many games you could maintain your elo peak of the month - one bad game could ruin a lot) and tbh, I'm not sure how long we had it.

(I think that that was the system that wish was talking about or otherwise I'm confused as fuck too)

http://kdice.wikispaces.com/E-mail+from+Ryan

also haha

http://kdice.wordpress.com/