<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'><P> I stand corrected. I think the instance(s) of contingent bids losing out to solo bids I referred</P>
<P>to was probably an iteration, i.e. the Onroto system preventing hedging. Thanks,</P>
<P> Rick<BR><BR></P>
<P>
<HR id=zwchr>
</P>
<P><B>From: </B>"Mark Blocker" <blockermark@gmail.com><BR><B>To: </B>"USML" <announce@usml.net><BR><B>Sent: </B>Monday, July 30, 2012 9:50:39 AM<BR><B>Subject: </B>[USML Announce] Fwd: From Contact Us: FAAB processing<BR><BR>League:</P>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV> See below regarding guidance from Onroto on FAAB bidding. Anything written below should trump what I am about to tell you, but I think the bottom line is that the Onroto system treats contingent bids as having the same priority as non-contingent bids. This was not true before we started using Onroto. In Onroto, a contingent bid of $X will win over a non-contingent bid of less than $X; it was the opposite in our old system. While not really relevant, my own view is that the Onroto system is a fairer way to do things. Note also below how Onroto handles the fascinating circumstance of placing both a contingent and non-contingent bid on the same player!</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV> Hope this helps. </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV> -- Mark B.<BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>---------- Forwarded message ----------<BR>From: <B class=gmail_sendername></B><SPAN dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:support@onroto.com" target=_blank>support@onroto.com</A>></SPAN><BR>Date: Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 9:04 AM<BR>Subject: Re: From Contact Us: FAAB processing<BR>To: <A href="mailto:mbblocker@aol.com" target=_blank>mbblocker@aol.com</A><BR><BR><BR>Hi Mark,<BR><BR>The commish always get a blow-by-blow of what happened each week: Commish<BR>Pages -> Transactions -> View Bid Logs.<BR><BR>You guys are a FAAB league, so that makes it a simple explanation: Dollar<BR>values always trump priority *except as a team runs out of money*.<BR><BR>Example:<BR><BR>1.) replace X by bidding $10 on A<BR>2.) replace Y by bidding $17 on B<BR><BR>If you have more than $27 to spend, the program will go ahead and give you<BR>player B to replace Y in all instances. If you have $17, however, it will<BR>try to give you player A first, before moving on to see if you've won<BR>player B.<BR><BR>If you do this:<BR><BR>1.) replace X by bidding $10 on A<BR> bidding $15 on B<BR>2.) replace Y by bidding $17 on B<BR><BR>the program will try $10 on A first -- if you're not the high bidder, it<BR>will try $15 on B -- and there it will see that someone has a $17 bid on B<BR>and so will quash your $15 bid. In effect, you trumped yourself. This<BR>prevents people from hedging, as it were.<BR><BR>You can also induce an infinite loop if you mix and match higher and lower<BR>contingent bids on the same sets of players.<BR><BR>Hope this helps.<BR><BR>-- Scott<BR>
<DIV class=HOEnZb>
<DIV class=h5><BR><BR><BR>> Sir/Madam: Is there somewhere on the website where you explain how the<BR>> BidMeister system processes FAAB bids? Some of our owners are interested<BR>> in knowing how the system process contingent and non-contingent bids. Any<BR>> help you could provide would be appreciate. -- Mark B.<BR>> League Abbrev: USML<BR>> User: mblocker<BR>> Sport: baseball<BR></DIV></DIV></DIV><BR></DIV><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>announce mailing list<BR>announce@usml.net<BR>http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce<BR></div></body></html>