sk1ppy
Distinguished Member
Posts: 553
|
Post by sk1ppy on Dec 3, 2012 12:14:12 GMT
I have moved the following posts into a new Thread (as requested) ;edit by sparkyHorsham 5 - 2 Redhill B Thanks Redhill for the early kick off & a very enjoyable evening! Well done to me old muckers: Top of the table, and all done without a points contribution from me ! :D 8-) Yet Tommo... Yet! You know when you'll be unleashed on the quiet! ;) (Just to get the Cats in with the chickens.... When is H gonna go against the break?) :o C'mon the Mighty Horsham!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Dec 3, 2012 13:16:00 GMT
[(Just to get the Cats in with the chickens.... When is H gonna go against the break?) :o Hi Skippy, you will need to look back to Series 9 of the 2009/10 Inter League season to find the last time that H played against the break.... but he lost that game and scored 0 (yes, that is zero) in an away match against Lewes and he hasn't been risked against the break again!! ::) Since then he has played 20 games with the break in either Division 1 or 2, winning 18 of them with an average of 9,521. 8-) ;D ;D It looks as if Division 2 will be very competitive again this season, good luck to all playing there.... especially if you are drawn against the break against H! :o ;D |
|
sk1ppy
Distinguished Member
Posts: 553
|
Post by sk1ppy on Dec 3, 2012 13:46:11 GMT
There impressive stats Dave! (& H)
This isn't personal, Just a little mental warfare coming from the trenches.... ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Dec 3, 2012 14:11:38 GMT
There impressive stats Dave! (& H) This isn't personal, Just a little mental warfare coming from the trenches.... ;D I thought that the Aussies had learnt that "sledging" doesn't work any more.... on a cricket pitch anyway!! :P ;D I'm sure that H will be looking forward to visiting the Stout House early in January now.... ;D ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by H on Dec 3, 2012 14:37:41 GMT
I might even play against the break. Happy either way, more than used to play against in many situations - just seems to be the tactic my captain likes to use!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2012 14:51:56 GMT
.... especially if you are drawn against the break against H! :o ;D You mean selected/picked/nominated - no "drawing" involved! ;) ;D ::) :P :-X |
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Dec 3, 2012 15:01:19 GMT
.... especially if you are drawn against the break against H! :o ;D You mean selected/picked/nominated - no "drawing" involved! ;) ;D ::) :P :-X Absolutely right Tommo.... which means that the captains have a proper role in deciding how best to use their players to try to help their team win the match and are not just glorified administrators that turn cards over and see who is lucky / unlucky. :P :-X |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2012 15:20:49 GMT
which means that the captains have a proper role in deciding how best to use their players to try to help their team win the match and are not just glorified administrators that turn cards over and see who is lucky / unlucky. :P :-X It's a great system, and one I have benefited from in the past. Totally despotic and corrupt, though. ::) Surprised the top teams haven't suggested the same for One-day Interleague yet. Whoops! :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X |
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Dec 3, 2012 16:14:48 GMT
which means that the captains have a proper role in deciding how best to use their players to try to help their team win the match and are not just glorified administrators that turn cards over and see who is lucky / unlucky. :P :-X It's a great system, and one I have benefited from in the past. Totally despotic and corrupt, though. ::) Surprised the top teams haven't suggested the same for One-day Interleague yet. Whoops! :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X Despotic and corrupt..... :o :o .... that is very harsh and you make it sound as if everybody who is given the break will automatically win the game! :P Yet in Division 1 in this series of matches, the players with the break only won 5 of the 14 games that I have had results for so far.... so 9 matches won against the break at the top level, although Division 2 saw 15 wins with the break in comparison to 6 won against the break and Division 3 saw 10 games won with break in comparison to only 4 won against it. So that would seem to indicate that having the break is more important in the lower divisions.... :o With regards to the One Day Competition, until this year, that was double legs for all games so everybody had an equal chance on the day, which has to be the fairest way of all. 8-) The return of Hastings last season meant that Division 1 was increased to 6 teams and therefore had to became single leg "even break" games with some players having 3 first breaks and others only 2 during the day.... not ideal as there was no option for "equal time" in the games, so perhaps the "top teams" should suggest a change for next year! ;D ;D Personally, I think it would have been better for Division 2 to have had the extra team and make their games single legs as it is less likely that players would win the matches on their first visit which happened a number of times in Division 1 matches last season. :o |
|
sk1ppy
Distinguished Member
Posts: 553
|
Post by sk1ppy on Dec 3, 2012 16:16:11 GMT
I might even play against the break. Happy either way, more than used to play against in many situations - just seems to be the tactic my captain likes to use! H - By the way I'm looking forward to meeting you! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2012 16:23:29 GMT
Dave -
What's your angle on Gandalf's suggestion of all 7 away breaks, as that seems to me the fairest way of all ?
