FAAB Clarification

viper · Post by **viper** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 1:34 pm

Hope this doesn't turn out to be a can of worms or worse.

I believe I recall seeing posted that the highest dollar amount bid even within a continguency series of bids will take precidence. An example:

1. I bid $4 on Sosa

1a. If unsuccessful, I bid $3 on Berkman

1b. If unsuccessful, I bid $100 on Erstad

In this series of bids, I believe I have read that my Erstad request would be acted upon first even if my Sosa and Berkman bids would have been successful.

Although there is a part of me that disagrees with this treatment, I understand the complexity of continguency bids and can bidding scenarios where players go to different teams based solely on the sequence of the players selected to resolve.

Cellar Dwellers · Post by **Cellar Dwellers** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 2:55 pm

Viper wrote: "I believe I recall seeing posted that the highest dollar amount bid even within a continguency series of bids will take precidence. An example"

Viper, the system won't allow you to put in a higher continguency bid than the main bid. I tried it last week and it wouldn't accept it. Unless something has changed since last week, and I don't think it has, then you won't be able to do that anyway.

Jackstraw · Post by **Jackstraw** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 2:57 pm

Jim Pollard

Junior Member

Member # 2

Member Rated:

posted April 06, 2004 09:02 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

this is why we don't let you bid conditionally for more than you bid on the condition above it. since higher value bids take precedence, allowing a higher bid that was a conditional could cause a cycle that would be unresolvable or purely chance. take this example :

NFBC Team 1:

1a ARod $10

1b Sosa $20 conditional

NFBC Team 2:

1a Sosa $10

1b ARod $20 conditional

NFBC Team 3:

1a ARod $10

NFBC Team 4:

1a Sosa $10

how do you resolve this free agent draft? who gets which player is totally determined by whether we first try to allocate Sosa or ARod. if we were making it so that the higher conditionals had preference over the lower conditionals even if they were more money, we could break that tie. but if we did that we felt that everyone would be scratching their head as to why they didn't win any player at all even though they bid the most money on one of them.

Viper, that was posted the other day. I think it sums up most of that discussion. Hope it helps

George

viper · Post by **viper** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 3:40 pm

I had not seen that post but I think I said in my original post that I could see why it would NOT work. I had worked out a very similar scenario last week. All I wanted was to hear from Greg or Tom as verification. I am glad to hear that the "system" won't allow higher bids. I did think I read that some teams did it last week but then maybe I misread or they have changed the process.