[BostonCard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=10428.msg95329#msg95329 date=1409095935]
[quote author=PrinceLightfoot link=topic=10428.msg95138#msg95138 date=1408939903]
If I remember correctly, we ended up following this formula: [Stanford predicted score - Stanford actual score] + [Opponent predicted score - Opponent actual score] = margin of error. The total number of points awarded is based on the number of players entering in a prediction for that week...i.e. 20 predictions, the person with the smallest margin of error gets 20 points, 2nd place gets 19 points, etc. There was a 10(?) point bonus if your score prediction was perfect and a 5(?) point penalty for picking against Stanford with the result being a Stanford win. Your weekly score would be added to the season-to-date totals.

If that's the formula, I'll predict a 0-0 tie, as I would have the lowest margin of error possible (assuming any scoring whatsoever, it will be a negative number).  In seriousness, I assume there are absolute values around each of the square brackets.  And although I don't want to mess with a formula that seems to have served the board well for a while, I do think there should be some bonus for predicting the correct team as winner (or a penalty against picking Stanford if Stanford lost).

All that being said, I'll go with a 31-10 Stanford win.

BC
[/quote]

This is what a 0 - 0 prediction would yield against a 35 - 10 final score (81alum is the winner in this scenario with a near perfect prediction).

Total Error = 45
Av Bias = -25

I wouldn't suggest that tactic unless you believe both defenses are immovable objects.  ;)

Publius and shinsengumi - I can help as well. I have everything built and ready to display if you all are unable to for the week. The following post is what Gauss built for display on the weekly pregame but if you want a different display, go for it.

I absolutely agree with adding the ESPN bloggers and anyone else in the media world that regularly puts forth Stanford predictions.
[/quote]

Yes, I figured that was what was intended.  But as written:
Stanford predicted score - Stanford actual score: 0 - 35 = -35
Opponent predicted score - Opponent actual score: 0 - 10 = -10
Total = -45

That's why I suggested you meant to put absolute values around the equation.

But it sounds like what you are going for based on the table below is the difference in scoring differential.  That equation for that would be:

| (Predicted Stanford score - Predicted Opponent score) - (Actual Stanford score - Actual Opponent score) |

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=10428.msg95329#msg95329 date=1409095935]
[quote author=PrinceLightfoot link=topic=10428.msg95138#msg95138 date=1408939903]
If I remember correctly, we ended up following this formula: [Stanford predicted score - Stanford actual score] + [Opponent predicted score - Opponent actual score] = margin of error. The total number of points awarded is based on the number of players entering in a prediction for that week...i.e. 20 predictions, the person with the smallest margin of error gets 20 points, 2nd place gets 19 points, etc. There was a 10(?) point bonus if your score prediction was perfect and a 5(?) point penalty for picking against Stanford with the result being a Stanford win. Your weekly score would be added to the season-to-date totals.

If that's the formula, I'll predict a 0-0 tie, as I would have the lowest margin of error possible (assuming any scoring whatsoever, it will be a negative number).  In seriousness, I assume there are absolute values around each of the square brackets.  And although I don't want to mess with a formula that seems to have served the board well for a while, I do think there should be some bonus for predicting the correct team as winner (or a penalty against picking Stanford if Stanford lost).

All that being said, I'll go with a 31-10 Stanford win.

BC
[/quote]

This is what a 0 - 0 prediction would yield against a 35 - 10 final score (81alum is the winner in this scenario with a near perfect prediction).

Total Error = 45
Av Bias = -25

I wouldn't suggest that tactic unless you believe both defenses are immovable objects.  ;)

Publius and shinsengumi - I can help as well. I have everything built and ready to display if you all are unable to for the week. The following post is what Gauss built for display on the weekly pregame but if you want a different display, go for it.

I absolutely agree with adding the ESPN bloggers and anyone else in the media world that regularly puts forth Stanford predictions.
[/quote]

Yes, I figured that was what was intended.  But as written:
Stanford predicted score - Stanford actual score: 0 - 35 = -35
Opponent predicted score - Opponent actual score: 0 - 10 = -10
Total = -45

That's why I suggested you meant to put absolute values around the equation.

But it sounds like what you are going for based on the table below is the difference in scoring differential.  That equation for that would be:

| (Predicted Stanford score - Predicted Opponent score) - (Actual Stanford score - Actual Opponent score) |

BC