Both leagues I now play in give all the breaks to the away side, everyone seems to accept it and no-one seems to knowingly try to rig their home table.
|
|
|
|
Post by H on Dec 3, 2012 16:33:35 GMT
I might even play against the break. Happy either way, more than used to play against in many situations - just seems to be the tactic my captain likes to use! H - By the way I'm looking forward to meeting you! Haha likewise. We may well have met briefly at last years Sussex competitions without really registering it. Still, shall see you in the new year! :) |
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Dec 3, 2012 16:58:34 GMT
Dave - What's your angle on Gandalf's suggestion of all 7 away breaks, as that seems to me the fairest way of all ? Both leagues I now play in give all the breaks to the away side, everyone seems to accept it and no-one seems to knowingly try to rig their home table. Yes, but those are both Leagues where the games are drawn rather than nominated.... and the tables that aren't perhaps the best tend to be where the weaker teams play their games. Sadly, it is not unknown for some teams (in certain Leagues) to "adjust" their table when a strong team is coming to play them to try to gain an advantage.... and that temptation could increase if they were giving away all of the breaks! ::) :-X I suppose that the idea does have some merit as far as the statistic and rankings for individual players as that would mean that everybody would be off a level playing field.... although surely the Team result is the important thing, not the individual players? It would also lead to the question of whether the home or away team would have to nominate their players first.... I can see arguments for both sides of that already.... and I think that it would simply mean that the team that had more strength in depth would win more often rather than the "surprise" results that we often see at present. I wouldn't be in favour of it myself, partly for the reasons above but mostly because I don't think that there is anything wrong with the current system.... ::) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2012 17:12:01 GMT
There you go, Gandalf, some answers coaxed out against your '7 breaks' suggestion at last. Doesn't seem like much point in suggesting it at next AGM. ::)
Afraid that these days I'm in the "Rhett Butler" camp on this one. :-/
|
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Dec 3, 2012 17:28:16 GMT
Dave - What's your angle on Gandalf's suggestion of all 7 away breaks, as that seems to me the fairest way of all ? Both leagues I now play in give all the breaks to the away side, everyone seems to accept it and no-one seems to knowingly try to rig their home table. Yes, but those are both Leagues where the games are drawn rather than nominated.... and the tables that aren't perhaps the best tend to be where the weaker teams play their games. Sadly, it is not unknown for some teams (in certain Leagues) to "adjust" their table when a strong team is coming to play them to try to gain an advantage.... and that temptation could increase if they were giving away all of the breaks! ::) :-X I suppose that the idea does have some merit as far as the statistic and rankings for individual players as that would mean that everybody would be off a level playing field.... although surely the Team result is the important thing, not the individual players? It would also lead to the question of whether the home or away team would have to nominate their players first.... I can see arguments for both sides of that already.... and I think that it would simply mean that the team that had more strength in depth would win more often rather than the "surprise" results that we often see at present. I wouldn't be in favour of it myself, partly for the reasons above but mostly because I don't think that there is anything wrong with the current system.... ::) Glad tommo bought this up again, am all in favour of suggesting ways to change this game to make what i consider a long term improvement to the way this game is played from grass roots level upwards using a revised set of basic rules, to make it fairer and therefore more enjoyable to ALL. I'm of the opinion that this would be a significant step forward. As previously stated just because some think that there is nothing wrong with current format(they are probably right),but it by noway means that an alternative format would not be better. Hopefully we can get some input from people other than the normal posters, or perhaps set up a poll. Still think this format/rule change should be endorsed by AEBBA so that any such change in the basic rules would filter through to affiliated leagues. regs cs |
