@Sharpe - nice reply. and you wont take the promotion yourself?

I thought so.

Keeping with the role, no way would Sharpe take such a promotion and remove himself from the battlefield.

I can be a manager or player

Forgot to add, I would prefer to be a manager, but if there are no more spots, then I will be fine as a player

ok, for the suggested betting league, how about:

a limited number of people participate, eg 20 (else it is too much work :/) they start with capital of eg 1000.

bets are made by quoting a price, from 0 to 100.
eg, you think Sharpe's team will win, so you quote 80. this means that you would deposit 80 with the exchange, if you win, you get your 80 back, +20 (to make 100).

who do you bet with? other players. eg, someone who thinks Sharpe is poor officer material, seeing the offered price of 80, would accept that price. he hands 20 to the exchange (100-80), and, if Sharpe loses, he gets his 20 back, +80 (to make 100).
what one side makes, the other loses.


now, the awkward bit. how to run this exchange? with 20 players, it could be done by hand, by some foolish volunteer (eg me :/)
i create a dummy game, invite the 'exchange players', and players can post in the chat, eg:

joebloggs: i back Sharpe @ 80
joebloggs: i lay Eagle @ 53

johndoe: @joebloggs - i lay your Sharpe @ 80 DONE

charliechaplin: @joebloggs -i back your Eagle @53 DONE

at the end of eg each day, i announce that all bet offers are cancelled, and i book-keep all accepted (DONE) bets - ie i record what bets have been made, and i count how much 'cash' players have left to make on new bets. (btw - making more offers than you have cash to honour is bad form, and i impose fines for this).

for this to work, i would want the betting period to be fairly short, eg 3-4 days, or maybe a few 'windows' during the tourney (else it is too much work for me). also, the tourney that we are betting on should be fairly fast (a couple of weeks maybe) else we all forget what we are betting about, etc.

any thoughts?

btw - this method allows you to bet that teams will win, and also to bet that teams will not win.

so, you might not know who the best team is, but you might be sure that Sharpe is good only for running the baggage train, and so you can make money betting he will fail.

i think this makes it reasonably interesting for the betting players.

I'd preferably be a manager, but I'll play if anyone wants me.

manager please, or player if there are no managers left.

manager pls if alll managers are gone then player

player please

Player.

Hmm I'll play I guess, no guts no glory!

player please.

I'd like to be in as a player.

But I'm curious how allowing managers to bet would work: Wouldn't they be able to get lots of money by tanking on purpose (and betting against themselves)?

Interesting idea, and I would be willing to be a player. While I know this concept is basically in beta, I think there needs to be some sort of motivation for individual players to do their best, a worth ranking from 1-4 does not allow for much growth, and being the MVP of individual games holds no lasting glory. And I'm a fan of lasting glory.

I would like to be a player.

I would like to be a player as well.

I would like to be a player.

Also, if the point allocation system is based on wins, there will quickly be a division into far superior teams and teams too weak to gain enough points to improve. There needs to be some sort of balance or salary cap or something.

I guess I'd like to be a player, too.