07 Dec 07
Originally posted by AmsterdamnI think it is a great idea, as long as it is not restrictive. There are players who like playing others who are higher rated on occassion (I am one of them). Adding onto that it would also be nice if you could send a message along with a challenge.
Right now, the current ratings of players are used to set up challenges..
Many Clan Leaders look purely at this: bouncing challences when they feel that the average rating of the other clan is not matching their own, without looking at past performance of the individuals..
For tournaments there was already an adjustment in calculating the tournament e ...[text shortened]... ch is far from their true average level of play..
Look forward to your feedback on this one!
- Joined
- 09 Feb 06
- Moves
- 21463
07 Dec 07
I'm not against this, but i do agree with English Tal in some ways to, part of the job is finding and analyzing challenges, which i do as i like fair line ups where possible. If you make it to easy you may as well just let the system do the job for you, auto generated challenges, just click to start...
07 Dec 07
Originally posted by gambit05Agree there, and it is a good service to spend time for your clan members to get fair challenges. It also can't be a bad thing to make things easier for all the clan members so they can dedicate more time with doing other things to help their clan. Just like anything else to make things easier for everyone on the site.
Although I agree with you and all others here, I would like to mention that it is not that time consuming compared to the time the Clan members spend on their games after a challenge has started.
07 Dec 07
Well Gentlemen, personally the point of setting up challenges is strategical, because how on earth can we set up challenges, it is difficult to match up over 4 or 5 now. So we set up challenges above and below rated players for a balanced match up.
If we go down this route I feel challenges of 5 or more will be difficult to set up unless you play the same clans of course.
well whatever you decde, fair enough
Paul
07 Dec 07
Originally posted by chessnut62'I tend to analyse the individuals'... that's a direct quote.
Count me in, Patrick. I tend to analyse the individuals, and as has been pointed out, this does take time. It would be good to have a fairer system in place, wherein some clan leaders wouldn't be able to play on the fact that many leaders don't check the ratings individually.
Excellent suggestion! 🙂
Excellent. You're obviously a good, thoughtful and fair clan leader.
A 'fairer' system, by your definition, would simply allow those clan leaders who didn't have the time or inclination, to accept or reject a challenge without thought.
All challenges would become almost 'automatic'.
'...many clan leaders don't check the ratings individually'... another quote.
Common sense dictates that a Clan Leader should choose, as a challenge, who plays whom, knowing his own players. If an opposing Leader misses the details of the challenge.... hard luck.
I stress... I haven't personally used this tactic yet ...but if I have, so what.... but I reserve the right to do so, because I actually feel that it gives the THOUGHTFUL clan Leader some real influence. I am not a clone. (Just a thought here... it's a real tactic for us 'minor' clans to have a go at the top two or three within the rules)
It's within the rules... please don't water them them down.
07 Dec 07
Originally posted by AmsterdamnExelent Idea Amsterdamn I am now in your corner in this🙂
Right now, the current ratings of players are used to set up challenges..
Many Clan Leaders look purely at this: bouncing challences when they feel that the average rating of the other clan is not matching their own, without looking at past performance of the individuals..
For tournaments there was already an adjustment in calculating the tournament e ...[text shortened]... ch is far from their true average level of play..
Look forward to your feedback on this one!
Ithink this idea of yours i well thought out but I have one question how ever: Can one (You or how ever) build a better system witch takes into account to what you suggest?
I dont reall whant to through A monkeyrench into the works but it is cornsurn of mine and I like your idea so I want it to work to.
07 Dec 07
The only issue I can see with this is clans with players that have serious ranges to their profile. I'm talking about those who peak at 1700 only to lose interest, have jobs in the way etc, causing a drop to 1000, inly to rise again when they return. The new tourney entry has eliminated quite a few problems, but not all.
It does seem to be a fairer method to look at challenges, but as with any ratings system has a flaw, thusly, we will still need to look at every challenge.
Initially I think it is a good idea though.
07 Dec 07
Originally posted by AmsterdamnWhat you are suggesting would save the clan leader time from doing what clan leaders should do - they should be looking at every person on the challenge list to see what their ratings are!
Right now, the current ratings of players are used to set up challenges..
Many Clan Leaders look purely at this: bouncing challences when they feel that the average rating of the other clan is not matching their own, without looking at past performance of the individuals..
For tournaments there was already an adjustment in calculating the tournament e ...[text shortened]... ch is far from their true average level of play..
Look forward to your feedback on this one!
Many clans have sent me challenges which look fair, but I always check the members on their list and sometimes I find they are 200 points below their usual performance!
So yes, you suggestion would save us time from checking these things.
Arrakis
07 Dec 07
Originally posted by Amsterdamni think that is an excellent idea
Right now, the current ratings of players are used to set up challenges..
Many Clan Leaders look purely at this: bouncing challences when they feel that the average rating of the other clan is not matching their own, without looking at past performance of the individuals..
For tournaments there was already an adjustment in calculating the tournament e ...[text shortened]... ch is far from their true average level of play..
Look forward to your feedback on this one!
count me in !