PB Matrix

  • I have been a long term critic of the matrix, but the last few days have been particularly concerning.

    After Jordan Henderson's performance in Liverpools 1-1 draw at home to West Brom was deemed good enough to win midfielder PB, Harvey Barnes goal +performance was somehow trumped by Mason Mount.

    The thing that was particularly odd. Barnes finished the days games in the 170s and Mount in the 150s. hours later there was only 3 points between them. At midnight Barnes was still ahead. This morning mount has 165 points.

    There's no accountability to know where these extra points have come from and why the scores are so inaccurate to start with.

    Part of the fun of FI is trying to get your player win PB, but this still ruined no as well. Apart from the scores clearly being inaccurate, the matrix is rewarding average performances.

    You could watch a game of football and still not have a clue who will be top PB scorer.

  • Jordan Henderson win was some what freakish 158 total passes 144 accurate in 90 mins to put it into context Messi in his last game when he scored a 10 with Whoscored had 84 passes with 75 accurate

  • @NewUser84362 I believe the reason the payouts were moved back to 9-11 was to make sure the right player wins, as Opta will make changes after a game has finished.

    Probably is a better system, as FI are now paying out based on accurate scores, but I accept it is frustrating for anyone following the PB scores live, especially if a win is whipped away from one of your holds.

  • It would be good if you see the breakdown of how each player’s score is made up each match, ideally in real time. I think that would give people more confidence in the system.

    But ultimately it’s based on Opta data and if they change who a shot off target, a pass or a foul, etc, is credited to after a match ends, then it will have an impact on PB scores.

  • @ocs123 do you think it's a trust issue? Lots of people have suggested having a full breakdown but it's never really interested me. Is it because people don't trust the numbers?

    I know people have used Opta breakdowns and applied the FI points in the past to test it and the numbers tallied from memory, so I've never had any reason to think the final numbers published aren't right.

  • Watching the PB score live is meant to be a positive of the platform, but it's pointless if the scores are inaccurate.

    For there to be a 30 point swing isn't good enough. For Mount to be awarded to have had a better game than Barnes just isn't true.

    Also, if you held Mount you've missed out on the price spike that happens when a player looks like winning PB. Instead Barnes got that, who didnt win PB.

  • @Mintyfresh

    There needs to be a way you can see a breakdown of points. It's about accountability.

    I don't think people should be guessing....

  • @NewUser84362 no that's fine, I was just interested if it was a trust issue or just curiosity, as the breakdown is of no interest to me. I just want the right player paid out and if that means waiting for Opta to finalise their stats, I'm happy to accept there may sometimes be a late change.

  • @Mintyfresh

    but do you not think that impact on the enjoyability of the site?

    Also PB winner is now a big part of peoples investments. Why should you be going to bed at midnight (2 hours post match) and not know the true scorers of players?

    It's just a bit amateur and unconvicngin to me.

  • There's nothing worse than watching a game and keeping an eye on the PB scores and seeing your guy winning at midnight when the market closes, only to wake up in the morning to find that OPTA have changed the scores during the night and you haven't won. Causes too much negative sentiment and takes the enjoyment out of match days.

    FI need to stop putting all accountability on Opta and take more responsibility of their platform. Give us a final deadline of 11 o clock or something, whatever the positions are then get paid out. Update the T&Cs and let everyone know so there can't be any comebacks. It's a similar situation with position changes.

    FI don't have to accept all the position changes Opta do on a whim. In 99% of instances position changes has no impact to any of Opta's other customers bur for FI it's huge, they should make a point that they'll go with what ever it is on 1st of month, start of the season, twice a season, whatever they decide to do and stick to it.

  • @NewUser84362 said in PB Matrix:

    Also PB winner is now a big part of peoples investments. Why should you be going to bed at midnight (2 hours post match) and not know the true scorers of players?

    Sometimes goal scorers are disputed and we don't know the official verdict straight away. Was it strikers goal or a defenders own goal? Some delay in awarding and verifying points is inevitable even if it is frustrating for FI users.

  • @NewUser84362 no, doesn't bother me to be honest. I can't spend the dividends until they are in my account, so it's not an issue for me. I would trade for IPDs on a match day and those aren't affected by this, so doesn't affect my match day enjoyment at all.

    Obviously sucks on those days you lose out to a late Opta revision, but on the flip side, there are days when I'll benefit from it, so it all evens out.

  • @Zizou unfortunately, FI used to effectively do this, with a 12am cut off, but there were becoming more instances of late changes and people were kicking off that their hold scored more points, but because dividends had already been paid, the wrong person had one. Moving the deadline to 9am was intended to give Opta a chance to finalise the stats so that the right person one. In that way, this latest change shows the system is working perfectly, as this was exactly the reason the deadline was pushed back. The trade off is though that you won't know the final PBs for certain until post midnight.

    Not actually sure which system is better, although if I had to pick, I think I prefer the current 9am cut off.

  • @Mintyfresh I agree and you'll never please everyone and regardless of what decision they make, people will still complain. I just feel that drawing a line when the market closes should be final. People wake up in the morning expecting to get dividends and don't get them and it's not a good look.

    If they put it in their T&Cs and let all the users know about a rule change, they won't need to pay out twice on PB winners.

  • @NewUser84362 said in PB Matrix:

    Part of the fun of FI is trying to get your player win PB, but this still ruined no as well. Apart from the scores clearly being inaccurate, the matrix is rewarding average performances.

    Sports Stack Careers, pinged you straight after the match to say you'd won divs and paid them instantly too, which was far more enjoyable than what we have here but on the other hand, it is really harsh if you get screwed over by inaccurate data, so as annoying as the current system is, I think it's a lot better that we have the correct person paid, rather than rushing to reward the wrong person. Some of us wait months for the odd PB win.

    I suspect the main reasons for the deepest OPTA changes, is the impact of VAR. If there's an attack that's deemed to be offside, the ref now puts the flag up after the play has finished. A lot of Key Passes, Secondary Key Passes, Shots, Last Man Tackles, Clearances, etc can happen in that time which are then wiped away because VAR deem an offside to have taken place 30 seconds earlier.

  • Its one of those that can go one way or the other. I've been on both ends, where I thought I'd won but didn't and then also surprised when they were correct and I got the few extra points to win.

    They have to rely on opta for the stats, so the only thing they could do is just cut off data downloads at a certain point each day, but I suspect that brings technical challenges. Since it's a 50-50 which is best, then they chose this option and at least get the correct winner, even if it does lead to some disappointments.

  • One thing that i noticed last night was how Harvey Barnes score was mysteriously reduced at dead on 8pm by around 20 points (remember this would have been just after the point of people buying into him for the "Guaranteed" PB win prior to the 8pm deadline of which there was a flurry of trading on him in the 10 mins or so leading up to it.) - i thought at the time hmmm he has now been put well within OPTA range as i reduced his lead to 3pts - then low and behold, overnight the scores are updated and Mount wins.

    I wonder if as much trades would have gone into Barnes had the scores been changed 10 minutes earlier.

  • Some you win some you lose, over the season they will go for you and against you.

    They changed the system to stop people whinging about wrong data and having to pay out twice.

    You get in your head the real deadline for PB is 0900 and not 0000.

  • You make good points but the correct result is the most important outcome, so in future we must manage our expectations before 9am. It would be nice to have a more accurate matrix, I was lucky to hold an equal amount of Barnes and mount so I was not impacted on this occasion.

Log in to reply