Dead Pool IV - the return of Zsa Zsa

Okay, so people seem to be getting the itch regarding the new pool . . . rumour has it that WildBill and DataMn have been tweeting furiously (on "ghost accounts") with the Grim Reaper in order to line up picks for next season, and hold off on a few at the tail end of this one. So, I thought I may as well put out the introductory post for Dead Pool IV, and detail the rules for next year.

Basics:

Each manager will select a roster of 50 players. This roster will consist of 10 players in each of the following 5 categories:

Politics
Sports
Entertainment
Music
Misc.

After selecting 50 players, managers are responsible for numbering their roster in the order that they wish them to be drafted. The 5 categories are not relevant to this numbering procedure (ie a manager can list all his Misc. players in the top 10). It is strictly who the manager thinks is most likely to expire within the calendar year.

Pay-offs:

Monies will be paid out on the following, graduated basis:

Player is 81+ = $5.00
Player is 66+ = $6.00
Player is 51+ = $8.00
Player is <50 = $10.00
Player is 27 yrs. old = $20.00

Managers are responsible for registering a "winner". You will have one month from publication of death to make your claim. After this one month period, the value of your player will be reduced by $1.00 per month until the value reaches $0.00. Winners not claimed by 31 January, 2014 will be deemed forfeit.

Ineligible players:

The following categories of players will be deemed ineligible for the draft:

Death Row inmates or persons under a sentence of death, regardless of country, or status of appeals. NO EXCEPTIONS FOR ANY REASON.

People who fall into the category of "World's Oldest . . .".
There will be an exception made if said player has fame/notoriety for something beyond their age (ie Oldest living NFL QB, Oldest Stanley Cup winner, etc). Any player in this category will be scrutinized heavily by the other Managers.

Qualifications:

Players selected must have some level of fame or notoriety to qualify for the pool, such that their deaths will be reported by a reputable news source outside of the obituary pages (so your great aunt will not qualify, unless she also happened to be otherwise famous). When informed of a winner, the Moderator shall confirm through these independent news sources before payments are to be sent. No confirmation, no pay-out. No exceptions.

The following news sources will be used for confirming a "winner":

CNN
MSNBC
FoxNews
CBC (Canada)
The Globe & Mail (Canada)
BBC News (UK)
The Guardian (UK)
The Telegraph (UK)
Sports Illustrated
ESPN
Variety
USA Today
The Economist
CBS
ABC
google news
yahoo news
Reuters
World news
AP
New York Times

In short, if your "winner" does not show up in one of these sources, you did not win.

Vetting:

In an effort to avoid future disputes over eligibility, Team Lists will be posted for all managers to see, after the draft has taken place. There will be a short time period (a week?) for managers to question players they feel are dubious, and for those issues to be resolved.

Timing:

In order to avoid late entries, and the hustle and bustle of Christmas, the following schedule is proposed:

November 25th: New Pool is announced and Managers solicited.
December 7th: Rules for the Pool finalized.
December 14th-21st: Roster submissions.
December 22nd/23rd: Draft order set, rosters posted for screening.
December 30th: Draft Day. Rosters posted to the Forum.

As stated, any players who die before the pool commences can be replaced on the roster by their managers. All previous rules and vetting will still apply to said replacement. The above timing is just a guide-line folks, nobody panic.


Team Managers:

JohnnieH
KWSteve
WildBill7145
TheMill
Tonychanman
Jacen299
compuease
«1345678

Comments

  • Okay, so let talk about who is in, and whether or not these rules are acceptable . . .

    also . . . can I get a "sticky"? And you can pull the sticky from the "New Rules thread" if you want to avoid the clutter.
  • I'm in.

    I don't like posting the rosters before the actual draft.
  • JohnnieH wrote: »
    I'm in.

    I don't like posting the rosters before the actual draft.

    The idea is that, after the draft order has been set, the rosters get posted for all team so that the Managers can look over the other teams, with an eye to preventing shenanigans before the Pool starts. It is an attempt to avoid what happened at the start of this year. My definition of famous might be different than yours. No one will be allowed to change their draft order at that point, only sub for a player deemed ineligible. The only drawback I can forsee is if a Manager does need to sub a player, they can poach a name they would otherwise not have on their list.

    The alternative would be to post the teams, and allow for the same scrutiny after the draft is complete, with subs coming from the roster that was unselected. Would that be preferable?
  • Milo, I know you said you don't care for a mandatory young pick idea. What about the under 30 payout idea?
  • Jacen299 wrote: »
    Milo, I know you said you don't care for a mandatory young pick idea. What about the under 30 payout idea?

    I like it the way it is. Under 50=$10
  • Pay-outs are staying as is . . . if anything I would drop the lotto bonus on the 27-club picks, but it does make a nice little teaser, if that is how you want to go . . .

    Johnnie, what did you think of my alternative to your comments about posting rosters?
  • I'm in.

    But, for the record I don't like the decreasing payout. We'll have to check rosters every week. Say, for example, someone has an family emergency, or illness/accident that requires them to be hospitalized. It would be just a little harsh to penalize them for missing their pick in the pool.

    Instead it should be up to the player to notice his picks. Sort of like Monopoly if someone lands on your property, it's up to you to notice. Players would still have the year to collect, but if they don't notice by then they get nothing.

    Also, a good criteria for determining notoriety is whether or not the person has an entry on Wikipedia. If anyone is at all famous they'll have a Wiki entry, and it's very hard for anyone to put up anything false. I'm not saying it should be the sole criteria, but it's good corroboration if a person is questionable.

    Anyway, those are my thoughts.

