Remember, in the end we want to reward skill; making things exciting is secondary. Get enough skilled people involved (like there always are) and things will become exciting enough on their own, no need for government intervention, so to speak.

I don't think that's entirely true. We do want to reward skill, but if people feel like it's impossible for them to come back, they will lose some interest. Also, you could argue that evaluating which risks are worth taking based on where you are in the standings is a test of skill. However, that said I still think the Oracle Challenge will be exciting with a different scoring system.

one thing I don't like are people who pick someone with 50% as a way to be the "least wrong". I'd rather a risky pick rewarded you, and it makes the leaderboard more interesting.

I think that getting rid of the 2x will help with that. My reasoning is that right now, if you move your pick from 50% to 51%, you're essentially risking 2 points to gain 1 point. If the result is higher than 51%, then a pick of 51% is 1 point better than a pick of 50%, whereas if the result is below 50%, then the 51% pick is 2 points worse. Under the 45-x or 50-x system, the amount you risk is always equal to the potential gain.
---
Nominate Aeris for SC2k6