From Padger's post on the Site Ideas Forum:
"I would like to propose that the new clan challenge rule that the two players be within 200 points, be changed to a 5 year average and within 100 points .this would stop all the lop sided challenges that happen now and be much fairer."
I am re-posting the idea here because the Clan forum seems like the best place for this kind of topic. It seems worthy of discussion to me.
06 Feb 16
Originally posted by Paul LeggettWe the Easy Riders support this measure because it will stop sandbagging clans like metallica from nefariously gleaning points.
From Padger's post on the Site Ideas Forum:
"[b]I would like to propose that the new clan challenge rule that the two players be within 200 points, be changed to a 5 year average and within 100 points .this would stop all the lop sided challenges that happen now and be much fairer."
I am re-posting the idea here because the Clan forum seems like the best place for this kind of topic. It seems worthy of discussion to me.[/b]
06 Feb 16
"Originally posted by Paul LeggettI am not sure that this proposal will "stop all the lopsided challenges" to any greater extent than the new 200 point rule.
From Padger's post on the Site Ideas Forum:
"[b]I would like to propose that the new clan challenge rule that the two players be within 200 points, be changed to a 5 year average and within 100 points .this would stop all the lop sided challenges that happen now and be much fairer."
I am re-posting the idea here because the Clan forum seems like the best place for this kind of topic. It seems worthy of discussion to me.[/b]
My 5 year average for example, is nearly 100 points lower than my 90 day average despite the 5 year, 1 year and 90 day high being within 12 points. A quick random sample can easily pick up other players like this for example @zumdahl and @bobla45 whereas @carpmaniac71 is an extreme example of the precise opposite.
I think the 200 point rule at least disposes of the ridiculous match ups automatically, whilst allowing clan leaders to use their own skill, judgement and due diligence in offering and accepting challenges.
Originally posted by RagwortIt would out sandbaggers like @zumdahl and @bobla45 in one swoop!
I am not sure that this proposal will "stop all the lopsided challenges" to any greater extent than the new 200 point rule.
My 5 year average for example, is nearly 100 points lower than my 90 day average despite the 5 year, 1 year and 90 day high being within 12 points. A quick random sample can easily pick up other players like this for example @zumdah ...[text shortened]... eaders to use their own skill, judgement and due diligence in offering and accepting challenges.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou are nothing but a LIAR!!!!!
We the Easy Riders support this measure because it will stop sandbagging clans like metallica from nefariously gleaning points.
We can show you in MULTIPLE challenges you clan is a party to, where you aren't within
several hundred points.
You know you are a colluding, cheating liar!!
We know it too.
Now please shut up and spare us your poopourri scent covered diatribe.
We all know you are a piece of crap and we can smell you for miles.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRubbish Robbie. Deliberate misdirection onto your favourite pantomime villains (ie trolling) as I knew you would when I picked those examples. Perhaps Russ should add up the number of players who have left in disgust at the "antics" and deliberate subversion of the clan system and sue you and the other perpetrators for the lost revenue.
It would out sandbaggers like @zumdahl and @bobla45 in one swoop!
My argument was the proposed 5 year average rule would have the effect of lowering those players challenge rating band when recent averages show them to be stronger.
If you don't wish to participate in polite reasoned discussion fine. Troll in some other thread.
06 Feb 16
Originally posted by RagwortI see you laid out the breadcrumbs nicely for Robbie.
Rubbish Robbie. Deliberate misdirection onto your favourite pantomime villains (ie trolling) as I knew you would when I picked those examples. Perhaps Russ should add up the number of players who have left in disgust at the "antics" and deliberate subversion of the clan system and sue you and the other perpetrators for the lost revenue.
My argument was t ...[text shortened]... If you don't wish to participate in polite reasoned discussion fine. Troll in some other thread.
And he stepped right into it.
Originally posted by RagwortGee thats bitter not to mention rather hysterical.
Rubbish Robbie. Deliberate misdirection onto your favourite pantomime villains (ie trolling) as I knew you would when I picked those examples. Perhaps Russ should add up the number of players who have left in disgust at the "antics" and deliberate subversion of the clan system and sue you and the other perpetrators for the lost revenue.
My argument was t ...[text shortened]... If you don't wish to participate in polite reasoned discussion fine. Troll in some other thread.
As for your assertion about reasoned debate, I think you may find that I myself proposed a rating floor based not on the five year average but the tournament entry rating which fell largely on deaf ears and was opposed by none other than the clan whose players just happen to have five year averages well above their present and in my opinion sandbagged ratings as it stands. Not a single credible reason was proffered on why the tournament entry rating could not be utilized as a rating floor.
06 Feb 16
Originally posted by shortcircuitWow it is a Jazz festival, whup whup whup. I like the sound of trumpets 😵
You are nothing but a LIAR!!!!!
We can show you in MULTIPLE challenges you clan is a party to, where you aren't within
several hundred points.
You know you are a colluding, cheating liar!!
We know it too.
Now please shut up and spare us your poopourri scent covered diatribe.
We all know you are a piece of crap and we can smell you for miles.
Originally posted by Paul LeggettI have been a strong supporter of using the tournament entry rating as the basis for clan challenges
From Padger's post on the Site Ideas Forum:
"[b]I would like to propose that the new clan challenge rule that the two players be within 200 points, be changed to a 5 year average and within 100 points .this would stop all the lop sided challenges that happen now and be much fairer."
I am re-posting the idea here because the Clan forum seems like the best place for this kind of topic. It seems worthy of discussion to me.[/b]
it has a built in floor and is much harder to manipulate thus the reason it is used in tournament play
not perfect, but the better alternative
06 Feb 16
Originally posted by lemondropmy tournament rating is more accurate so i would go with this idea
I have been a strong supporter of using the tournament entry rating as the basis for clan challenges
it has a built in floor and is much harder to manipulate thus the reason it is used in tournament play
not perfect, but the better alternative
06 Feb 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI think the deaf ears are a result of the accumulated fatigue from
Gee thats bitter.
As for your assertion about reasoned debate, I think you may find that I myself proposed a rating floor based not on the five year average but the tournament entry rating which fell largely on deaf ears and was opposed by none other than the clan whose players just happen to have five year averages well above their present and in ...[text shortened]... reason was proffered on why the tournament entry rating could not be utilized as a rating floor.
listening to your drivel for years.
To the point that on the rare occasion that you actually say something sensible, nobody listens.
Too bad !! 😴😴😴😴