BlogNomic: The First Dynasty of Desertfrog

Good start.

The favourite is going to start with 1:1 odds; would be nice to see that come off the baseline a bit.

Why get rid of the existing Giolitti formula?

I’m open to tweaks to the formula, if people have suggestions.

I removed the Odds formula for Giolitti because it didn’t seem to represent the actual track record of the winners. I’m willing to remove that line and leave the Giolitti rules alone if the rest of the proposal is otherwise acceptable

I’d need to do some math to see under what circumstances the new numbers are reasonable - I already did that math for the current Giolitti odds.

This formula has an obvious issue with ClingBoom’s odds not adjusting for the extra participants, though, which makes ClimgBoom bets almost certainly terrible.

It’s probably worth defining specific Odds rules for ClingBoom, if that’s the outlier. I’d rather do that than make the overall formula more complicated to accommodate just one Sport.

Also, a participant with a Track Record of 0 results in a divide-by-zero payout.

Good point, I just now added a minimum of 1 for Y.

Since Track Record 0 is presumed a longer shot than Track Record 1, I’d double X in addition to setting Y to 1.

For today’s Nomich match, this would give odds of:
6 : 6
6 : 6
1 : 1
So even odds all around and all worse than the current default odds.

For tomorrow’s Blogbots, it would give odds of
Ducktank Win 8:1
Hard Hat Win 8:8
Ducktank SD.  8:1
Hard Hat SD.  8:8
Draw       7:1

Where giving even odds to the favorite seems extremely generous, and Sudden Death odds are bogus anyway.

...not that the current odds are all that rational outside Giolitti, but this doesn’t seem to be much improvement.

I welcome suggestions for improvements that don’t overcomplicate things or require simulations via coding. Simpler tweaks are better.

Maybe the favorite in each Sport gets X:X+Y odds rather than X:X, so that you get paid a bit less for betting on the favorite.

If both Participants have the same Track Record values, make it X+1:X odds for each, which is similar to but not exactly like the current odds.

I did struggle with Draw, especially since it can vary with each Sport. Some Sports can naturally lead to a Draw. With others, a Draw is highly unlikely. Now that the Method of Resolution is hidden, and with support building to simplify this Method into just a formula, it’s hard to say.

At the end of the day, the information we will have is the Track Record, which should probably be regenerated if a Proposal to reduce the Method of Resolution to a formula is enacted.

In any case, the current set of Odds needs improving, and I think it’s better to get incremental improvements than outright rejections with no follow-up suggestions.

for Guy Wins outcomes, X = 3 plus total of other participants’ track records, and Y = own track record.
for Draw outcomes, X = total of all participants’ track records and Y = 3.

Three is not necessarily the right constant to use for the Draw’s effective Track Record.

Per Bucky. I think this is the right approach, just needs a bit of fine-tuning.

Withdrawn, I’ll re-propose with Bucky’s suggestion