The plan is to update this post as I fine tune from all of your feedback. But I would really appreciate feedback on weaknesses and strengths of the following Contest Idea. I did not want to get off topic in another thread and feel bringing it out here is the right thing to do...
 
The goal here... Create a contest idea... Gather 40 folders willing to be Guenna pigs and look for weaknesses. Make changes, and try again. Then set a contest date in the future for this new contest.
 
The current idea.. Have a contest that demands max production, and the team closest to the predicted numbers wins!
 
My thinking above is more about setting a ridiculously high number/goal for us to all reach. So max production is still the goal. Then run a pair of teams with all the participants (100+ folks)... Call it the Qualifying round. And the instructions are clear.
Produce at max output as you will during the contest.
 
Then split those now known production numbers, plus any correction per each individual request... And make 8-10 teams.
 
Quick rules after the teams are put together...

1. Closest to prediction production numbers wins! SO if a team put together was to produce 5,000,000 and does 5,100,000, yet another predicts 4,000,000 and does 4,010,000. The 4 mil team wins!
2. Under-producing by 15% or more cuts points for that team in half.
3. Over-producing same 15% and Half the points.
4. Have one side team where anyone is allowed to just add any amount of production they want. For example. Instead of a person finding out they can produce 50k more a day because of point adjustments from Stanford or hardware changes etc... They can move that production over to this "Bonus team". ***Also think of this as the dump tank for overage as teams try and control their laser sight on the targeted daily number*** They do this by changing the producer name to that team name but still using their passkey an 111065 team EVGA...
5. The 15% is of of TEAM  predicted numbers. This means if a member inside a team has failures etc, any other team member is welcome to compensate for that.

Anyway...
 
Below is from a PM I sent out and gives you and idea of what it looks like. SO from here I am looking for feedback and design ideas to put it all together.  Without the good and the bad.. All contests go bad. So do not BASH the idea please, but critique it.
 
 

---

 
There is no reason a contest cannot be fun for "Closest to the Target" and having fun with a penalty box could be a riot... So that is my thoughts on that...
 
The reason for this way is simple... All about the "Timed" drag race or what I like to do with my old Jeeps or Motorcycles... Have a times (Actual time... like 2 hours 15 minutes) run, closets to fuel mileage and overall avg speed wins... In other words... Closest to the pin wins... We measure time, Miles per hour avg and fuel usage. The best at all three (Closets to the predetermined goal) wins.
 
It should NOT matter if an individual goes over it should be based off the team score. As a team they should work together to help project/protect and produce to as close to the 1132.9 as they got aligned to do with the players they have.
 
However! Since the idea is to have teams be as competitive as possible... Going over is baaaaad. It should not be about who learns how far the % can be pushed. It should be about getting as close to the projection as possible. (This coming from a 200%+ over producer mind you!!)
 
Also... 93% or better of all participants must produce 85% of their offered predicted number. If a team only has 87% producing within 85% to 100% of their predicted times, they are penalized points. Now they can make up those points, but at half the normal rate.
 
Alright enough of that. Now we are getting to deep into loop hole closing...
 
On another note... Folks can "Claim" they are all about a team. But clearly many are deliberately overproducing in a controlled manner because they want to win. This is good for those teams that have player prepared enough to do that. NOT so good for those not.
 
Also, it is very counter productive to run a contest wanting to do 700 but limit the production point to do that while at the same time trying to make the teams "Equal"...
 
In other words... The competitiveness of this will always come out. As long as there is a measurement of "Adding" points and highest point wins, this will happen.
 
Now just imagine if we could use that same energy to get as close as possible to a target/goal like I mentioned above. Closest to their teams predicted production wins! We could say we want to get 800 million and 35 million. Then instruct them to run as if they are competing because we are using it as the baseline for the contest. Making sure it is perfectly clear that any overages are BAD as BAD as under-producing. This way they are accurate with TRUER production predictions. Then run a week as they learn the system as one entire team (All participants are one team at this point). Then brake them off into equal teams... Run for two weeks... And walla... Closest to the target wins...

I would be up for this
 

this contest would still be controlled by the largest folders who would be capable of "fine tuning" the whole team's output by shutting down for short-long stretches.
 
if people want to cheat and ruin a contest, they will.

Good feedback folks! Keep it coming. Please note my responses are about expanding on your feedback. Not meant to change it. I do think not everyone reads all of the info above sometimes and I am not clear other times. So this is a good thing to go over when needed!
 
Also, please bring your thoughts on how to improve it. This is not about me and my idea. This is about our team looking for a new way to have a competition. Just like we have in the past with new contest ideas. We have to start somewhere!
 
As for those that want to cheat...
 
The thinking behind this idea is around that very issue. Perceived or truth.
 

