To see less ads Register or Login ----- Daily Fantasy Sports games 18+

Let's catch up with Ville

A forum for comment and discussion on Fantasy PremierLeague.com (FPL) Teams. Post your Rate My Team (RMT) messages here!
Post Reply
User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Ruth_NZ »

Man. I don't see what is so objectionable about my request but if you dislike it so vehemently I'll withdraw it. :shock:

Yes I have read some of this thread and a lot of it seems to be a process of guessing what transfer VR will do next for some reason. I don't know what's so fascinating about that but it obviously floats some peoples' boats so fine.

What I am after is a summary of what makes VR a good FPL manager. I don't see that distilled anywhere. I offered my own attempt but I don't doubt you could do better, Dazzler. I'd be interested to read it if you wrote it. If you don't want to write it that's OK too. :|

User avatar
Mo Bot
Dumbledore
Posts: 7208
Joined: 15 Oct 2005, 13:59
FS Record: Inaugural Last Man Standing. FISO Fantasy Eurovision champ 2012. World #1 in UFPL for a whole week

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Mo Bot »

I can see a whole host of possibilities for next season.....
Fantasy Ville (predict his next move)
Guess the starting XV for GW1

Interested to hear views on where he lost the extra 140 points required to win the whole thing. Is he too much of a follower and needs to lead more to get the big prize?

The Dazzler
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 1248
Joined: 03 Dec 2008, 20:26
FS Record: 9th overall in FPL 2005/06, 50th 2010/11, 288th 2014/15

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by The Dazzler »

Ruth_NZ wrote:Man. I don't see what is so objectionable about my request but if you dislike it so vehemently I'll withdraw it. :shock:

Yes I have read some of this thread and a lot of it seems to be a process of guessing what transfer VR will do next for some reason. I don't know what's so fascinating about that but it obviously floats some peoples' boats so fine.

What I am after is a summary of what makes VR a good FPL manager. I don't see that distilled anywhere. I offered my own attempt but I don't doubt you could do better, Dazzler. I'd be interested to read it if you wrote it. If you don't want to write it that's OK too. :|

Sigh, okay. You don't see what's objectionable?
Your first line in the thread set the tone. It was rude and dismissive;
Ruth_NZ wrote:Hi, I don't really have time to trawl through 11 pages.........
You continued in this vein;
Ruth_NZ wrote:So... I have trawled through page 9 anyway but apart from the comments quoted I don't think I am any the wiser. I would be genuinely interested in what TD thinks can be distilled from his tracking of VR because maybe it will help me improve. But of course it's up to TD if he wants to summarise it.
Ruth_NZ wrote: If this thread isn't an attempt to learn something then I don't really understand what the point of it is.
You're continuing in this latest post;
Ruth_NZ wrote:...a lot of it seems to be a process of guessing what transfer VR will do next for some reason. I don't know what's so fascinating about that but it obviously floats some peoples' boats so fine.
That's not objectionable?
Even if it was just guessing what Ville's next transfer was (which it is very clearly not), what would be wrong with that? This is a thread in a niche sub section called RMT. It's a thread RMT'ing Ville. It's not cluttering up the main forum and all I claimed in my opening post was;
The Dazzler wrote:Last year, in the FPL genius thread, we did a week by week analysis of the moves of Ville Ronka.....Some people found that interesting so I thought it might be good to do it again.


So I'll ask you, what do YOU find so objectionable about this thread?


You're coming into a thread I created, in a sub section of the forum you never visit, to speak disparagingly about this particular subject and yet you're claiming you've never read the thread! I know this fits the narrative of "this output is beneath me" but as I have pointed out, it's highly unlikely to be true. You've written a (bad) summary of the points raised, for God's sake! You've written a summary of a thread you haven't fully read? Remarkable!

You're being dismissive in this thread and repeatedly asking for a summary, something I never said I'd provide, I might add. If you think it's valuable, you'll read the thread. It is beyond obvious that a summary is not going to be as valuable.

Tell me, if I came into one of your threads and said, "I don't have time to trawl through this so could you provide a summary?", what would you reply?
"Why, yes indeed sir. I'll get right on it." Would that be it?
Nah, I don't think so. I'm going to hazard a guess you'll reply with your playground mantra of "if you don't like it, don't read it."


Look, we all know that of course you've read the thread but as I'm such a nice and helpful guy, I'm making this very easy for you. You show a modicum of respect and go off for a couple of hours. Then come back after you've pretended that you've read the thread for the 1st time. Ask your questions and I'll answer them. Have some respect and you might receive it in return.

User avatar
Vid
Head Moderator
Posts: 21729
Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:33
FS Record: winning is a distant memory

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Vid »

The Dazzler wrote: Look, we all know that of course you've read the thread but as I'm such a nice and helpful guy, I'm making this very easy for you. You show a modicum of respect and go off for a couple of hours. Then come back after you've pretended that you've read the thread for the 1st time. Ask your questions and I'll answer them. Have some respect and you might receive it in return.
And we'll all be civil from here on in, very good!

User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Ruth_NZ »

Lord. Frankly I am bewildered by your responses here.
The Dazzler wrote:Sigh, okay. You don't see what's objectionable?
Your first line in the thread set the tone. It was rude and dismissive;
Ruth_NZ wrote:Hi, I don't really have time to trawl through 11 pages.........
You continued in this vein...So I'll ask you, what do YOU find so objectionable about this thread?
Nothing, Dazzler. I haven't objected to it. I don't object to it. All I have done is to ask what you and/or others have learned from tracking VR so closely. And I really don't see why that's an unreasonable question.
The Dazzler wrote:You're being dismissive in this thread and repeatedly asking for a summary, something I never said I'd provide, I might add. If you think it's valuable, you'll read the thread. It is beyond obvious that a summary is not going to be as valuable.
I'm not being dismissive. And I think that distilling what you have learned from an exercise is the most important part personally.
The Dazzler wrote:Tell me, if I came into one of your threads and said, "I don't have time to trawl through this so could you provide a summary?", what would you reply? "Why, yes indeed sir. I'll get right on it." Would that be it? Nah, I don't think so. I'm going to hazard a guess you'll reply with your playground mantra of "if you don't like it, don't read it."
I didn't think I owned any threads. I didn't know you did either. But if (for instance) you asked for a summary in a long thread like the one on BPs I'd say that I intend to produce that when I have completed the research. Which I will do, by the way.
The Dazzler wrote:Look, we all know that of course you've read the thread but as I'm such a nice and helpful guy, I'm making this very easy for you. You show a modicum of respect and go off for a couple of hours. Then come back after you've pretended that you've read the thread for the 1st time. Ask your questions and I'll answer them. Have some respect and you might receive it in return.
You are perceiving disrespect where there is none, Dazzler. If I didn't think you'd have something worthwhile to say about what makes VR a good manager I wouldn't bother asking. Believe it or not I am actually interested. Or was, anyway. :?

