[156mphserve]

I choose multi vote single poll option like we've had all along because I believe this is the way Hian was going to run it.

Also, how many people are in the final? 8 or 10? Hian had planned on 10 I think

[Arakasi]

Originally Posted by duong

no ! Eden's thread is not at all a single choice poll, it's a poll which gives 10 points for first favorite, 9 for second one, etc ... until the tenth, quite like what Slasher calls "the Race". It's not sure that a "single choice" poll would have the same result (there was something like that organized on MTF in the end of previous years and Fed did not win it although I think he should win it if it was organized in good conditions like Eden's poll : Eden's poll has many more voters than MTF's polls in the end of year) .

I wasn't clear. I meant it would be a duplicate in the sense that the result would be the same i.e. Federer would win by a landslide. I didn't mean the actual format is the same.

[duong]

OK Arakasi, personally I wanted to insist on the superior interest of Eden's poll comparing to a single choice poll.

Something for Slasher : I had the impression that the players in youir first semifinal were ordered according to the number of votes they got in previous rounds.

I think it would be better to make a kind of "random order"

[Pratik]

My pick would be Elimination or Tennis Draw. But, since neither of them have any chance of wining the poll, I voted for single choice.
In multiple choice, it becomes a hybrid between favourite and least least favourite.

[TBkeeper]

Originally Posted by Pratik

My pick would be Elimination or Tennis Draw. But, since neither of them have any chance of wining the poll, I voted for single choice.
In multiple choice, it becomes a hybrid between favourite and least least favourite.

So ?

[Pratik]

Originally Posted by TBkeeper

So ?

Well, for one, the thread titles say "Favourite Top 100 Tennis Player". The most liked player theoretically could also be disliked/hated by several people. Hence, a multiple choice poll would not give the correct result.

[TBkeeper]

Originally Posted by Pratik

Well, for one, the thread titles say "Favourite Top 100 Tennis Player". The most liked player theoretically could also be disliked/hated by several people. Hence, a multiple choice poll would not give the correct result.

Yea i know ? so what ?
WE HAVE 2340930490 THREADS like this ... let this one be DIFFERENT gosh ...

[Orange Wombat]

It should be a multiple choice poll with the 8 players and also options for "Warlocq" and "I hate tennis",(As Hian would have done). You pick the two winning players after a certain amount of days and pit them against each other in a final. People vote for the finalists similar to ACC competition.

[Lestat]

I think it was already decided...

[duong]

Originally Posted by Orange Wombat

It should be a multiple choice poll with the 8 players and also options for "Warlocq" and "I hate tennis",(As Hian would have done).

Hian seemed to do this one seriously : no "Warlocq" and "I hate tennis" options

[Featherer]

Originally Posted by Pratik

Well, for one, the thread titles say "Favourite Top 100 Tennis Player". The most liked player theoretically could also be disliked/hated by several people. Hence, a multiple choice poll would not give the correct result.

Good example of an opinion.
Would a single choice poll "give the correct result"?
What do you think about this?:

Originally Posted by Featherer

You can also vote tactically in a single choice poll (when it's close and you vote for the other one).
That can have a very strong impact as well. Single choice is far from being perfect either.
In case of this contest you can even see from the performances in the SF who you would have to vote for in order to affect the result of the player you dislike.
If you don't like Federer and Haas wins his semis, then you don't even have to wait for the poll result to get close (in the finals), but just vote for Haas when you want.

But with single choice you can't vote for more than one player you like, unlike in the previous stages!
Imagine you dragged your 2nd favorite player all the way to the final, but now the format gets changed and you have to let loose of them ...in order to avoid reduce some possible tactical voting.
Don't you guys think that this is more severe?

Would a single choice poll even be closer to correctness, now that Nadal and Murray have already been out-multiplechoiced?

I say, let's go all the way with multiple choice. It's a tournament. Nobody is safe.

[BackhandDTL]

Go with your tennis draw idea, it sounds great. The one concern I have is how the issue of sequence will be handled.

If it's 40-30 in favor of Player A (meaning he's up 3-votes-to-2) and two more votes come in, one in his favor and one in favor of player B, isn't it important to know the order in which they occurred? If Player A got the next vote, it would be game, but if player B got it, they would be at deuce.


You could make it post-only, but that might be tedious to keep track of, and it might lower the overall participation. I like the idea, though, because it could work like the seed-elimination game only without the chance to reverse a result, meaning four straight votes is game no matter what.

Anyway, just some ideas and ponderings, but I like the "tennis draw" idea you have.

[Freak3yman84]

Originally Posted by Orange Wombat

It should be a multiple choice poll with the 8 players and also options for "Warlocq" and "I hate tennis",(As Hian would have done).

GOAT choices! I like this idea.

[Pratik]

Originally Posted by TBkeeper

Yea i know ? so what ?
WE HAVE 2340930490 THREADS like this ... let this one be DIFFERENT gosh ...

I do not recall having a series of polls(of any format) with voting between top 100 players.
I remember favourite player from a particular country, a poll of federer vs other, a poll of federer vs nadal and of course Eden's thread.
Also, opinions change over time. Theoretically if we had had this sort of a poll a few years ago, the result could be very different now. Take this thread for example:
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=79422
If a poll was conducted between the same players now, I really doubt that we get the same results.

Originally Posted by Featherer

Good example of an opinion.
Would a single choice poll "give the correct result"?
What do you think about this?:


Would a single choice poll even be closer to correctness, now that Nadal and Murray have already been out-multiplechoiced?

I say, let's go all the way with multiple choice. It's a tournament. Nobody is safe.

I agree with what you said. That's my I mentioned:

Originally Posted by Pratik

My pick would be Elimination or Tennis Draw. But, since neither of them have any chance of wining the poll, I voted for single choice.
In multiple choice, it becomes a hybrid between favourite and least least favourite.

As elimination is very similar to Eden's thread(with hourly knockouts), I would go for Tennis Draw. As I said earlier:

Originally Posted by Pratik

My pick would be Elimination or Tennis Draw. But, since neither of them have any chance of wining the poll, I voted for single choice.
In multiple choice, it becomes a hybrid between favourite and least least favourite.

My opinion that among the two, a single choice would be better. Not saying it is the best.
Again speaking theoretically, a strategic vote against a player can go to any of the others in a single choice poll, at least in the beginning when there is no obvious front runner other than the supposed favourite. Some people may vote for player B, some for player C, etc. In a multiple choice poll, you just vote for everyone put the player you dislike. If anything, the single choice poll would have a lesser "negative" effect.

[Pratik]

Originally Posted by BackhandDTL

Go with your tennis draw idea, it sounds great. The one concern I have is how the issue of sequence will be handled.

If it's 40-30 in favor of Player A (meaning he's up 3-votes-to-2) and two more votes come in, one in his favor and one in favor of player B, isn't it important to know the order in which they occurred? If Player A got the next vote, it would be game, but if player B got it, they would be at deuce.


You could make it post-only, but that might be tedious to keep track of, and it might lower the overall participation. I like the idea, though, because it could work like the seed-elimination game only without the chance to reverse a result, meaning four straight votes is game no matter what.

Anyway, just some ideas and ponderings, but I like the "tennis draw" idea you have.

I like the tennis draw idea too.

My only issue with it is that we may not get enough participation in the off season to complete so many matches, each with multiple sets.