• By having a penalty for failing to produce pre-predicted numbers and OVER-predicted numbers keeps that in check. (So under producing and over producing is bad on the team level)
• I was thinking a 15% Over or under threshold or maybe 20% is the max for no penalty, 16% or 21% all penalties hit. No scale at this point. Just flat out penalty of 50%... This is an area I need  great feedback on. Might be a bad idea.
• Having another team set aside for over achievers to dump their overage to whiles still going after the ultimate goal allows the ultimate goal to be reached.
• By making it about a team, and not the individuals in the team, we only have to look at the team production and it simply does not matter if a power player spoofs their numbers. It is TEAM based. Not individual based.
• This also makes the penalties easier to manage. Instead of it being per participant, it is per team.
• My thinking was every three days the penalties would be given. Giving time for the larger drops to happen. This is an area I need  great feedback on. Might be a bad idea.
• Also. By this being about hitting closest to the pin, and max production. The overage going to the other "Bucket" would be under that team name. So folks would go into that client and change the name for that WU. For multiple clients on one Tracker... This is why we need the pre-qualifying round so they know what the production is for that point in time. And many larger producers have multiple systems. Allowing for more of a controlled environment for their team, and all out max production in the bucket. A win win.

diplomacy

The percentage of max output is still flawed because the largest producers are still granted huge ppd windows in real tearms. +/- 15% is a massive window with which to avoid penalties and presumably picking up production again would re-qualify you for points so its really not much of a deturrant.

Makes since. But are you taking into account that we are basing the % on the team total? Not the individual?

The thining behind that is to your point and mine. Smaller producers can easily go 25% over in one day, or get excited and add one gtx 260, or a good SMP... And the larger producers need more firepower to do it.
 
By having a "Bucket" to catch the excitement and not discourage over producers and the blood flow so to speak...  Is where that comes from. Not NOT discourage over producing, yet create a second competition of sorts by making teams work together in hitting the prediction numbers...

And I am VERY open to thoughts and ideas for a better % or?

sajinor

Because this is all about pin distance, it does not sound like the teams would have to be balanced, production wise. I had this thought about the current contest as well, but it applies here too. Would it be too complicated to have the entire teams set up through a draft? This would allow for captains to try to build a team to their strategy. Captains could look at EOC stats, mods rigs, and any other information the competitors have posted to see what sort of potential they have. It may put a lot more work on the captains, but it would make for some interesting teams and/or strategies.

If this were applied to a contest like the current one, not the proposed one, I think it could eliminate the need for a points correction system. Captains could spot some obvious sandbaggers and give them a higher draft pick, reducing the effectiveness of said sandbagging. Obviously teams would not be completely balanced, but that is the idea. Someone has to win and someone has to lose. This just takes some of the computer control out of the competition and puts it back to people trying to be competitive.

Sorry if half of this message doesn't apply to this thread, but it felt like a better place than the already busy contest thread. Comments are more than welcome.

Your thinking fits perfectly in this proposal. I am out the door in a few moments and will come back with more detail later. But here is the gist...
 
Team captains and producers would be in consistent communication to do just that. Get as close to the pin possible.
 
They would also be encouraged to dump all "predicted" excess (One producer for the day or even a few systems) into the bucket under that team name (Call that team "Bucket" for this example). This promotes awareness, learning the systems and WU differences and folks learning more about their systems. However!!! It also promotes max production. So those into this contest for the cause and not personal gain will have no problem placing excess production into the bucket name instead of their own name...
 
So max production is still the name of the game, a side game is the "Pin"...
 
But... Let's not forget. I propose a few test runs on this first once we have an accord. I also propose a week long "Pre-Qualifying round" for folks to go all out as one team, or even a pair of teams (to create the "Contest" atmosphere). Then we split the producers into teams. Either by us and the production shown, or they create their own. Not sure yet...
 

BTW... Keep this in mind...
 
Where does our personal production go when doing the CC?
 
http://folding.extremeove...ry.php?s=&u=449361

A bucket to catch stuff is still a bit more maintenance than should be neccessary. I'm with a set # captains and have them recruit from the whole folding world. After it all comes down to the production going to Team EVGA. Next year.... recruit better if you don't win. Works for sports..... why should any annual contest be any different. If a picked folder/contestant refuses the draft.... let them sit out til next year....
Just saying. Winning team will be determined by the best scouting team.
EDIT: Give a day that all entrants have to be entered into the draft. After which none are eligible to be drafted. Then let the draft determine the winning team. Works in Professional Sports....

Instead of looking at overages each day, how about looking at the average production over a few days?  Depending on how fast everything runs and which wus you get and when they start, it is possible you'll have a day once in awhile with more points than another day....  Back when I could do -bigadv, I would get them done in about 55 hours or so I think, if I remember correctly.  Depending on when the unit started, sometimes I would have an "extra" day with no points or an "extra" day with points....  
 