The Dazzler
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 1248
Joined: 03 Dec 2008, 20:26
FS Record: 9th overall in FPL 2005/06, 50th 2010/11, 288th 2014/15

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by The Dazzler »

Ruth_NZ wrote:Lord. Frankly I am bewildered by your responses here.
Gosh golly. Frankly I think you're being disingenuous!
Well as you're bewildered, I'll try to enlighten you.
You're continuing to deny being rude and dismissive. Okay. I'll point to the previously quoted posts as evidence that is clearly not the case and I'm happy that any reasonable person would agree.
Ruth_NZ wrote: All I have done is to ask what you and/or others have learned from tracking VR so closely. And I really don't see why that's an unreasonable question.
No. That's not all you have done. You have been rude and dismissive of the subject (see above). You have asked for a summary as you 'don't have time to read' the thread. Guess what? To me, that's an unreasonable question. Hopefully you can empathise with my reading of the situation and you are now un-bewildered. :D
I hadn't planned on doing a summary but if you had asked me nicely, I might have. Now I'm sulking and I won't, I won't, I won't! :D
Ruth_NZ wrote:I didn't think I owned any threads. I didn't know you did either.
Oh, very clever. :D
'My' or 'your' thread is fairly common forum speak for a thread someone started. It doesn't imply ownership. Do I really need to explain this? Seriously, this is absolutely juvenile.
Ruth_NZ wrote:But if (for instance) you asked for a summary in a long thread like the one on BPs I'd say that I intend to produce that when I have completed the research. Which I will do, by the way.
That's great. You'd do something that you were going to do anyway? But that isn't the question I asked you, is it?
My question was prefaced with, "I don't have time to trawl through this......" Would your reaction be the same? I know, I know. There is absolutely nothing disrespectful about that opening line, right?
That's your story and you're sticking to it.
Ruth_NZ wrote:You are perceiving disrespect where there is none, Dazzler.
I think our standards differ. You're lucky I'm not in the mafia :D
Ruth_NZ wrote:If I didn't think you'd have something worthwhile to say about what makes VR a good manager I wouldn't bother asking. Believe it or not I am actually interested.
Great. You'll find what I have to say about Ville being a good manager............wait for it.................wait for it.......................in.......the........thread!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Okay, let's move on. It's the weekend and I'm in a generous mood so I'll deal with the summary you wrote of the thread that you didn't read and point out to you why you should maybe read the thread.

Ruth_NZ wrote:As far as I can tell, VR's play is based on 3 things:

1. A very competent knowledge of FPL mechanics and an efficient squad structure that he seldom diverges from;
2. A well-formed policy for the use of transfers, avoiding hits and rolling FTs when possible. This implies the valuable ability to do nothing when others are knee-jerking around.
3. The continuing, steady optimisation of his team around the expected points estimations of FFSs RMT function. In other words he often lets his players be selected for him and doubtless does similar a lot of the time with captain picks too.

That's what I have seen. But I'd be very happy to be informed better by someone that has been tracking him as closely as Dazzler or others in this thread.
1. Incorrect.
If you had read the thread (so wierd how we keep coming back to this, isn't it?) you should be aware that is not correct.
Hint: the evidence that it is not correct is on the 1st page. Actually, I won't make you trawl through a whole page. It's in the 1st post. Warning: It's a loooooooong post.
I'll let you find it as I think that aids learning.
2. Top marks!
3. Incorrect.
This is such a bad answer, I'm thinking of awarding minus marks. But as I said, I'm in a generous mood so you just get zero.
You are assuming that Ville uses FFS RMT function due to what you assume is the similarity of the results. You assume too much sir. Perhaps they have separate models which cause similar results?
Even if it twas true that he optimised his team around the RMT (it isn't), to then go on further and infer that he "lets his players be selected for him" is quite a jump!
The evidence that Ville does NOT do this is also in the 1st post. You know the drill. Go find it!

The idea that Ville's play can be distilled into 3 simple sentences is pretty silly imo and, I hope I'm not labouring the point :D but if you read the thread, I think you should understand why.

1/3 = 33%.
Sorry Ruth, that's a fail :D

Conclusion: Further reading required.

Any further questions?

User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Ruth_NZ »

Thanks. :)

1. I said he seldom diverges. Didn't he return to his tried-and-tested bench midfielder after experimenting with the front-8 rotation thing? I guess what I'm asking is, how flexible on structure do you really think he is?
2. In your experience, does refusing to transfer out an injured/non-playing bench player in favour of rolling a FT often hurt VR? TL is very similar in that regard. Personally having useless rubbish on the bench annoys the hell out of me.
3. The optimising around the FFS RMT thing I got from elsewhere. Is it really wrong? Does VR make what you would consider to be maverick moves? How patient is he with players that blank for a few weeks? How quick is he to bring in players that start to get bigger scores (e.g. Vardy)? Does he tend to be ahead of the game? A little behind? A long way behind?

The Dazzler
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 1248
Joined: 03 Dec 2008, 20:26
FS Record: 9th overall in FPL 2005/06, 50th 2010/11, 288th 2014/15

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by The Dazzler »

Ruth_NZ wrote:Thanks. :)

1. I said he seldom diverges. Didn't he return to his tried-and-tested bench midfielder after experimenting with the front-8 rotation thing? I guess what I'm asking is, how flexible on structure do you really think he is?
2. In your experience, does refusing to transfer out an injured/non-playing bench player in favour of rolling a FT often hurt VR? TL is very similar in that regard. Personally having useless rubbish on the bench annoys the hell out of me.
3. The optimising around the FFS RMT thing I got from elsewhere. Is it really wrong? Does VR make what you would consider to be maverick moves? How patient is he with players that blank for a few weeks? How quick is he to bring in players that start to get bigger scores (e.g. Vardy)? Does he tend to be ahead of the game? A little behind? A long way behind?

