BuzzerBeater Forums

If what you say is true, could you help me understand the ratings in these two games:

(2078154)
(2412582)

They were played one on friday, in private league (the first one), after the training and form updates, and one the very next day. The first one is Normal, the second one is TIE.

Now, the form of all players is the same in the two games, the tactics are the same (both offensive and defensive), and the minutes are all very very similar (I think there is a maximum variation of 6 minutes for each player from one game to the next).

As you can see the ratings for both offenses are almost identical (only one sub-level difference), perimeter defense is identical, and ball movement is also almost identical (one sub-level difference). What changes dramatically are rebounding and interior defense. There is en entire level difference between the two games. If not for the TIE having a direct effect on those two ratings, how can that difference be explained?

I mentioned those two games because, having nearly identical conditions, they are particularly significant IMO, but there are also other examples I can think of.
(For example, I registered my highest ever Interior defense rating in a game where I was playing away from home, using a Normal defense (I usually play a 2-3), and with my best interior defender out with injury. But I CTed that game.)

Now, TiE/CT means that your team is simply getting luckier / winning the close decisions.

- This is what I meant when I said "random effect". To me, random and lucky have some kind of conceptual relationship.

Do you realize what it means, though? It doesn't 'introduce random effects in the CT/TIE. Put another way, it means that a team given a certain chance to get a rebound against a particular opponent, a team will now need a lower rebounding rate to get it. For example, if you needed, say, an average (low) rebounding to have a 70% chance, on average, to grab a rebound against a certain opponent, if you CT you might need mediocre (average), and if you TIE -- maybe respectable (low). Sounds absolutely logical to me.

You can't really discuss the random factor the way you do, since the game always has always had and will always have a random factor involved.

well.. after 2/3 CT your enthusiasm is low, and that's why you should have a hard time winning. The "effect" of CTing isn't any different though.

As far as 'the effects of CTing are concerned, whether or not enthusiuasm affects all ratings, as opposed to only rebounds and defending is a matter of discussion. My understanding is that CT is, functionally, a boost of enthusiasm for the certain game, and TIE acts vice versa. Which is why the overall ratings dropped after the midseason changes.

In view of this, the effect of CT/TIE is the same simply because it 'boosts' or 'cuts' enthusiasm by the same percentage value, which in turn means that CT at low levels of enthusiasm is not exactly useful.

Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 4/17/2008 7:40:09 AM

I was going to post the same as you. In Spanish forums i did it. I think that the old effects of the PIC are in force, and the new changes that were recently added are increasing too much the effects of the pic (and the mots)


Changing the subject of this thread.. look at this match (2844550), i won in PIC 97-90, but.. how can he make playing "look inside" 8-11 from the 3 line? I have 2 levels more of outside defense, its amazing!

Last edited by Edju at 4/17/2008 10:56:41 AM

I would say probably just extreme bad luck, mailny due to the PIC. I don't think his perimeter players were all that good, and certainly not good enough to shoot 8-11 in normal circumstances.

And I completely agree with you on your first point.

It is hard to discuss in this forum... Leyendinha said something about changing the subject but he was not actually changing it!

Unfortunately we are forced to discuss here because it is the only way we can discuss with the collaboration of BB-Charles...


/Edited: OK, thanks, everybody can make a mistake... ;-)

Last edited by Emilio at 4/17/2008 10:58:17 AM

I think you're right - I restored the origjnal.

Ey!! they censored my post!!!

I cant believe it!!!!

Why??????????????'

I am not going to post anything more, i dont want to say something about this that can carry big problems, but i am very angry. i dont understand, really i cant understand that.

Ey!! they censored my post!!!

I cant believe it!!!!

Why??????????????'

I am not going to post anything more, i dont want to say something about this that can carry big problems, but i am very angry. i dont understand, really i cant understand that.

I made a mistake and reposted it.

Calm down.

At least you could restore the post like it was.

The game link (2844550)

And I am absolutely calmed, but in my opinion (and its just my opinion) a GM cant make this kind of mistakes, it shows up that you make decisions without reading the post.

I am representing a community of thousands of people and i try to translate them what is said here, i do it to help them, you have to take into acount that maybe more than the 50% of the people that post here does not have the English like his primary language. We are doing big efforts to be here, please try to read the posts before make a decision.

Regards.

Had to have been, no? His first game was a PL game which doesn't affect enthusiasm. I suppose the second game would have slightly lower enthusiasm, but I doubt it would be that significant.