Loophole Fixture Analysis

Discussion in 'Blog' started by Jason, Feb 10, 2016.

By Jason on Feb 10, 2016 at 2:37 PM
  1. Jason

    Jason Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,810
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    For those who take the selection of their fantasy football team seriously, you're probably already aware how the loophole works. For those who don't there is a refresher at the bottom of this article. The loophole principle can be applied to the selection of your VC each week, but can also be applied to the selection of emergencies.

    For the loophole to work, you need a non-active player. For maximum flexibility, the non-active player is preferably from a team which is playing in a late timeslot during a given round.

    Analysing the Fixture

    To assess which teams have more favourable fixtures in terms of providing a loophole target, I analysed the fixture in terms of when each team played each round. The first timeslot of the round was allocated a score of 1 and the second timeslot was allocated a 2, etc. Where timeslots differed by less than an hour, I considered them to be the same. The results are shown in the table below:

    Fixture Analysis 1.JPG

    Round 23 has a floating fixture until a few weeks prior, hence has been left out at this time. The bye rounds (R13-R15) have been included for completeness, however any player from a team with a bye can be used for a loophole - meaning that every team should have more than enough options to choose from during these rounds.

    Further Analysing the Fixture

    Drilling into the details a bit further, I took a look at how each team compared over the first four rounds, the first eight rounds, the first 12 rounds (i.e. before the byes) and over the entire season. The results are shown below:

    Fixture Analysis 2.JPG

    Over the first four rounds, Geelong and Hawthorn present the best value for a loophole option, closely followed by Brisbane and Fremantle, North Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs. Richmond and to a lesser extent Essendon are terrible, due to the early timeslots that these teams play early in the season. Adelaide and Collingwood are not much better.

    Looking a little further ahead to cover the first 8 rounds however, the picture changes. Brisbane is well clear on top of the list with the best value for a loophole option, whilst Adelaide and Richmond provide the worst overall value during the first 8 rounds.

    The picture again changes if the first 12 rounds are considered, with West Coast, Collingwood and St Kilda rising to the top of the value ladder and Hawthorn assuming last place for loophole value.

    Clearly the interpretation of "loophole value" is dependent on how far across the season is under consideration.

    Cheap ruck options for R3

    Some interesting conclusions can be drawn from the analysis, particularly regarding the player selected at R3 for your team. Given that in 2015, there were hardly any cheap ruck players who played a game - many teams focused their R3 selection on their value as a loophole option.

    If you are considering an R3 selection primarily based on their loophole value, I'd suggest that the first four rounds are most important. Any further into the season and most teams begin to have other non-active players on their bench due to rookies being dropped or injuries/suspensions etc. R3 selection based on loophole value could perhaps consider the first 8 rounds, at a stretch.

    Let's look at the options for a cheap F/R player to be selected as an R3. The $102k options are Loersch (GC), Chol (Rich) and Wyatt (Coll).

    Over the first four rounds, none of these players are particularly valuable as a loophole target, with their teams ranking 12th, 15th and 18th respectively. But if you wanted to split these guys, Loersch is certainly better value than Wyatt, who is better value than Chol, who is terrible value, playing in the first timeslot of R1, R2 and R4.

    Over the first eight rounds however, there is better separation between these three F/R cheapies. Wyatt is clearly much better across the first eight rounds (with his team ranked 4th) compared to Loersch (15th) and Chol (17th). Wyatt is also the best choice from these guys if the first 12 rounds (up to the byes) are considered.

    There are of course other cheap ruck options of the three players that I have looked at in detail above. Personally I am interested in an R3 who has F/R because I am also interested in selecting an F4 who has F/R status.

    For those who aren't attempting to open a DPP link, I'd recommend Goetz (WB) as the best cheap option for R3 for providing loophole value over the first four rounds. Across the first eight or twelve rounds, Wyatt is the overall better value from the $102k rucks. However, it is important to note that Wyatt plays in the first timeslot of Round 2 and thus provides no loophole option during this round.

    Who will you be selecting as your R3 this year?

    Will it be based on their loophole value, and if so what is your criteria for determining who presents the best loophole value?

    How the loophole works

    As promised this section of the article is a walkthrough on how to use the loophole.

    Step 1. Choose a player from an early timeslot and make them your VC.
    Step 2. Choose another player from a later timeslot and make them your C.

    If your VC scores poorly, simply stick with your C selection. This means that you won't be making use of the loophole during this round. If your VC scores well and you can use the loophole, proceed to Step 3.

    Step 3. Identify a non-active player from a team which has not yet commenced their timeslot.
    Step 4. Move the non-active player identified in Step 3 onto the field and make them your C.
    Step 5. Remember to select an emergency on the same line as your now non-active C.

    When your non-active player's team finishes their match for the round, your C score will be registered as a zero and your VC score will be doubled.

    All of the above assumes of course that you have access to your team selection across the weekend, to make changes to the onfield set up as required.

    It is also possible to use the loophole on one or more of your emergencies each round, in addition to the VC loophole.

    Good luck and happy loopholing!
     
    • Like Like x 6
?