1. We've tracked him for 2 years so I can't speak for previous years to that. In that first year, he played 3-4-3 with bench enablers pared to the minimum. Last year, he played 3-4-3 and went to a strong 8 in GW3 and kept it almost the entire season. GW3!!!
In previous years, this Strong 8 was seen as a rookie mistake. And a pretty bad one. Good players simply didn't do this. Ville saw something very early that we didn't cotton onto until much later. It was of course standard to have a strong 8 later on in the season.
He is as flexible on structure (or anything else) as he feels he needs to be in order to maximise his points. Whatever works. He is the ultimate practical and adaptable manager.
To throw out the 'all bench fodder' mantra that has been tried and tested for so long so early shows bravery and a reading of the situation that was way ahead of others. I didn't go to a Strong 8 until GW11. I couldn't. It was just 'wrong'. I had tons of money in the bank waiting for the return of the premiums that never came.
He reverted back to a bench fodder mid for 3 weeks (GW22-24) and then back to the Strong 8 for the remainder of the season. The reason he did this I think is because his weakest of the 8 was the very disappointing Richie. That was one transfer that the thread were certainly ahead of Ville on. The thread was aghast! He scored nothing and dropped a bit in price. Ville transferred him to Fletcher in GW22 and Fletcher->Firmino in GW25.
This is why I couldn't understand Sutter's suggestion that he didn't adapt this year. He played completely differently to how he played the previous year, in almost every aspect. Imo, he completely adapted to the changed environment and much quicker than most of us. But there is apparently another school of thought on that.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. This season was strange in a lot of ways. Did anyone here have any sort of injury crisis throughout the season? It's normal for that to happen in the course of a season when 5/6 players all get injured over a very short period. Sometimes that happens twice! That just seemed mostly absent this year. Also rotation didn't seem to be a big issue with most of the top scoring players (again, to a historical abnormal level). So I don't think injured bench players were all that much of a problem.
Trigger has a rule to always remove the weakest link. That has been my rule too for years. Ville doesn't subscribe to this. Ville concentrates on his core. Again, it takes bravery to remove fit players when you have injured players on the bench. Removing the injured player is the 'easier' option.
I think Ville is correct and myself and Trigger are wrong. Of course, you've got to have very good judgement on players to buy and sell.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The FFS RMT thing is completely wrong. The previous season, I could hardly predict a single transfer Ville made. They were solid but they were very different to prevailing forum thoughts. This year, we had a pretty good strike rate. We could claim that that increased strike rate was due to us cracking 'Da Ville Code' but I think we could be flattering ourselves. This season was very unpredictable and I think as a result, he battened down the hatches and went a lot safer, hence easier to read. Maverick moves? I don't think so if by that you mean differentials. The previous season he went with solid players but not the forums favourites.
As for how patient he is with blanking players, that's a difficult question to answer as so many factors are in play. He kept Richie for a long time!
As for how quick he is to get big scoring players, he seems to move pretty quick once he's been convinced by them.
I don't really know on those 2 questions though, I'd be guessing.
I' do have a theory he bookmarks later transfers based on fixture blocks and is quite disciplined in that. There were a couple of times I thought he's going to buy Player A in GWx and Player B in GWy and he seemed to do that regardless of other players streaks that some of us get distracted by. I might not entirely correct on that, it's just a theory from a small sample.
Ruth_NZ wrote:Does he tend to be ahead of the game? A little behind? A long way behind?
Are you serious???? :D

User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Ruth_NZ »

OK, those are interesting comments, Dazzler, thanks again. I'll be making some comparisons to what I tend to do in the notes below because that helps me to get the differences and identify areas of improvement, I hope you won't mind that.

1. Yes, the strong front-8 thing was a problem for me too. I was still arguing against it in GW11 or so if I remember right and didn't really adapt till the 2nd half of the season. I had a cheap 5th mid till GW28 in actual fact, first Westwood, then Surman, then Stanislas. And yes, Westwood :arrow: Surman :arrow: Stanislas was 2 FTs used. :oops: Like I said, I have a problem with having rubbish on the bench and I also hate allowing them to lose me TV.

So, VR managed this much better than me, clearly. Which begs the question why. How come he was quicker to see the changed situation and adapt? More flexibility of mind? Was it his longer FPL experience showing? It seems that "conservative" in VRs case doesn't mean "stubborn", would you agree? I reckon that's a good lesson to learn (for me at least).

2. Well, I have been experimenting with the idea of "do what your team needs" this season, it's kind of in the direction of what VR does I think. But because I also get annoyed by having a useless bench I tended to correct that too (especially in the first 15 weeks) and that meant unnecessary hits. So arguably I managed to achieve the worst of both worlds. :lol: "Concentrate on the core" seems a very useful principle to me. I will use that next season.

You are obviously right to say that all of this relies on quality of judgement about players to bring in and/or lose. Which brings us to point 3.

3. OK, these comments are really interesting to me. I'm not bothered about your ability to "prove" your theories, I am perfectly happy to accept them as a working hypothesis, when you study something you start to get a "feel" for it that isn't always easy to rationalise and I'm happy to go on that basis here.

So, it sounds as if VR operates with quite a decently long perspective with his transfers. The bookmarking of future ins and outs based on fixtures I also do but don't always stick to. At the start of season I bookmarked Wijnaldum for GW9 believe it or not. But when the time came I had something else to do that seemed more important. Wijnaldum scored 25 points in GW9 (or something like that). :oops:

Anyway, what I am getting from your observations is telling me more than just the word "calm" which has been used about VR quite a bit. It is helping me to understand what that "calm" means. What I am reading is - steady forward planning, focus on points over 6 weeks rather than 1 week, no knee-jerks and no chasing fashionable punts but at the same time an inspective appraisal of player trends and readiness to adapt/react if they are convincing. Is that a reasonably fair summary?