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Dec 3, 2012 17:39:41 GMT
There you go, Gandalf, some answers coaxed out against your '7 breaks' suggestion at last. Doesn't seem like much point in suggesting it at next AGM. ::) Afraid that these days I'm in the "Rhett Butler" camp on this one. :-/ Is he related to Edge Butler that plays for Worthing C....? ::) ;D ;D Why not propose it for the next Sussex AGM.... I am only one vote, Gandalf and yourself would make two votes and it would be a majority decision on the night? 8-) I have to say that I get very frustrated reading grumbles about missing rules and changes that should be made to the format of competitions on here.... on many occasions it appears to be the same ones that seem to come back year after year.... and then nobody ever bothers to propose them - and in some cases, don't even show up at the AGM's!! :P Why not start a new thread about proposals for the next Sussex AGM and any ideas that get a seconder can go forward to the County Secretary for next year.... then nobody will have a chance to say that their ideas weren't given the chance to be considered and we will hopefully get some new thoughts coming forward. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Dec 3, 2012 17:45:23 GMT
Glad tommo bought this up again, am all in favour of suggesting ways to change this game to make what i consider a long term improvement to the way this game is played from grass roots level upwards using a revised set of basic rules, to make it fairer and therefore more enjoyable to ALL. I'm of the opinion that this would be a significant step forward. As previously stated just because some think that there is nothing wrong with current format(they are probably right),but it by noway means that an alternative format would not be better. Hopefully we can get some input from people other than the normal posters, or perhaps set up a poll. Still think this format/rule change should be endorsed by AEBBA so that any such change in the basic rules would filter through to affiliated leagues.regs cs Perhaps I missed this somewhere during my absence from the Forum.... :-/ .... please could somebody point me (politely!) in the right direction so I can see what Gandalf has proposed? ;) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2012 18:01:05 GMT
Why not start a new thread about proposals for the next Sussex AGM and any ideas that get a seconder can go forward to the County Secretary for next year.... then nobody will have a chance to say that their ideas weren't given the chance to be considered and we will hopefully get some new thoughts coming forward. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Dec 3, 2012 18:02:02 GMT
There you go, Gandalf, some answers coaxed out against your '7 breaks' suggestion at last. Doesn't seem like much point in suggesting it at next AGM. ::) Afraid that these days I'm in the "Rhett Butler" camp on this one. :-/ Quite frankly my dear Tommo i do give a damn :-* Being a relative newcomer to the higher levels of the game (some may dispute that ::)) i have played a lot more beginners and intermedate players and have come up with some suggestions that might make us normal players enjoy the game more, i think this should be the aim of ALL involved in bar billiards, will discuss in more depth later as im off to play BB now ;) Will start a new thread on Possible Improvments shortly regs cs |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2012 18:14:14 GMT
Quite frankly my dear Tommo i do give a damn :-* regs cs I used to be a self-styled 'righter of wrongs' and 'champion of the underdog' but was knocked off my white charger one too many times......great to see that somebody with the required energy is willing to take over the baton. You have my moral support! :D |
|
|
|
Post by H on Dec 3, 2012 21:29:53 GMT
'champion of the underdog' All the underdog must do is be patient, keep fighting, and they may suddenly find that they aren't the underdog any more. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2012 21:42:16 GMT
All the underdog must do is be patient, keep fighting, and they may suddenly find that they aren't the underdog any more. But sometimes underdogs need someone to fight a cause on their behalf. Know who my great hero was ?  |
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Dec 5, 2012 14:46:59 GMT
It's all gone quiet on this discussion since Sparky kindly gave us a special area to discuss possible new formats, although a few proposals have been made on another thread which are now getting seconded. 8-)
So let's start a few discussions about some possible changes that we could make and see if there is any merit to push them forward as proposals as well..... :-/
Here is my first idea....
