Warrior General Games

Originally posted by johnbarber
from 180 to 350 is a 170 lb swing for 30% or 6 lb's for every 1%.



in other words, 1/6 % per pound

roughly

Originally posted by SikoraP13
indeed...if you could set up a curve to curve it by the pound to give you the exact %...it'd be quite impressive...should effect the following attributes, imo...

Strength
Speed
Agility
Jumping

Exactly.

So the speed is .16666667% per pound?


I think the agility should take about a 20% decrease, meaning 170lbs, 20%
Strength should be about the same as agility, total drop of 20%
Jumping should be the biggest difference of them all, IMO. about a 40% drop? Maybe more? How many 350lb linemen can jump over 30 inches?

the math gets rough if you go exact %- x =weight

(x-180)x 1/6=y%

100%-y%=z%

attribute x z=final score

example-
300 lb lineman with 68 speed

(300-180)x 1/6=20%
100%-20%=80%
68 speed x 80%= 54.4 speed.

Originally posted by johnbarber
the math gets rough if you go exact %-

(x-180)x 1/6=y%

100%-y%=z%

attribute x z=final score

example-
300 lb lineman with 68 speed

(300-180)x 1/6=20%
100%-20%=80%
68 speed x 20%= 54.4 speed.

That'll work, I think. You guys keep fleshing out all that nerdy math stuff, and I'll be back tomorrow to claim credit

let me see if it works on a 240 lber with 68 speed


(240-180)x 1/6=10%
100%-10%=90%
68 speedx 90%=61.2 speed

to do it for strength the equation only has to change slightly.
x=weight
-(x-350)x .167=y%
100%-y%=z%
attribute x z%= final score

examples:
a 246 hb with 85 str

-(246-350)x 1/6=17.4%
100-17.4%=82.6%
85 x 82.6%=70.21 strength


a 300 C with 85 str
-(300-350) x .167=8.35
100-8.35=91.65
85x91.65=77.9 strength

another thought, will this apply before, or after the EQ and VA bonuses? I'd say after, but that's just me.

Originally posted by SikoraP13
another thought, will this apply before, or after the EQ and VA bonuses? I'd say after, but that's just me.

I agree. After would be best, because that + whatever from EQ shouldn't be penalty free.

I have a formula for jumping
x=weight
(x-240)x .167=y
100-(y)=z%
attribute x z%=A
A x 42"= B=jumping height
B+ height = jumping radius

example:

180 lb wr- 6 foot tall- 70 jumping


(180-240)x .167=-10.02
100-(-10.02)=110.02%
70 x 110.02%=77.014
77.014% x 42"=32.34588"
104.34588" radius
at 100 jumping he'd have a 46.2" jump/118.2" radius

240 lb lb- 6 foot tall- 70 jumping
(240-240)x .167=0
100-(0)=100
70x100=70
70%x 42"=29.4"
101.4" radius
at 100 jumping he'd have a 42" jump/114" radius

310 lb nt- 6 foot tall- 70 jumping
(310-240)x .167=11.69
100-11.69=88.11%
70 x 88.11=61.677
61.677% x 42"=25.90434"
97.90434" radius
at 100 jumping he'd have a 37" jump/109" radius

100 in jumping get close but above average per position.

http://www.mahalo.com/Nfl_Combine_Results

Thought your brain was on fire John lol

combine record is 46" vertical jump so i'm not that far off

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_NFL_combine_record_for_the_vertical_jump

ilikethis, +1

Originally posted by johnbarber
combine record is 46" vertical jump so i'm not that far off

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_NFL_combine_record_for_the_vertical_jump

This is where it gets hairy. Do we want 100 jumping to be the best, and leave you with a 46inch vertical, or do we want 70 to basically put you at the "record"?

If we make 100 be 46", then something like 60 could be in the mid 30's, which I'm not entirely opposed to.

Edit: Here is the record. Seems like 60" is beastly

http://vertcoach.com/highest-vertical-leap.html

So would that mean 60" should be the 100? That would put 70 around a 42, and that's a GOOD vertical for an NFL receiver.