One of the things I work hard at is to spot those trends before they are evident to most people, to predict them one might say. One of the ways I do that is by trying to read the effects of changed circumstances - subtle changes of position (Sanchez, Aguero) or the effects of a new manager (Sigurdsson, Townsend). I know that you (and others) don't have much time for that but that's by the by. What I am less good at is reacting to trends if I didn't get on the train early - I was stubbornly resistant to Vardy and didn't get him until after the event, he got 1 goal and 3 assists for me in 8 games in my team. I blame Stemania's influence by the way. :wink:

The reason I do that is a weakness in my own psychology. I don't like being a follower. I have too much ego involvement. And I also think that I lack a useful advantage that VR has, which is that he doesn't participate in any forum (that we know of, maybe he does in Finland or wherever he comes from). He doesn't appear to have the psychological investment that I do in not wanting to look a fool. :oops: :roll: :lol:

Anyway, you say he tends to go for "solid players" but not necessarily according to forum fashion and not differentials. How do you define "differential" then? Does this imply that VR (almost) always goes for players who have good underlying stats behind them? Or are scoring high in the eP or eV models? If you could comment (or even give your best guess) on how he makes his player decisions that would be very interesting to hear.
The Dazzler wrote:
Ruth_NZ wrote:Does he tend to be ahead of the game? A little behind? A long way behind?
Are you serious???? :D
Yes, I was. :) I meant on transfer decisions really. I was asking how much evidence of recent "form" he seems to need before he reacts.

Well, that's 3 x :oops: , 2 x :lol: and 1 x :roll: that I have racked up in the VR comparison so far. :) I appreciate your willingness to discuss this, personally I am finding it interesting and useful.

The Dazzler
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 1248
Joined: 03 Dec 2008, 20:26
FS Record: 9th overall in FPL 2005/06, 50th 2010/11, 288th 2014/15

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by The Dazzler »

Others here have followed Ville too. Maybe they have some thoughts on your questions.

User avatar
Sutter Kane
Dumbledore
Posts: 7522
Joined: 05 Aug 2010, 12:13
FS Record: Unknown.

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Sutter Kane »

The Dazzler wrote:This is why I couldn't understand Sutter's suggestion that he didn't adapt this year. He played completely differently to how he played the previous year, in almost every aspect. Imo, he completely adapted to the changed environment and much quicker than most of us. But there is apparently another school of thought on that.
With so little information available at GW3, I still can't see how on earth he concluded going to a strong front 8 was the thing to do though unlike some, I'm not convinced that was a game changer. I'm pretty convinced the 'focusing on the core' was more important once again, and an admirable quality Ville has in FPL - he does obviously get bad luck but from what I've noticed, it tends to rarely give him bad weeks overall yet we all have stinkers from time to time. He somehow negates it.

My reasoning for the 'non-adapt' comment, was simple and based on my opinions for the main reason he smashed it again this season; and also partly based on 2nd hand info perhaps from this thread :oops: , simply put, Ville chases value in the first few weeks (10 weeks or so??) and if you did that this season, you were generously rewarded not only with excellent team value but with fairly heavy points as well. The first 12 weeks of this season is all we need to concentrate on imo, with Ville. That made his season, from his WC to week 12. He wasn't really that great from then on (I may be stood corrected on that :lol: ) and didn't need to be, starting from 40k. I'm very surprised someone of his ability didn't make the top 1k from there; maybe the Ritchie move was the stopper...but didn't FFS points projections still have Ritchie quite high at that point. :D

PS: I've never seen the FFS points projections, are they a tool people use on fiso and does it cost money?

User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Ruth_NZ »

Sutter Kane wrote:I've never seen the FFS points projections, are they a tool people use on fiso and does it cost money?
You have to be a FFS member. Lots of people use them. Personally I rarely if ever look at them even though I have access.

User avatar
Carlos Kickaball
Dumbledore
Posts: 7801
Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 18:02

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Carlos Kickaball »

Sutter Kane wrote:With so little information available at GW3, I still can't see how on earth he concluded going to a strong front 8 was the thing to do though unlike some, I'm not convinced that was a game changer.
I'm pretty well agreed with this. I think you guys are right when you say he focused on the core, and that this is a good thing to do, and that he focused on team value early on. What was unusual this season his how many points those primarily chasing team value got, after 10-12 weeks those who had taken quite a few hits were sitting rather pretty.
Sutter Kane wrote:he does obviously get bad luck but from what I've noticed, it tends to rarely give him bad weeks overall yet we all have stinkers from time to time.
Everyone gets bad luck sometimes, it's the balance that matters. If you could toss a coin 10 times and you got a pound for every head, getting 7 heads would be a fortunate result, not proof of your bad luck because you threw three tails. :lol:

The Dazzler
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 1248
Joined: 03 Dec 2008, 20:26
FS Record: 9th overall in FPL 2005/06, 50th 2010/11, 288th 2014/15

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by The Dazzler »

Sutter Kane wrote:With so little information available at GW3, I still can't see how on earth he concluded going to a strong front 8 was the thing to do though unlike some, I'm not convinced that was a game changer.
You don't see how he concluded it so early, therefore what? He didn't conclude it? It was a lucky coincidence?
He did conclude it early and used it all season (bar 5 GWs). And it became the 'correct' approach. It didn't go all swimmingly well for him. The 1st week he used it, he benched Wilson's hat trick. He also benched Mahrez's 15pts in GW11 due to it.
It seems standard play for the season now in hindsight but at the time, it seemed a very strange choice (that we commented on) and it was a move that casuals usually make.
I'm not claiming it was a game changer. What I am saying is that it shows he's brave, unorthodox and he's adaptable.

When he went to the Strong 8, I thought it was an anomoly and that he would soon return to the accepted path. At the end of the season, we can see it wasn't an anomaly. He made that decision and stuck to it.
So with the benefit of hindsight, we can look back and see that he saw something early and veered away from previously accepted best practice and engaged in what looked like an amateur move. It turned out to be the new best practise. He was right, we were wrong. I wouldn't dismiss that as not significant.
Every season is different to the last. Perhaps next season, that approach won't be successful.
Every season FPL tweak things. What did they tweak this season? The pricing for one thing. There were no more base price playing defenders. The minimum cost of fielding an all playing team went up. Was that it? Did he feel with the added cost, it would be best to spend a little extra and to have a viable Strong 8?
Was it the premiums not firing and therefore not taking up all our cash? I agree GW3 looks too early to make that call. Was it something else? It was something and it isn't insignificant.
Sutter Kane wrote:My reasoning for the 'non-adapt' comment, was simple and based on my opinions for the main reason he smashed it again this season; and also partly based on 2nd hand info perhaps from this thread :oops: , simply put, Ville chases value in the first few weeks (10 weeks or so??) and if you did that this season, you were generously rewarded not only with excellent team value but with fairly heavy points as well. The first 12 weeks of this season is all we need to concentrate on imo, with Ville.That made his season, from his WC to week 12. He wasn't really that great from then on (I may be stood corrected on that :lol: ) and didn't need to be, starting from 40k.
I'm not going to correct you but I am going to vigourously disagree with you. That's far too simplistic imo.
I aggressively chase team value early. I got to 48k in GW8 (Aguero's 25pts). I then plummetted over the next 10 weeks or so to 422k in GW17 before I slowly turned it around in the 2nd half of the season. Many other good mangers did similarly.
He was 33k in GW8. He was 86k in GW17. Most top managers suffered badly over that period. Ville did too but he managed it better.
In the total absence of any compelling, or even vaguely plausible, evidence that Ville is lucky, why don't you try and find alternative explanations for that? Most top managers struggled, so why didn't he? Don't you agree that most top managers play similarly? I think the evidence from this thread suggests that Ville does NOT play like other top managers. His adaptable style dealt with the changed landscape a lot better than managers like me who kept saying, "it'll go back to normal now. Okay, now. Now? What about now?"