One Day Interleague Competition.
Division 1 should be played with a maximum number of 5 teams to allow all games to be played as double leg games throughout the competition each year. It always used to be played on this basis and changed last year when Hastings took part again.
As was mentioned further up the thread, having the first break in a single leg game can mean that the player going second has no opportunity to win a game as there is no "Equal Time" rule available and surely this is not fair to players at the "top level" when the "lower" Divisions play double leg games. :P
The Format for Division 2, B Teams and Ladies Competitions could be played as either Single leg matches or Double leg matches if the number of entries is suitable to allow sufficient time to be played as double legs.
What do people think about this....??
|
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Dec 5, 2012 15:14:54 GMT
Dave - What's your angle on Gandalf's suggestion of all 7 away breaks, as that seems to me the fairest way of all ? Both leagues I now play in give all the breaks to the away side, everyone seems to accept it and no-one seems to knowingly try to rig their home table. Tommo has already mentioned Gandalf's idea of the away teams having all of the breaks in the Home & Away Inter League Competition, but how about some alternative suggestions to change the way that we play this competition...?? Here are a couple of ideas to start the ball rolling..... although I think that they may be a bit "revolutionary" for some and I shall await to be duly shot down in flames about them!! :o ;D ;D Option 1.... Play all matches as "shortened" Double Leg games with both players having the break in one of the legs, each "leg" lasting either 8 or 10 minutes although that could obviously be discussed further to decide the best time for each leg? The advantage of only playing 8 minutes would be that it would still probably only require 1 coin to play both legs and would probably ensure some fairly frantic play to try to score as many points as possible! ;D The order of play could remain the same as present with the Home Team having first break in games 1,4 and 7 and the away team having first break in games 2,3,5 and 6. This would ensure that all players would have an equal chance of winning each game with 1 point awarded for each leg won and 1 point awarded for the Aggregate win as well. Option 2.... probably even more revolutionary than Option 1! :o Keep the existing Format for matches for the first half of the season.... normal length games, same breaks for both teams with the points being awarded as per the current system. Nothing revolutionary about that so far is there.... But then the change happens..... in the REVERSE Fixture, all of the players play the SAME OPPONENT as they did in the first match between the two teams, apart from the fact that the OTHER player will now have the break in this match! :o That would pretty much guarantee that most players would end up having the same number of breaks during the course of the season and would give them a chance to try and get some revenge if they had lost to their opponent earlier in the season as well! ;D It would also mean that the captains would really have to give a lot of thought of who to play against their opposing players and also who would play with the break in home matches. Obviously, in the event of a player not being available to play in the reverse fixture, a substitute player could be included.... but they would have to play the opponent that the player they replaced would have played and will either be lucky or unlucky as to whether they have the break in that game. ;D Just a couple of very basic ideas that I have thought about this morning.... but hopefully will lead to some interesting discussions and maybe some other ideas? 8-) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2012 15:46:55 GMT
I would like to see the re-instatement of a Rule which was found unworkable in its given wording - at the time when changes were made to Licensing laws. (I believe it quoted a specific time of day, which was too rigid.)
I propose that the following stays, and is renumbered as 2 (b):
RULES FOR INTER-LEAGUE COMPETITIONS
GENERAL
2. The visiting Captain may satisfy him/herself on the level of the table and to facilitate this, the balls are to be made available in the tray upon request in order that he/she may make trial shots to the top of the table. However he/she may not use side cushions, strike another ball or attempt the break shot.
