The pick em’ thread. As a new twist to the forum I propose a pick em’ thread where posters can compete for the unofficial ESB title of “ master soothsayer “. Here is how it works. We pick ten big world title fights. The person with the highest score at the end of ten fights wins. The following are the picks the posters can make: Picking the winner via wide decision ( 8-4 in rounds by at least 2 judges and UD by all three judges ) = 3 points Picking the winner via close decision ( A correct Split decision call OR a close decision where a total of 6 points or less makes up the decision by all three judges ) . = 4 points Picking the correct winner via decision, but off on the forecast = 2 points Picking the winner via TKO/KO/RTD in the exact round = 5 points Picking the winner via TKO/KO/RTD within one round before or after = 4 points Picking the right winner via TKO/RO/RTD but off on the rounds = 2 points. Picking a winning fighter, but wrong on the call of a decision or KO. = 1 point. Picking the winning fighter if a DQ happens = 1 point A wrong pick = 0 points ND = 0 points Calling a draw = 10 points What we need: A person to keep score. Picks can be made via PM to the score keeper. The first match of ten could be either Calzaghe vs Jones or Hopkins vs Pavlik.
Just for the record, this isn't actually a "new twist." The idea first came up, as I recall, when Revolver was declaring that his conclusions about which fighters were greater or would beat other fighters were "scientific fact" and that he had proven them, which led me and a couple others to challenge him to prove the reliability of his methods by accurately predicting the outcomes of upcoming matches (he never took us up on this). I briefly ran a thread like this, but didn't think it through well enough or make sure participants agreed on concrete, clearly-delineated rules and standards beforehand, so after they came into dispute, I dropped it, and then Cross_Trainer held a similar, but better-planned and more interesting one shortly thereafter, which ended when he left (and, sadly, he still hasn't been seen again since). That said, though, this is a good idea, and it looks like you have an interesting and sound format for your own version. I am a little confused by your last sentence, though- what does "The match of ten could be Calzaghe-Jones or Hopkins-Pavlik" mean? Do you mean the contest could start with those matches?
It should read the first match of ten to pick could be Calzaghe vs Jones or Hopkins vs Pavlik. Who wants to be the score keeper?
Pavliks-BHOPs this weekend, I'm going for Pavlik UD based on workrate, winning 8-4. But would love to be proven wrong by Nard turning the clock back 1 more time. Whens RJJ-Calazage? I'm picking Calazage UD but again hope I'm wrong by RJJ turning the clock back. Pity this didnt start last month, I've won all my vbookie fights since starting playing last month. EDIT why is my vcash down? Is it because I have money on BHOPS-Calazage?
Actually can't we include Vitali-Peter as we all made a call on it and I picked the exact round 5 Points to PowerPuncher
Agreed. Pavlik vs. B-Hop 8 to 4 rounds. But I will root for B-Hop. Calzaghe vs. Jones 7 rounds to 5. I feel Jones will surprise us but it won´t be enough.
I think Calazage wins a bit wider due to Jones laying on the ropes and doing too little. The only concern I have with my predictions is. Calazage has never fought someone like Jones before who's faster, so skilled, and I'm not sure he's fought anyone who hits as hard, although Jones power is diminished And Pavlik has never fought anyone as cagey or clever as Hopkins. Putting your money on 1 fighter and supporting the other can mess with your enjoyment too
Because SD and very close decisions are rarer than UD's or wide decsions. This is why I feel they should be worth more points. No one should be making picks now. Picks are sent via PM. Then the score keeper updates the picks once a week. The contest cannot start until some one volunteers to be the scorekeeper.
One thing I notice about your standards, though- on the picks of decisions, it appears that there's a gray area in between "wide decision" and "close decision" in which one apparently can't pick, or at least can't receive extra points for picking correctly; that is, for example, a UD of 115-113 on all three cards would have a difference of 6 points (outside the "close decision" range), but would fall short of the "8-4 in rounds on at least two cards" qualification for a "wide decision."
I bumped the close decision up to 6 points by all the judges. Some picks might fall into a grey area. If you miss the exact call, but get the decision right, its still 2 points.
I think i'll take Pavlik aswell, you just never know with B-Hop though, i had him beating Joe for the record!
Hold your horses! NO PICKS COUNT YET. WE NEED A SCORE KEEPER FIRST. ONCE A SCORE KEEPER IS PICKED, THE PICKS ARE SENT TO HIM VIA PM. The contest might have to wait 1-2 more weeks to begin.