User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Ruth_NZ »

The Dazzler wrote:I think the evidence from this thread suggests that Ville does NOT play like other top managers. His adaptable style dealt with the changed landscape a lot better than managers like me who kept saying: "It'll go back to normal now. Okay, now. Now? What about now?"
Well, I recognise the bit in colour sure enough. :oops: I brought Hazard in 3 times last season and only the last time was it the right time. One thing I'd like to know is whether VR seems to have a "thing" about using all his budget? For large swathes of last season you'd have done very well if you left a chunk of it unused. Was he that brave/foolhardy?

I'll also refer to one of my (as yet unanswered) questions earlier.
Ruth_NZ wrote:Anyway, what I am getting from your observations is telling me more than just the word "calm" which has been used about VR quite a bit. It is helping me to understand what that "calm" means. What I am reading is - steady forward planning, focus on points over 6 weeks rather than 1 week, no knee-jerks and no chasing fashionable punts but at the same time an inspective appraisal of player trends and readiness to adapt/react if they are convincing. Is that a reasonably fair summary?
I get the sense that he has an ability to clear his mind of pre-conceptions and look at the terrain neutrally. I thought that might show in transfers but maybe it shows in the front-8 thing as well. Now, that ability is top grade in any walk of life (and also quite rare). In which case the point you once made about the "distracting noise" of FPL forums makes sense. I know that one of the things that influenced me last season was the desire not to look foolish. That's something I'm grappling with (which is why I have mentioned it twice now). Maybe VR is just playing against himself.

User avatar
Sutter Kane
Dumbledore
Posts: 7522
Joined: 05 Aug 2010, 12:13
FS Record: Unknown.

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Sutter Kane »

@Dazz - When you say we were wrong and he was right - does that mean nearly all the players who beat him also played a strong front 8 throughout - when did front 8 being superior become fact? Was there reasonable justification for this I missed? Also is it absolutely nailed that he doesn't rely heavily on ffs points predictions?

How can somehow decide from 2 weeks that the premiums will misfire and continue to misfire for a while? In previous seasons, it's been the same and the premiums have always delivered sooner rather than later. Sorry my comments are sometimes rather flippant because I absolutely believe that this season, the sequence of events were utterly ridiculous/haphazard/insane. It may just be that we/I fear what we don't know, therefore we deny it's possible. Deep! Or not.

I repeat that the focus on core is his main strength - many managers don't do it, they just can't resist from wavering. It's still the start though for me...Can't he just get a really bad start, then we'd see what he's really made of? :P Even if he does, people will still say "he's not trying any more, he's bored, he must be having a baby, etc, etc"!

I remember looking at Hancock's season a few years ago, one of the ones after he had such brilliant first few seasons - and thinking you're doing nothing wrong, the decisions/transfers are still outstanding, just getting hammered by bad luck week after week. It's still my opinion it will happen to Ville in the end and he won't be able to recover to a fantastic season and not because he got bored. At least then he can't be considered omnipotent any more!

The Dazzler
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 1248
Joined: 03 Dec 2008, 20:26
FS Record: 9th overall in FPL 2005/06, 50th 2010/11, 288th 2014/15

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by The Dazzler »

Mo Bot wrote:I can see a whole host of possibilities for next season.....
Fantasy Ville (predict his next move)
Guess the starting XV for GW1

Interested to hear views on where he lost the extra 140 points required to win the whole thing. Is he too much of a follower and needs to lead more to get the big prize?
The reason we predict his next moves is not an end in and of itself.
Why we do it is to see if we are getting into his mindset and understanding how he's approaching the game. The previous season I had a very low hit-rate on his transfers, therefore I can surmise that I was not at all on his wavelength.
This season we had a much higher hit-rate, therefore we can surmise that we were somewhat closer to understanding how he was thinking. Due to the abnormally unpredictable nature of results this season, it is possible that he just played a bit 'safer' and therefore was easier to predict?

As for guessing the starting XV, I thought it was interesting that his intial team this season contained not a single newcomer to the Premier League and did not have even one player from a promoted side.
Perhaps as a Finn, who we don't think posts on any Fantasy forum, he had no knowledge of the promoted sides rosters. Certainly this season, he went to proven performers and engaged a 'wait and see' on any new guys. It'll be interesting to see what he does next year in his initial draft.

As for why he hasn't won it, clearly he's just been unlucky :D
Seriously though, you're playing against millions of opponents. It's always going to be very, very difficult to win the whole thing. I don't expect he ever will.
We all make mistakes every year, including Ville. It's the guy whose mistakes, against all odds, actually come through for him that usually wins it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ruth_NZ wrote:
The Dazzler wrote:I think the evidence from this thread suggests that Ville does NOT play like other top managers. His adaptable style dealt with the changed landscape a lot better than managers like me who kept saying: "It'll go back to normal now. Okay, now. Now? What about now?"
Well, I recognise the bit in colour sure enough. :oops: I brought Hazard in 3 times last season and only the last time was it the right time. One thing I'd like to know is whether VR seems to have a "thing" about using all his budget? For large swathes of last season you'd have done very well if you left a chunk of it unused. Was he that brave/foolhardy?