.....But a Rule 2 (a) be inserted, thus:
"The table shall be prepared by the home team for the match, care being taken as to its level, half-hour or more before the first game is due to commence. But no further practice or 'warming-up' by players shall be allowed within this half-hour period."
Reason: a matter of etiquette.
|
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Dec 5, 2012 15:54:45 GMT
I would like to see the re-instatement of a Rule which was found unworkable in its given wording - at the time when changes were made to Licensing laws. (I believe it quoted a specific time of day, which was too rigid.) I propose that the following stays, and is renumbered as 2 (b): RULES FOR INTER-LEAGUE COMPETITIONS GENERAL 2. The visiting Captain may satisfy him/herself on the level of the table and to facilitate this, the balls are to be made available in the tray upon request in order that he/she may make trial shots to the top of the table. However he/she may not use side cushions, strike another ball or attempt the break shot. .....But a Rule 2 (a) be inserted, thus: "The table shall be prepared by the home team for the match, care being taken as to its level, half-hour or more before the first game is due to commence. But no further practice or 'warming-up' by players shall be allowed within this half-hour period." Reason: a matter of etiquette. I understand what you are saying here Clive, but surely if the Home Team want to practice on the table after the opposition have arrived it will give the away team a chance to see what the table is doing which would surely give them some benefit as well? ??? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2012 16:07:44 GMT
I understand what you are saying here Clive, but surely if the Home Team want to practice on the table after the opposition have arrived it will give the away team a chance to see what the table is doing which would surely give them some benefit as well? ??? It's my proposal, Dave, and let's see if it gets a seconder. That is what I thought this thread was for. ::) You will have your opportunity to shoot it down in flames when the AGM comes. Having said that, I'm on the wrong thread, aren't I ? Meant it to be on the 'AGM Proposals' one. >:( I give up ! |
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Dec 5, 2012 16:27:03 GMT
I understand what you are saying here Clive, but surely if the Home Team want to practice on the table after the opposition have arrived it will give the away team a chance to see what the table is doing which would surely give them some benefit as well? ??? It's my proposal, Dave, and let's see if it gets a seconder. That is what I thought this thread was for. ::) You will have your opportunity to shoot it down in flames when the AGM comes. Having said that, I'm on the wrong thread, aren't I ? Meant it to be on the 'AGM Proposals' one. >:( I give up ! Yep, you are on the wrong thread.... which is why I thought it was a topic for "discussion" so I gave my opinion!! ;D ;D For me, the whole point of keeping the "Proposal Thread" separate from the "Discussion Thread" was to enable us to have the ideas for significant new changes put here and to give people the chance to discuss (banter) the ideas and then hopefully lead to a meaningful proposal on the Thread that can go forward to the next AGM. 8-) I didn't really intend to shoot this down as a proposal at all, although I don't really see that the home team gain any real advantage by practising up to the start of the match but I am sure that you will find somebody that agrees with you and will second it..... ;D .... assuming you put it on the right thread of course!! ::) ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by "Silent" on Dec 5, 2012 17:42:02 GMT
Mine is radical....the 'B' Division to become Division 3 and relegation and promotion created between Division 2 and Division 3. Since 2000, 12 of the 13 'B' Divisions have been won by either Brighton 'B' or Worthing 'B' not seeing much competition there!! They remain playing the same teams time immemorial and whilst individual records look excellent, the competitive element is not so. It cannot be satisfactory that the same team(s) keep winning it.....I await the banter and the flames :)
Obviously this is for the One-Day Interleague
|
|
|
|
Post by JB on Dec 5, 2012 23:05:45 GMT
The one day inter league is for one team from each league. The B/C team comp was only introduced because there were a lot of players who wanted to play who would probably never get the opportunity. There was a spare day on the weekend of the ladies so the B competition was introduced. My thoughts are this shouldn't be changed as in reality the B comp doesn't have to take place
|
|