Who will you select at R3 in SuperCoach for 2016?

  1. D.Wyatt (Coll)

    14 vote(s)
    43.8%
  2. M.Chol (Rich)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. C.Loersch (GC)

    4 vote(s)
    12.5%
  4. L.Goetz (WB)

    6 vote(s)
    18.8%
  5. K.Galloway (Syd)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  6. M.Korcheck (Carl)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  7. T.Read (Geel)

    1 vote(s)
    3.1%
  8. M.Cox (Coll)

    6 vote(s)
    18.8%
  9. Other (please specify in comments)

    1 vote(s)
    3.1%

Comments

Discussion in 'Blog' started by Jason, Feb 10, 2016.

  • Tags:
    1. Owen
      Owen
      Well then if that happens, bingo he can be my loophole guy. Probably not the best selection wise for Sunday games etc. but he'll do.
    2. ORFFWizard
      ORFFWizard
      I been changing my ruck set up so much in recent days that take my thoughts with a grain of salt as could change with the wind on these types if teams named make more changes required. However at this stage I took Currie out as I am not keen on the cost to keep him compared to Grimley. Whilst Grimley is a concern for scoring the helpful part is he is dual position so he allows more flexibility of how to deal with him if becomes any issue. Currie is simply RUC for SC and if he only plays one or two games and dropped it is a waste of funds as he is little use for loopholes compared to Grimley if he got dropped. Least Essendon at some stage play some late rounds games. Gold Coast tend to be more middle of weekend times which is not great should Currie be useless for cash cow or ruck back up. If I had more confidence Currie was planned to be played most weeks by Suns I would be more willing to take the punt but Gold Coast have young Peter Wright and Brooksby too and even at North Currie barely got used. He simply might be on their list purely as back up if Nicholls got injured.

      I wanted to get Max King as loophole guy but in the end removed him in favour of generating cash from forward rookies such as McCarthy and Milera. What I done instead was use a loophole agent between forwards and midfield. Cavka of Eagles I've chosen for that as could not find anyone else ideal for the full season. Eagles play enough late games to be useful for such a role.
      Last edited: Mar 24, 2016
    3. port_leschenault
      port_leschenault
      Well I wouldn't use how North used him as a point to suggest that's how Gold Coast will. Wright is concerning but seems to be playing more up forward in the Dixon role last year, which tbf they need him more with only Lynch being their sole KPP forward whilst Day keeps spudding up. No interesting in having both, so that Grimley in the forward line could swing into the rucks if you have to trade Currie early?
    4. ORFFWizard
      ORFFWizard
      No at moment I simply have Grimley as RUC 3. I presently have no ruck/fwd link. I let it go but Grimley obviously could be swapped to FWD later on if need arose. I got Gawn as main ruck and Vardy as my mid priced second ruck. If Essendon name the Burger man I could still put him as R2 instead of Vardy. Basically when I read Don Pyke has a love child in Milera I decided to get him in the forward line which made me decide the luxury of fwd/ruc link I will let go for now as can only have so many forward spots. Grimey at R3 simply best fit for my overall team structure at this point.
    5. port_leschenault
      port_leschenault
      Fair enough but I don't see the point in going a mid-priced ruck with dpp without having another f/r in forward lines. Gone set & forget myself and a loophole ruck, if I have plenty of coin by end of lockout may upgrade him to Grimley.
    6. ORFFWizard
      ORFFWizard
      If you go with f/r link up forward you are essentially carrying 4 rucks. That maybe good if the FWD/RUC options were good enough to warrant a FWD spot on their own but in this case I do not see that aspect here. You are looking at it as glass half empty in terms of the guys I got R2 and R3 presently. The fact they both have the bonus of FWD/RUC can be seen as a bonus. Lets say their is a premium ruck show up in 7 rounds that dropped in price and I feel the time to get on him is then but Grimley not quite made the funds I want at that point to milk as a cow. Maybe he is still 3 or 4 weeks from that point. Well in that case you could view his FWD/RUC handy in that stage because I may have a forward cash cow ready to milk at that point. Maybe Milera or McCarthy for an example. The fact Grimley has FWD/RUC at that point would allow me to trade out the forward cash cow, switch Grimley to forward bench and then bring my upgrade premium ruck in. Then allow Grimley to make a bit more funds till ideal time of milking for cash. Meanwhile whilst he is there he also allows me to have my FWD/RUC mid pricer score up forward if I was as then I got the link created. Basically it simply gives me more options. Gives me an each way bet for the mid pricer to either be a cash cow or become a premium if he scores well enough to convince me of that. As it turns out I have swapped Vardy to Leunberrger as mid priced R2 for now and Grimley stays as R3 to act as emergency when needed for Burger man.

      Having said that I got no problem with your set and forget choice. Perfectly ideal if you happy with value and scoring you can find in two premium rucks from the get go. I basically had that type of set up for last two years where there was basically no cash making rookie rucks so R3 started as King last year and stayed there for captain loopholes as his role.

      There is no set and forget duo I like this year for prices on offer so I simply adapt to the next best adaptable option for me with investing a smaller amount in ruck division.

Share This Page