I'll also refer to one of my (as yet unanswered) questions earlier.
Ruth_NZ wrote:Anyway, what I am getting from your observations is telling me more than just the word "calm" which has been used about VR quite a bit. It is helping me to understand what that "calm" means. What I am reading is - steady forward planning, focus on points over 6 weeks rather than 1 week, no knee-jerks and no chasing fashionable punts but at the same time an inspective appraisal of player trends and readiness to adapt/react if they are convincing. Is that a reasonably fair summary?
I get the sense that he has an ability to clear his mind of pre-conceptions and look at the terrain neutrally. I thought that might show in transfers but maybe it shows in the front-8 thing as well. Now, that ability is top grade in any walk of life (and also quite rare). In which case the point you once made about the "distracting noise" of FPL forums makes sense. I know that one of the things that influenced me last season was the desire not to look foolish. That's something I'm grappling with (which is why I have mentioned it twice now). Maybe VR is just playing against himself.
If that's your summary of what you've read, go with it. I'm not really in favour of short summaries as I believe identifying aspects of his play and how they relate to the overall picture is much richer but what you have there seems fine to me. Others can chime in with their thoughts on your questions as many have contributed to this thread and I thank them for that.
Obviously if I was to do this again next year, which I don't think I will be, I would include a summary in the 1st post as it's needed to introduce the subject.
I know it's the 2nd time you raised your ego involvement. Do you really want me to tell you what I think on that subject? I don't think you do :D
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sutter Kane wrote:@Dazz - When you say we were wrong and he was right - does that mean nearly all the players who beat him also played a strong front 8 throughout - when did front 8 being superior become fact? Was there reasonable justification for this I missed? Also is it absolutely nailed that he doesn't rely heavily on ffs points predictions?

How can somehow decide from 2 weeks that the premiums will misfire and continue to misfire for a while? In previous seasons, it's been the same and the premiums have always delivered sooner rather than later. Sorry my comments are sometimes rather flippant because I absolutely believe that this season, the sequence of events were utterly ridiculous/haphazard/insane. It may just be that we/I fear what we don't know, therefore we deny it's possible. Deep! Or not.

I repeat that the focus on core is his main strength - many managers don't do it, they just can't resist from wavering. It's still the start though for me...Can't he just get a really bad start, then we'd see what he's really made of? :P Even if he does, people will still say "he's not trying any more, he's bored, he must be having a baby, etc, etc"!

I remember looking at Hancock's season a few years ago, one of the ones after he had such brilliant first few seasons - and thinking you're doing nothing wrong, the decisions/transfers are still outstanding, just getting hammered by bad luck week after week. It's still my opinion it will happen to Ville in the end and he won't be able to recover to a fantastic season and not because he got bored. At least then he can't be considered omnipotent any more!
Sutter, you're a slippery one :D
No, it doesn't mean nearly all the players that finished ahead of Ville used it. Come on, this means nothing. We are discussing FPL. We know that there are virtually no absolutes, everything is shades of grey.
No 'rule' is going to be universal. Every year there are going to be many players finishing well that have a poor understanding of the game and just got lucky.
But if any rule was (nearly) universal among good players, it was that playing a Strong 8 is bad.
Ville threw a golden rule out the window in GW3 and maintained it throughout the year. Many (obviously not all) good managers later adopted this tactic. That would be virtually unthinkable if I said to you a year ago that that would happen. Surely we can agree on that?
Ville is a skilled and deliberate manager. He decided that this was a good idea in GW3. He did this much earlier than most good managers.
I'm not saying this was a game changer. I'm not saying it wasn't. I am saying it's very interesting.
We just had a crazy season where many casual managers scored very well. What is a very common feature of casual managers teams? Too much squad strength, a strong XV and not enough focus on the first XI.
In a normal season, this is punished but in this season someone with a strong XV (or XIV or XIII) might have done pretty well. A Strong 8 is a move towards that. Perhaps he saw that before many of us did.

I already said that I agree GW3 would be too early to say the premiums wouldn't fire this season. But thinking about it, if you remove Chelsea (Ville had 2 in GW1 and jettisoned both in GW3 and by GW3 their problems were becoming evident), how many must have premiums were there?
Ville had Sanchez + Aguero in GW3, KDB was yet to sign for City, Rooney was off the boil, Sturridge is a crock, etc, etc.
Who would he need to make room for? Last season wasn't a season where we had a plethora of superpremiums like Ronaldo/Gerrard/Lampard/Fabregas/Rooney/Drogba/Tevez and we had to pick and choose. I can't see the prices now but how many 12m+ players were there? Even £10m+ players? Even when KDB became an option, players like Vardy + Mahrez had emerged and were huge financial enablers. So maybe it was a lack of faith in premiums. Maybe it was the pricing incuding no base price defenders. Maybe it was something else. Maybe it was a combination of these things.
I played this season the same way I play most seasons and I waited for the return of the premiums. Ville didn't.
I contend he did have a bad start, it just wasn't as bad as others due to how he adapted. He was 86k in GW17, with nearly half the season gone. As for a really, really bad start, maybe he had a couple in the previous seasons where we didn't look at him?
But hopefully he will have a terrible season next year and you'll be happy :D

Regarding the FFS points predictions, no it's not nailed.
He won't talk to us :( so we can't be sure. To be honest that was my main reason for the thread, to bring him here. I know my ego would love to have a thread on some forum all about me and I would be sure to come and lay some blessings on my devoted followers :D
I think the idea may have come from the Richie transfer. It surprised a lot of us and on further inspection, it turned out that Richie had the highest VFM points projection on FFS for the following 6 weeks. No one could understand the transfer so it looked like the FFS RMT might be a possibility. Maybe it was true that he bought Richie on that basis.
Ok, let's assume that particular transfer was made on that basis.
Does that mean that he buys all his players on that basis? Well, obviously no. He may do but it's far from conclusive proof. So let's dig deeper.
A very obvious proof that he doesn't is his historical record. He had 7 previous seasons prior to this. Did FFS points projections exist 8 years ago? I don't think FFS is 8 years old so I'm going to say no. I think ChrisA is the guy behind the points projections (and the HOF) so he may let us know. I think he had the points projections on his own site before moving to FFS? In any case, I don't think whatever projections were out there 8 years ago would be very accurate. And if Ville had an outstanding record before these points projections, do you think he'd stop using his own judgement to trust those? Pretty unlikely.

And I don't think he's omnipotent. I don't think he's head and shouders above some others, there are many good managers out there.
I wanted to explore for the forum how a good player plays. I could have picked many but why not pick the top ranked one?
I chose to post it in the niche RMT forum because I knew it would get less traffic. I wanted it to be concise and remain a readable length (apparently I failed in that! :D )
If it was in the main forum, it would be overrun and become almost unreadable (like the FPL genius thread) due to certain posters constantly derailing it.

