BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Home Court Adv tied to Attendance...

Home Court Adv tied to Attendance...

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
38542.1
Date: 7/9/2008 5:36:36 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
137137

Was wondering what people would think to making the Home Court Advantage effect tied in some way to attendance. In real basketball, its a lot tougher to play in front of 20,000 drunk Bostonians at the Garden than a empty house against the Clippers.

I would propose something like:

Adv = 33% + 67% * (min [attendance, 20,000] / 20,000)

If attendance were:

2,000: Adv = 39.7%
5,000: Adv = 49.75%
10,000: Adv = 66.5%
15,000: Adv = 83.25%
20,000+: Adv = 100%

I think it would have two interesting effect:

1. Peoples decisions to raise ticket prices -- especially at the low end.
2. Add a little bit of uncertainty to game planning as you wouldn't be entirely sure how much bonus you'd be getting at home etc.

Would it only help the "big" teams? Yes and No...

At home: it would, because they'd get the larger bonus from higher attendance -- but isn't that how it is in real life.

On the road: it would actually hurt the "big" teams -- as they'd draw larger crowds for the home team and thus those teams would get a bigger advantage than against average or poor teams.

Your thoughts....


Steve
Bruins

This Post:
00
38542.2 in reply to 38542.1
Date: 7/9/2008 7:34:56 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
Fans are pretty succes based, and this would make strong teams even harder to beat, and inn leagues like mine* it would become a big advantage to have a cup game before a home game. In the last cup round you could maybe say the opposite ;)


* a lot of supporters and nearly everyone could beat everyone ;)

Would it only help the "big" teams? Yes and No...


I would say especially the big or "old" teams, because the amount of visitors is mainly based on the home crowd and your succes(you could see it fine in the first cup rounds, with first leagues teams playing against noobs the attendance don't drop)

At home: it would, because they'd get the larger bonus from higher attendance -- but isn't that how it is in real life.


In real life their are are other factors too, like the fan club(my home club got pretty lame fans) etc.

But this is an game, so it should be important that it still make fun :) And if somebody with a winning streak becomes unbeatable at home, and a other player looses a lot of his home crowd because of a loose game i doN't think it maximumum fun which is more important then reality.

This Post:
00
38542.3 in reply to 38542.2
Date: 7/9/2008 8:09:34 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
137137
I think you make some good points....I do think you point out one thing that needs to be corrected -- attendance is still way to dependent on the last game or two. It should be more dependent on longer-term performance.

Steve


Last edited by Solana_Steve at 7/9/2008 8:16:33 PM

This Post:
00
38542.4 in reply to 38542.3
Date: 7/9/2008 11:56:52 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
11
if you do this, it makes those teams with big arena go something more advantageous


since they are already power house! but how about starting it on ft attempts hahaha

remember karl malone who has a hard time hitting ft because the crowd were chanting 1 to 5 and he just threw it up till he knew to count on his own :D

This Post:
00
38542.5 in reply to 38542.1
Date: 7/10/2008 12:44:35 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
44
Wouldn't the HCA also be affected by how full the arena is. If those 20,000 drunken Bostonians are spread throughout a 30,000 seat arena they won't be as scary. Plus it should take into account the lower tier and courtside seats. Have enough of those fans, they call the cops to keep the bleacher fans out. And the fans will be watching the cops instead of the game.

10,000 bleachers-only crowd and we'll see the visiting players wilt. Let's put the cage back in cager.

From: chihorn

This Post:
00
38542.6 in reply to 38542.5
Date: 7/10/2008 12:25:54 PM
New York Chunks
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
943943
I have to say this is sounded like such a common sense idea at first, but in reality, the arenas that are the hardest for opposing players to play in are not really the biggest. They're just the areans with the worst acoustical designs (like the old Chicago Stadium, or Cowboys' arena in Stillwater, OK), and where there' a rich (I mean wild and rambunctious) basketball tradition. For football, where games are outdoors and acoustics aren't near a factor, I could see this, though even then stadium design and culture (or lack thereof) are influences. Why is it so hard to play against U of Arizona? Why is Arrowhead such a tough venue?

All that being said, I would agree that does take a critical mass of people to get a place rocking. But I think how close a team is to selling out is more a factor than the arena capacity. The Alamo Dome that's only half-full is not as intimidating as the local high school gym with packed bleachers.

Don't ask what sort of Chunks they are, you probably don't want to know. Blowing Chunks since Season 4!
This Post:
00
38542.7 in reply to 38542.6
Date: 7/10/2008 12:52:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
137137
I think there are a lot of factors that make a arena hard to play in...if the fans are really close to the floor, if the arena is designed a certain way, the type of fans a team gets etc. Seems like those would all be hard to gauge in a game like BuzzerBeater...that's why I suggested something simple like size.

However, seems like the sentiments is that linking Home Court Adv. to something like this would only benefit the "big" teams. So maybe its a no go...

>Why is it so hard to play against U of Arizona?

It is? Maybe it used to be...


Steve

This Post:
00
38542.8 in reply to 38542.7
Date: 7/10/2008 1:04:16 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0rMe2Vyb9E

this video is genious, i think pana could be happy to play in ront of such fans, but the arena is just half full if you look at the background :)

In german we would say if you look this video your hair stands

This Post:
00
38542.9 in reply to 38542.8
Date: 7/10/2008 2:18:24 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9696
if this suggestion ever makes the list of implemented stuff, I sure hope they have cupfinals on neutral ground.
It is already killing to have to play a final at some other teams homecourt, if they get an advantage due to their fans as well the game doesn't need to be played anymore...

They are not your friends; they dispise you. I am the only one you can count on. Trust me.
This Post:
00
38542.10 in reply to 38542.7
Date: 7/10/2008 3:05:00 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
44
How about this formula:

Adjusted_attendance (noise level):

Sum (section_attendance * bleacher_price/section_price)

So bleachers count 100%. If the lower tier tickets are 3X the bleacher tickets, then fans in those seats count 1/3.

Arena_volume:

Arena_capacity + 1000.

The 1000 represents the area taken up by the court.

Relative_intensity:

Adjusted_attendance / Arena_Volume

Intimidation_factor:

Max (0, Relative_intensity - Threshhold_intensity)

The threshold intensity might be around 75%.

This Post:
00
38542.11 in reply to 38542.9
Date: 7/10/2008 3:15:49 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
303303
I believe the Cup semis and finals are already to be played on a neutral court.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live