Or have the draft blind and random and unknown until towards the end of the contest, have two winners, most points and closest to estimate?

It doesn't even have to be completely blind, every few days towards the end of the contest you reveal some members on the teams....

going in the right direction ^_)^

bowlinra

Couple Thoughts,

I like the Fastasy Football Draft approach. Get the pool of folks interested in the contest, have the Team Captains do there own homework / scouting. Then draft either by traditional style (each Captain has an assign picking order) or auction style (each Captain has a budget and a fair shot at every player) style. This cuts out the whole mess of attempting to balance the teams, handicaps systems, sandbagging some what.

I think the Olympic style contest would be most interested. Each team MAY compete in each event. Multiple event COULD be going on at the same time. ie.. This will require some team strategy of where to use, which player and when.

Sample Events: (Award Gold, Silver, Bronze badges per event for players forum signatures)
Each event could have both Individual and teams versions.

• Strongest Man - Individual or small team to produce the largest point total for a single WU with the X days.
• Sync. Swimming - Team (5 minimium, but could be any size really) that can produce the most consist points daily for X days.
• Hot Dog Eating - Team able to complete most WUs in X time.
• Close to Pin - Individual or Team has to call the "TIME" it will hit the 100K, 500K point marks. Closest estimate for the Gold
• Drag Race - Sprint to 10 Millions points, shorts time wins.
• Add something for everyone.. Curling?

Team wins based on Medal Count, just like the Olympics.

*Goose bumps*
 
If you go back and read ideas from last year I offered one similar to this. Love to explore this!!
 
Now... Here is the question. We all know who has the big machines. And what is to stop captains from recruiting early? Now we have teams with nothing but huge hitters and they have the gold already before the game starts.

Xavier Zepherious

Blind assignment - capts don't get to pick
teams are made diversified by contest organizer
(ie... those with server rigs will have to be put in separate category and then dispersed evenly)

it also gets rid of any collusion (planning to take advantage of the rules prior to the contest - so that 1 team has a bunch planning to subvert it)

hate to break the party - but after the recent fiasco (MM) and people under predicting - this would be a breath of fresh air

if people plan to under estimated - it won't be an organized attempt by one team (or a bunch or teammates)

and know one knows who they are assigned to until midway thru - or until after PPD is qualified
fold for a week or two all out...get the estimation - and baseline them on that (you can post individual output during individual qualifier and then assign them after that)

Oh, so the one time we're actually holding a lead, it's just cause we underpredicted...  No, we had people who didn't plan to go all out who got inspired by the fact that I stated that I'm not finishing in last this year.  The fact that other teams then quickly sprung up and dueled with us for the lead led to some of those who had extra power dragging it in.  After that moment, it was out of my hands.  And toward the end of the first 15 days, we were being caught up to.
 
I would normally have pointed fingers, but this happens every contest.  One team rises above the rest with an unrecoverable lead.  The fact that it's the Maniacs rising like a Phoenix is the only reason that people are shooting at us with snarky comments behind the scenes.

No offense to any one team MAD... but mostly everyone under predicted..it's the margins that are way out.
Even I am over - but not by much
 
when people are over 30% ...40..50 200%..then  they misrepresented or miscalculated it
I predicted within 10% of mine and still have time to game while only losing 1% of my PPD
(you could have put up your REAL numbers and still gamed).
 
the rules could have been setup up with a individual qualifier round (this will be your baseline - so bring it then) - if you get over 20 or 30% after this you will be penalized by the overage - and it might be at the expense of your team. (start taking points away).
 
or you don't use a qualifier and tell them you will penalize them and the team(if you go over by 30% then cap at the original estimate) - so predict high - if you don't want your team to lose points (you being fixed at a certain MAXIMUM PPD)
 
ALL we are asking is that if people want to join in - then predict accurately or predict high if they think they are going to produce more.
 
the way it set up now - anyone can bring in a powerhouse mainframe (bladeserver) - overproduce 2M PPD or ever 20M per day and thwart any attempt at a race or competition - because they can
any over production is OK (even if they only predicted 10 PPD...not 10k or 100k)
just imagine predicting 1k PPD and produce 20M PPD

 
Unless the person fesses up and said they don't own the hardware...this will be allowed - since NO ONE CAN PROVE ANYTHING (you have to assume they own it)
 
either team races will be gone because of this - since there is no way to make things fair at this rate
 
IM not against your team MAD- just the rules
if you win you win according to the rules (that's fair)
 
lets just figure out better rules
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Has anyone considered a weighted system
where small folder have greater weight to affect the balance - to balance against people with large rigs or setups?