    Just want to add this. I don't think we should post rosters. It just gives people insight into another players' picks. And if someone does need to be replaced you allow someone to poach from another person's research.

    Post the final teams and if someone needs to be replaced you can do it from the same players roster with the next numbered selection.
  • kwsteve wrote: »
    I'm in.

    But, for the record I don't like the decreasing payout. We'll have to check rosters every week. Say, for example, someone has an family emergency, or illness/accident that requires them to be hospitalized. It would be just a little harsh to penalize them for missing their pick in the pool.

    Instead it should be up to the player to notice his picks. Sort of like Monopoly if someone lands on your property, it's up to you to notice. Players would still have the year to collect, but if they don't notice by then they get nothing.

    Also, a good criteria for determining notoriety is whether or not the person has an entry on Wikipedia. If anyone is at all famous they'll have a Wiki entry, and it's very hard for anyone to put up anything false. I'm not saying it should be the sole criteria, but it's good corroboration if a person is questionable.

    Anyway, those are my thoughts.

    Wiki is a legit source for confirmation, but will not be the only one.

    The decreasing pay out structure was an idea to encourage Managers to keep an eye on their teams. It is not necessary, if you folks would rather leave that aspect of the game alone. Alternatively, we can extend the timeframe, or alter the loss of pay-out.
  • Okay, so the consensus seems to be "NO" for posting full rosters. How about if we just post the "Teams" for full scrutiny?
  • Yeah, I think so. Post the final teams and then we can hash out any concerns. And if needed then you can go to the player's next selection on his roster for a replacement.
  • Okay, making the edit now. Any other comments pro/con about the decreasing pay-out?
  • I really don't like the decreasing payout starting at only 1 week, perhaps at 1 month?
  • compuease wrote: »
    I really don't like the decreasing payout starting at only 1 week, perhaps at 1 month?

    Like it . . . this should also make things easier for Managers on vacation, etc. Any objections?

    Added in a bit that says if you have not claimed a winner by January 31, 2014 you are SOL. Thoughts?
  • Milo wrote: »
    Like it . . . this should also make things easier for Managers on vacation, etc. Any objections?

    Added in a bit that says if you have not claimed a winner by January 31, 2014 you are SOL. Thoughts?


    I like.

    Did 2012 50 player rosters get posted? I can't find.
  • Full rosters were not posted, only final team lists. Leaning towards that this year as well.
  • I'm not in..

    But I love how this dead pool thing has become more complicated and has more regulations than anything I have ever done ever.

    Mark
  • DrTyore wrote: »
    I'm not in..

    But I love how this dead pool thing has become more complicated and has more regulations than anything I have ever done ever.

    Mark
    ^^^^
    unlike...... hardly.....
  • DrTyore wrote: »
    I'm not in..

    But I love how this dead pool thing has become more complicated and has more regulations than anything I have ever done ever.

    Mark

    We already have a couple of designated assholes . . . and this ( /\/\/\ ) does not even come close to the standard.
  • DrTyore wrote: »
    I'm not in..

    But I love how this dead pool thing has become more complicated and has more regulations than anything I have ever done ever.

    Mark

    I feel the same way

    All these stipulations and "prices" takes the fun out of it for me, hate how much criteria there is now... I've said for years how badly I wanted in on this, but I had no idea it was this complicated.

    what ever happened to shipping a fiver for someone croaking and everyone rooting relentlessly for Zsa Zsa to die?

    I think Johnnie had her a couple years ago and I used to laugh my ass off when she was having medical troubles, amputations, etc , and johnnie claimed she was slowrolling him lmao.

    Also, I think its amazingly kind and nice of Milo to organize this for everyone and he doesn't even take part himself.
  • costanza wrote: »
    I feel the same way

    All these stipulations and "prices" takes the fun out of it for me, hate how much criteria there is now... I've said for years how badly I wanted in on this, but I had no idea it was this complicated.

    what ever happened to shipping a fiver for someone croaking and everyone rooting relentlessly for Zsa Zsa to die?

    I think Johnnie had her a couple years ago and I used to laugh my ass off when she was having medical troubles, amputations, etc , and johnnie claimed she was slowrolling him lmao.

    Also, I think its amazingly kind and nice of Milo to organize this for everyone and he doesn't even take part himself.

    How old are you again? Gotta be close to 27, right?
  • Milo wrote: »
    How old are you again? Gotta be close to 27, right?

    im old, but not quite that old
  • maybe next year? >:D
  • In.


    Next year has got to be better than this.
  • Milo wrote: »
    maybe next year? >:D
    dibs on that pic? >:D
  • wait . . .

    are u guys implying some sort of sick joke in regards to me being on a DP IV team and thus implying that you want me to die?
  • Mole had Zsa Zsa in DP1, I had her in 2 then Mole got her back for DP3.

    She will be my overall #1 draft this year!
  • Long live Zsa Zsa . . .
  • costanza wrote: »
    wait . . .

    are u guys implying some sort of sick joke in regards to me being on a DP IV team and thus implying that you want me to die?

    You could always play the game . . . there could be an implied exemption. :)

    Or not. ^-^
  • costanza wrote: »
    wait . . .

    are u guys implying some sort of sick joke in regards to me being on a DP IV team and thus implying that you want me to die?
    Milo wrote: »
    You could always play the game . . . there could be an implied exemption. :)

    Or not. ^-^

    Even some wanted to pick me in an earlier DP but since I was a team owner our esteeed commish, invoked the famous "No picking an owner rule"..
    Only way for you to be safe...:-X
  • In, will post thoughts on proposed changes later. Don't think we need to reinvent the wheel, but some tweeking is def in order.
Sign In or Register to comment.