|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2008 18:45:00 GMT
Just a bit of fun this. We on the Forum will monitor tables week by week.
This is how the tables in Mid Sussex finished, in descending order of total scored (both home and away players). Where there was more than one team they have been added together and divided by two.
1 Hurstpierpoint 420k 2 Greyhound 390k 3 Handcross 370k 4 Sportsman 281k 5 Clayton&Keymer 280k 6 Plough 275k 7 Brewers 270k 8 St Francis 266k 9 Watermill 250k 10 White Horse 245k 11 Windmill 210k
Nominations can be made from the weekly write-ups received. If there's been an amazing score or brilliant team performance, your table moves up one on the ladder. Home scores of 10k plus definitely count ! If a table copped for some criticism it drops a rung on the ladder.
Let's try it and see - and please ! This isn't meant to be taken too seriously.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2008 18:50:31 GMT
So here's the starting point, with the Windmill gone, and Royal Oak, HUSC and Laughing Fish added into the middle:
1 Hurstpierpoint 2 Greyhound 3 Handcross 4 Sportsman 5 Clayton&Keymer 6 HUSC 7 Laughing Fish 8 Royal Oak 9 Plough 10 Brewers 11 St Francis 12 Watermill 13 White Horse
League week one, Henry scores 16,900 on the Laughing Fish.
1 Hurstpierpoint 2 Greyhound 3 Handcross 4 Sportsman 5 Clayton&Keymer 6 Laughing Fish 7 HUSC 8 Royal Oak 9 Plough 10 Brewers 11 St Francis 12 Watermill 13 White Horse
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2008 18:56:20 GMT
League week 2, Sir KT scores 14,800 at the Hurst; BB Warrior gets 11k at the Sportsman, and low-scoring maatches are reported at the Brewers and the Watermill:
1 Hurstpierpoint 2 Greyhound 3 Sportsman 4 Handcross 5 Clayton&Keymer 6 Laughing Fish 7 HUSC 8 Royal Oak 9 Plough 10 St Francis 11 Brewers 12 White Horse 13 Watermill
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Sept 26, 2008 6:38:46 GMT
League week 2, Sir KT scores 14,800 at the Hurst; BB Warrior gets 11k at the Sportsman, and low-scoring maatches are reported at the Brewers and the Watermill: 1 Hurstpierpoint2 Greyhound 3 Sportsman4 Handcross 5 Clayton&Keymer 6 Laughing Fish 7 HUSC 8 Royal Oak 9 Plough 10 St Francis 11 Brewers12 White Horse 13 Watermill Unfortunately, this is where Johnny's comments (under Table Poll) that you can't judge a table on one individual score are proved to be correct......... ::) The Watermill have been moved down a place due to "low scores being reported"..... admittedly the home team only averaged 960 but their opponents (Plough) players had an average score of 2798. Meanwhile, the Sportsman move up a place when Greyhound (one of the strongest teams in the League) players average 1634 and the home team (excluding my score) average 1713... ??? ::) We hear that H hits a low score..... and he opens up the Table Poll again to comment about tables..... but we don't know what the scores were for any of the matches - but the Brewers table moves down a place! ::) H subsequently reveals a possible reason for his low score....!! :o No mention of the match at the White Horse where the home team averaged 2078 and Hurst B 3493........ giving higher averages than those at Hurst Club with 2510 for home players (excluding Sir KT! ;)) and 2534 for the Zeds. :o At USC, the new team there averaged 1826. The visiting Droops averaging 2896, Big Andy hits 6810 and Sir Jock predicts big scores there...... but again, not mentioned or moved in the table. ??? I like the idea of having a "League Table of tables"...... but unless we get every team to give a rating of the tables for each match I think that we will end up distorting the figures if we just base the positions on 1 individual performance in a game. Also, surely we should start with each table being on an equal basis and not basing it on how they were last season.......
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Sept 26, 2008 8:38:56 GMT
but then if you therefore exclude the score of sir kt that means that it is an average of only four players so this does not make sense every team has five players no matter who they are where there ranked there scores should be included as if this idea is going to happen then it should be fair
|
|
|
Post by bigtj on Sept 26, 2008 9:32:20 GMT
I agree with BOBHALL that all scores should be taken into account, because one player is the exception on the night does not mean that the table was tricky for the rest, rather that as I have always said class players will read and adapt to the table.
If one player can score 10k plus on the night surely that only goes to prove the table was well playable and then it is up to everyone else to raise their game to that level.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2008 10:00:10 GMT
What a fuss ! :o You guys have really missed the point here !
