Annoying quirks of MB
playingcards1 last edited by playingcards1
Two screenshots below. One gets 80 points, the other 110. Normally, I am absolutely of the opinion that people should learn the scoring matrix and play the game accordingly. But the contrast below is actually quite indefensible, and not something that users can account for.
Sadly it makes the MB system look rather arbitrary, amateurish, and random. I really hope we get a bit more rigour in the MB system soon, because there’s no way a headline hailing the best in the world after a masterclass should be scoring less well than a gruesome eye injury... :D
(I think the reason is “masterclass” doesn’t register as a positive multiplier. There’s another article further down where the phrase “Hazard masterclass” scores 20).
Zidave last edited by
I thought Hazard would win MB yesterday too but Firmino plays for Liverpool and it was the live game so would attract media attention I guess. I personally don't like MB. If I was a journalist I would be having a field day getting on players I was going to write about the next day.
I noticed this as well. As a new user, I found it quite discouraging and I agree that a less arbitrary system is highly needed. I will not deposit more until this and the order book are in place.
dannypea last edited by
who once said 'all publicity is good publicity'?
Because on that basis... All publicity should be valued the same?
I don't like the 'top 200 only' getting the Media benefits.. I don't like the way the scoring works... But I do like telling people week in week out that by holding the top nine players on FI that you will dominate MB dividend days enough to not worry about what each article on every paper is worth...
IF buying for MB... Buy Ronaldo, Buy Messi, Buy players that score hat-tricks... IF buying for PB... Buy Ronaldo, Buy Messi, Buy players that score hat-tricks and IF buying for GROWTH... Buy Ronaldo, Buy Messi, Buy players that score hat-tricks...
My point is... Rather than worrying about how the game should be played... Play it how it is being played... that way you'll make much more money from it!!!!!
playingcards1 last edited by
I think that’s exactly my point. But in this instance, a player scoring a hattrick wasn’t scoring points as highly because the buzz aggregator doesn’t recognise “masterclass” as a positive multiplier.
Firmino was described as a “star” who got his eyes gouged. 110 points.
Hazard was hailed as the “best in the world” for his “masterclass”. 80 points.
This isn’t about a single MB outcome. It’s about putting confidence into the platform - reassuring new and existing users that their well researched and reasoned buys (whether Hazard, Ronaldo, or Messi etc) will be registering points in line with the rules of the game. And that means very positive stories should garner more points than random injury stories.
dannypea last edited by
Totally agree it's often farcical how it works but then for me so is PB and the whole FI system if i think about it too hard!!!
What my point was referring to is that it all seems to come out in the wash if you back 'the right' big players so in the end, Hazard hat-trick and all got the PB and the MB he deserved whilst Firmino got nothing but a poke in the eye...