User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Ruth_NZ »

The Dazzler wrote:I know it's the 2nd time you raised your ego involvement. Do you really want me to tell you what I think on that subject? I don't think you do :D
You can if you want to. You have my permission in advance to criticise the poster rather than the post. :D

Apart from that, thanks for your responses which have been interesting.

User avatar
Sutter Kane
Dumbledore
Posts: 7522
Joined: 05 Aug 2010, 12:13
FS Record: Unknown.

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Sutter Kane »

The Dazzler wrote: We may argue about how the HOF rankings work and how valid they are but let's just accept them at face value for a moment.
If you look at the historical HOF, Ville has a ranking of 98.29pts. Triggerlips is in 2nd place and he has a ranking of 97.24pts. So Ville has a lead of 1.05pts. It sounds small but Triggers lead over 3rd place is just 0.05pts. In fact, you would need to go all the way down to 30th place for Trigger to have as large a lead as Ville does over 2nd.

If you go to the 'live' in-play rankings, Villes lead is actually even bigger. Many of the top managers are struggling this year and Trigger slips in the live rankings to 17th. The career 23rd placed player David Meechan is now in 2nd place and he is 1.22pts behind Ville. You would have to go down to 33rd place for Meechan to have as big a lead.
Ville is not just ahead, he's miles ahead. And he's increasing his lead!
I think maybe I assumed incorrectly that you insinuated that Ville is miles ahead in terms of results, especially after this season!! Or is he only marginally ahead but that translates into a huge HOF gap?

I would be happy if he'd have a terrible start yes, because we'd learn something. A lot hopefully. I also hope he wins it at some point. I think we'd learn something then as well, when this mysterious maverick mute has to say something. :lol:

The Dazzler
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 1248
Joined: 03 Dec 2008, 20:26
FS Record: 9th overall in FPL 2005/06, 50th 2010/11, 288th 2014/15

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by The Dazzler »

Ruth_NZ wrote:
The Dazzler wrote:I know it's the 2nd time you raised your ego involvement. Do you really want me to tell you what I think on that subject? I don't think you do :D
You can if you want to. You have my permission in advance to criticise the poster rather than the post. :D
Even though that is a hugely tempting offer :D , I think I'll decline to do so here as this thread is about Ville Ronka. I'll do it via pm when I get around to it.
Ruth_NZ wrote:Apart from that, thanks for your responses which have been interesting.
Thanks for contributing constructively.
Sutter Kane wrote:
The Dazzler wrote: We may argue about how the HOF rankings work and how valid they are but let's just accept them at face value for a moment.
If you look at the historical HOF, Ville has a ranking of 98.29pts. Triggerlips is in 2nd place and he has a ranking of 97.24pts. So Ville has a lead of 1.05pts. It sounds small but Triggers lead over 3rd place is just 0.05pts. In fact, you would need to go all the way down to 30th place for Trigger to have as large a lead as Ville does over 2nd.

If you go to the 'live' in-play rankings, Villes lead is actually even bigger. Many of the top managers are struggling this year and Trigger slips in the live rankings to 17th. The career 23rd placed player David Meechan is now in 2nd place and he is 1.22pts behind Ville. You would have to go down to 33rd place for Meechan to have as big a lead.
Ville is not just ahead, he's miles ahead. And he's increasing his lead!
I think maybe I assumed incorrectly that you insinuated that Ville is miles ahead in terms of results, especially after this season!! Or is he only marginally ahead but that translates into a huge HOF gap?

I would be happy if he'd have a terrible start yes, because we'd learn something. A lot hopefully. I also hope he wins it at some point. I think we'd learn something then as well, when this mysterious maverick mute has to say something. :lol:
I admit it, I did insinuate it!
It's the absence of a single blowout season that gives him this lead (whereas most of us have at least one) and I accept that that blowout Ville season could, and probably will, come at some point. Then he'll be back down amongst the rest of us.
I concede that my comments above were indulging in a little bit of hype and I'm building the Ville mystique. It's just a bit of Barry Hearn type showmanship :D
The figures above were correct at the time of writing (they may be different when updated for the final tallies) but I accept that they may be misleading if they suggest he definitely is head and shoulders above the rest.
I'm not rulling out that he may be head and shoulders above but I'm not stating he definitively is. I certainly would have said he wasn't head and shoulders above prior to this season. After this season, I'm more open to the potential that he may be.
Of course the HOF is the 'official' ranking system so to speak but ChrisA said that it is heavily weighted to the most recent seasons. I think if you looked at 2/3/4/5 seasons worth of data, there were different leaders. So it depends on what you're looking for. If you were to take cash league winnings as a ranking system, I blow Ville out of the water :D
Perhaps Fiso could come up with their own ranking system. I don't know who would undertake such a Herculean task however.
Anyone seen MoSe around lately? :D

User avatar
Ardrageen
Red & Blue Braces
Posts: 415
Joined: 24 Jul 2008, 14:38
FS Record: Retired from FPL. Used to be ok at it. 120th FPL. 1st FFS HOF.

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Ardrageen »

The Dazzler wrote:Perhaps Fiso could come up with their own ranking system. I don't know who would undertake such a Herculean task however.
Anyone seen MoSe around lately? :D
Billy Whizz attempted to produce such a ranking system. viewtopic.php?f=82&t=102933&hilit=fiso+hall+of+fame

I updated it at the end of the 2014/2015 season. See the table on the last page of the thread viewtopic.php?f=82&t=102933&hilit=fiso+ ... &start=120

It might be too simplistic a ranking system for some peoples tastes but there is a clarity in its simplicity.

it uses the criteria below

Your position on the leaderboard will be based on the THIRD BEST ranking of your last four seasons played (thus encompassing your best three finishes - it's a quick and easy way of measuring consistency). If you’ve only played three seasons, that’s OK - your lowest finish will be the one that counts.

User avatar
snakzz
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 3613
Joined: 03 Oct 2012, 08:56

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by snakzz »

Gowanyalanger wrote:
The Dazzler wrote:Perhaps Fiso could come up with their own ranking system. I don't know who would undertake such a Herculean task however.
Anyone seen MoSe around lately? :D
Billy Whizz attempted to produce such a ranking system. viewtopic.php?f=82&t=102933&hilit=fiso+hall+of+fame

I updated it at the end of the 2014/2015 season. See the table on the last page of the thread viewtopic.php?f=82&t=102933&hilit=fiso+ ... &start=120

It might be too simplistic a ranking system for some peoples tastes but there is a clarity in its simplicity.

it uses the criteria below

Your position on the leaderboard will be based on the THIRD BEST ranking of your last four seasons played (thus encompassing your best three finishes - it's a quick and easy way of measuring consistency). If you’ve only played three seasons, that’s OK - your lowest finish will be the one that counts.
Sounds like an awesome idea.

