NFBC Message Boards

I, along with some of the other members of LV 7, am concerned that our league leader was awarded a free agent player with a tie bid this week. He was definitely ahead in points and the rules state that the team with the 'worst league record' will win tie bids. Does 'record' mean '# of points' and if so, what gives? Doughboys won Ricardo Rodriguez in this instance.

Don't know if this is the case but you can tie yourself...I have put in multiple bids for the same player, dropping different guys of course. When I have won that player it shows the seond place bid that was mine too...so I won the guy for $17 second place was $17 but actually nbody bid on teh guy but me.

Originally posted by bjoak:

I, along with some of the other members of LV 7, am concerned that our league leader was awarded a free agent player with a tie bid this week. He was definitely ahead in points and the rules state that the team with the 'worst league record' will win tie bids. Does 'record' mean '# of points' and if so, what gives? Doughboys won Ricardo Rodriguez in this instance. I'll ask STATS to look into this. The lower placed team would win the player on a tie bid, so let me look into it and get back to you.

Here is the reply from STATS:



The team "Doughboys" was the only team in that league that placed a bid of any kind on Ricardo Rodriguez.

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Here is the reply from STATS:



The team "Doughboys" was the only team in that league that placed a bid of any kind on Ricardo Rodriguez. Greg, the problem is that Stats is showing the 'next highest bid' on a player and including the SAME team, so if I put in this bid stream:



$12 Babe Ruth, drop Willie Mays

Conditional $11 Hank Aaron, drop Willie Mays

Conditional $10 Cy Young, drop Willie Mays



(PLUS)



$11 Hank Aaron, drop Ty Cobb

Conditional $10 Cy Young, drop Ty Cobb



If someone else gets Babe Ruth and I land Hank (dropping Willie) for $11 it then shows the next highest bid as $11 (which was also mine)



It should ignore the same owner as the one who wins the bid.



Hope that makes sense!



Dave

Yes, Dyv, I figured that's what happened in this instance. My main concern was that we had errored in this transaction, which I'm glad isn't the case. We'll have to tweak the way we show the runner-up bids going forward, but that's easy to do.

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Yes, Dyv, I figured that's what happened in this instance. My main concern was that we had errored in this transaction, which I'm glad isn't the case. We'll have to tweak the way we show the runner-up bids going forward, but that's easy to do. Rock on ... tweak away!



Dyv



[ June 14, 2005, 03:26 PM: Message edited by: Dyv ]

Is there a month old echo in here? Wasn't that runner up bid observation made by me on this very message board? I believe that there was a grass roots uproar on the message board about it and a revolution of sorts almost ensued (translation: I replied to the message myself to bump it up and I was the only one who felt the message was compelling enough to reply to. I exchanged emails and cellphone #'s with myself and debated it for days....)