247 sats \ 13 replies \ @Undisciplined 15 Mar \ on: Stacker Sports-Day 101- Rivalry Game (The Duel) Stacker_Sports
I recall someone saying they were a Broncos fan, but I haven't seen them around for a while. Otherwise, I don't see any potential duels for the Raiders this season.
Can the duels be player vs player? For instance, SGA vs Jokic is a good potential duel for me and @gnilma. The Nuggets aren't my team, but Jokic is my guy.
I didn't touch on the player duels point. That could be really fun as well. Say when Nuggets play Thunder you take Jokic and gnilma takes SGA and whichever player gets the most points wins. I like that. Good addition.
reply
Points only? Way to stack the deck against the most well-rounded offensive talent of all-time.
Whatever the terms are, if Jokic puts up a 13/27/18 on 80% shooting, I expect to be declared the victor. I don't care if SGA does his 35/1/1 thing.
reply
Well if you issue the challenge I would think that you would set the terms of victory or at least propose them and then your challenger can agree or counter with their own terms. Is there an OKC/Denver game coming soon?
reply
Fair enough, it looks like they've already had all their matchups anyway. It'll have to wait for the postseason.
reply
That example alone is probably going to make it hard for the player vs player duel to happen. Often times, players differ in play style and position, so it's quite hard to gauge who is the clear winner, especially if both players played well. Probably easier to do this with games, as the winner is always clear.
But I guess like what GR suggested, the post creator can always set the terms and the opponent can accept or refuse or counter offer. Either way, this duel concept sounds like a lot of fun and I look forward to participate in something like this in the future. Will be even willing to put some sats where my mouth is.
reply
We could also have a push, if the outcome is in dispute.
My preferred terms would be something like "Jokic will outplay SGA". If we both agree that that's what happened, then you pay. If we both agree that that didn't happen, then I pay. Otherwise, no one pays.
It seems more satisfying to make the other person admit they lost, rather than have it be objectively determined by some metric. Of course there is the catch-all metric of "game score" if we want to be objective about it.
reply
This will be very subjective and biased, unless the difference in performance in clearly apparent. But I'm sure we can figure something out.
It seems more satisfying to make the other person admit they lost, rather than have it be objectively determined by some metric.
So you not only want to win their sats but also want humiliate them in the process. It's tough being your opponent man...
Yes I also recall a Broncos fan lurking when we were doing the NFL pick 'ems but don't remember who it was and if they are still around. If the Raiders play a Thursday, Sunday or Monday night game, I am sure someone will take the other side and challenge you.
reply
The Heat and Raptors play two in a row next month. No one will think less of you if you decline the challenge.
reply
I am cheering for the Raptors to lose so they can keep their first round pick but in the spirit of competition I will happily take the challenge. I just won't be disappointed when I lose.
April 12? We can do that one unless something better comes to our attention between now and then.
reply
You can't really win a duel against a masochist.
reply