User avatar
Ardrageen
Red & Blue Braces
Posts: 415
Joined: 24 Jul 2008, 14:38
FS Record: Retired from FPL. Used to be ok at it. 120th FPL. 1st FFS HOF.

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Ardrageen »

Hi snakzz, if we included the 2015/2016 season, you would have a ranking of 10,052 using that system, very impressive record!

User avatar
snakzz
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 3613
Joined: 03 Oct 2012, 08:56

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by snakzz »

Gowanyalanger wrote:Hi snakzz, if we included the 2015/2016 season, you would have a ranking of 10,052 using that system, very impressive record!
Dont know if thats good or bad with that system :D

Well its decent, but way behind many others here sadly.

My first season I started after some GWs since I just learned about the game when the season had started. (Hence my bad placement that year)

Sadly I was not smart enough to start an new account when I decided to play seriously for the last 4 years and got addicted to the game :)
(If I had known it was an HoF and other stuff like this I would have done that:))

User avatar
MoSe
Dumbledore
Posts: 9550
Joined: 10 Sep 2014, 12:25
Location: next door S.Siro stadium
FS Record: FISODAS CUP Winner Season 25
FISO H2H Winner: 15/16 Div2 - 16/17 Div1
FISO Mirror: 16/17 PL Winner

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by MoSe »

The Dazzler wrote:Of course the HOF is the 'official' ranking system so to speak but ChrisA said that it is heavily weighted to the most recent seasons. I think if you looked at 2/3/4/5 seasons worth of data, there were different leaders. So it depends on what you're looking for. If you were to take cash league winnings as a ranking system, I blow Ville out of the water :D
Perhaps Fiso could come up with their own ranking system. I don't know who would undertake such a Herculean task however.
Anyone seen MoSe around lately? :D
  1. Official: I understand it is FFS official system
    By that I mean it's not anything FPL official, just one site's private ranking.
    Proof be it that (very legitimately) they restrict it to those who join the FFS league
    (always wondered, if you miss their league one season, do they drop you out their HoF that season?
    and should you leave their league halfway?)
  2. weighted: you'd assume having a weight is the default, but UEFA coefficients for Club competitions don't: they use a flat average over last 5 seasons.
    So indeed the choice of the weight influences what you get, and it might even shift some rankings around.
    IIRC ChrisA posted here that he uses the combination of two different weights.
    I was thinking myself to study the curves "envelope" using the weight as a parameter.
  3. seasons span: those who have read the "genius" thread know I have advocated there the idea that over 4 selected seasons there have been other players who obtained results comparable to VR's if not better.
    So if any my bias would be directed there: to demonstrate that you can pick a weight or a weighting system by which VR is not 1st.
    This not because some VR aversion, but to show that his results don't prove he's a genius or at least not his results alone. I'd be happy to accept he's a genius by the analysis of his moves and strategy, as you're doing here.
  4. FISO: the above point is moot anyway, as if we go by the same standards as the other site, only those joining the FISO Forum League would be entitled to be listed in the Official FISO Ranking...
    And Ville won't thus be in it.
    That would pose a seriously restricting condition, as by my research for our League Cup this season there are almost as many regular posters here who did NOT join our Forum League as there were who joined it.
    That would be fine to me, as I've been lobbying all season for posters to join it :mrgreen:
    But of course the board endorsement would be required to deem any HoF or ranking the Forum "Official" one, and in such case it would be up to them to set the inclusion criteria compatible with the site policies.
anyway, I don't program (last time it was in C++ two decades ago) and never developed in a Web environment, so I lack the tools and skills, and I'd need someone to help me first by collecting the members historic data into excel :oops:

OTOH that would be of course a fascinating endeavour to me, especially as to fulfil it I'd have to be officially endowed with Forum Big Brother powers! 8-) :twisted: :mrgreen:

User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Ruth_NZ »

MoSe wrote:OTOH that would be of course a fascinating endeavour to me, especially as to fulfil it I'd have to be officially endowed with Forum Big Brother powers! 8-) :twisted: :mrgreen:
I vote to give MoSe Big Brother powers. :mrgreen:

I don't know what it means but it sounds like a good idea anyway. :)

User avatar
Vid
Head Moderator
Posts: 21729
Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:33
FS Record: winning is a distant memory

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by Vid »

MoSe wrote: OTOH that would be of course a fascinating endeavour to me, especially as to fulfil it I'd have to be officially endowed with Forum Big Brother powers! 8-) :twisted: :mrgreen:
Is that a job application? :D

ChrisA
Kevin and Perry
Posts: 12
Joined: 04 Jun 2015, 20:41

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by ChrisA »

Hey! I've updated the HoF and as it should be uploaded in the next few days on FFS (it should be available to members and non-members as it is the close of the season). Ville Ronka is still top- in fact his lead is now 1.15 points, which is the same size gap as from 2nd to 33rd! :o

The Dazzler
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 1248
Joined: 03 Dec 2008, 20:26
FS Record: 9th overall in FPL 2005/06, 50th 2010/11, 288th 2014/15

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by The Dazzler »

ChrisA wrote:Hey! I've updated the HoF and as it should be uploaded in the next few days on FFS (it should be available to members and non-members as it is the close of the season). Ville Ronka is still top- in fact his lead is now 1.15 points, which is the same size gap as from 2nd to 33rd! :o

Thx Chris!
We expected Ville would be still top but it's a nice scoop for us here at Fiso to hear the confirmation here first :D

User avatar
baganboy
Comfortably Dumb(ledore)
Posts: 5874
Joined: 05 Aug 2008, 06:59
FS Record: 2011/12 - 212. 2019/20 - 222.
Altogether 6 top 10Ks. 8 top 20Ks. 9 top 50Ks.

Re: Let's catch up with Ville

Post by baganboy »

Dazzler, delightful read, this thread. Thanks for starting it. Not finished reading yet - but this would perhaps give me a microcosm of what I missed this season. Will be back for questions.
Will be playing (a lot less seriously) this season.

View Latest: 1 Day View Your posts
Post Reply

Return to “FPL Team Diaries & RMTs”