There is no cup at stake here, is just a way to do a bit of unofficial 'monitoring'. No one really believes it's going to make the tables any better. ::)
With a ladder competition, usually it's turned upside-down to start off the new 'session', so maybe I should have started it off with Hurst right at the bottom. But knowing what injury to feelings this would cause, I thought better of it ! ;D
Let's try it for one more week at least, taking nominations after next Wednesday's round of games. And if it causes too much of a rumpus I'll bin the whole idea and delete the thread. :-/
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Sept 26, 2008 10:34:01 GMT
no i no there is no cup at stake but i do feel there should be the one for the best buffett lol
i feel i could win that :)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2008 10:38:58 GMT
..... but the only way that we can try to improve ALL of the tables in Mid-Sussex is to judge them equally at the start of the season. I disagree, and think that this idea of a bit of gentle fun could be beneficial, so long as we're not too anal about it. I'm therefore defending the format, which was really easy to set up (took me less than half hour last night) and should be equally easy to maintain. My own table (Handcross) slipped a place through no fault of its own, on the basis of your one game at the Sportsman. (There was no game at Handcross). I do not mind that at all, and will take it as a challenge to prepare the table nicely for our match with the Laughing Fish next Wednesday. So don't be surprised if H does well on it and we gain our third place back ! ;)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2008 10:45:57 GMT
Personally, I think that the best way we can start to improve the tables is for the Away team to give each table a mark (out of 10 to allow more flexibility) for how it has played after each match, with an area of the result card for any comments about particular aspects that are bad - or good about the table. I agree on that point. It's what Redhill League do and it works fine. I've said so before on here somewhere but somehow it got glossed over. i do remember Ian Giffen weighing in though and saying that Horsham do a similar scheme. Too late to implement for this season, though. Someone ought to suggest it for next year's AGM. [edit - no, I'm wrong, Redhill's marks out of 10 are 'sportsmanship points' for teams' attitudes, but quality of tables can be a point of consideration. But Horsham do allow a plaque for the best table each season - I know, because I was the one who commissioned it originally !]
|
|
|
Post by Chunky Monkey on Sept 26, 2008 13:30:27 GMT
Just an Idea guys how about it is judged on the away teams Scores? Home players shoud score well on their own table so would it not be best to have it judged by the away scores?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2008 14:01:44 GMT
Yes, it will all fit into the bigger picture. 8-)
Get your nominations ready for after next Wednesday's games.
|
|
|
Post by H on Sept 26, 2008 14:15:53 GMT
I'm all up for this on the condition that is does not cause unnecessary fallings out etc. I for one have voiced my opinions on a number of tables I consider/considered to be in poor condition and not once have I been able to do it without "a bad workman always blames his tools" comments cropping up, or people getting upset and the like. If we can fairly rate tables without people getting defensive, then great! Quite honestly, the Laughing Fish table was in a terrible state this time last year, and it is because I realised that and did something about it that it now plays the way it does. I believe every table out there can have that level of care and attention, it just needs to be brought to people's attention in a non-offensive manner, and I hope this will lead to an improved all-round experience for away teams in the future (and less drunken tantrums from me!)
|
|
|
Post by Chunky Monkey on Sept 26, 2008 14:42:41 GMT
H, i see your point on giving the table care and attention but as you are the one setting the table up dont you find it is set up to suit yourself? I know last week when we played there it was playing very nice but none of your team played the table as well as you did!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2008 14:44:21 GMT
Agreed Henry,
If it starts to be counter-productive I'll put an end to it.
In the past people have been too afraid to speak out about bad tables, and sometimes things need saying before anything is done.
Like yours, our table at the Handcross needed lots of attention to bring it back up to a reasonable standard, and the last thing I want is people having a miserable time and saying nasty things about it.
|
|
|
Post by Chunky Monkey on Sept 26, 2008 14:55:31 GMT
Agreed Henry, If it starts to be counter-productive I'll put an end to it. I can see it is going to cause a problem, i know it is supposed to be a bit of fun but certain comments will start getting peoples back up, i.e not including Kt's score in the averages. i dont see what difference it makes. Last year when both myself and Warrior were playing we were hitting scores between 8 and 11k on the same night whilst the rest of the side were hitting between 2 + 3k would these two greater scores have not been included then? At the end of the day arnt we just going out playing a game of Bar Billiards and enjoying the evening. If you are not enjoying the Evening ..... Give Up! Nothing more will be said from my part on this subject
|
|
|
Post by H on Sept 26, 2008 15:01:54 GMT
I can see both sides of the story, Kev does have a point. All I will add is I set the fish table up based on other good tables I had played before, not necessarily to suit myself, but i suppose you will always be able to argue that my own preference still had some part to play, whether consciously or not.
|
|
|
Post by iang on Sept 26, 2008 15:53:58 GMT
Just to refresh Tommo's & BBW's memorys Horsham do have a table rating on the score card it is based out of 5 is supurb & 0 is firewood. We were going to increase it to out of 10 to be more flexible but it didn't happen at this AGM
This is a confidential rating so nobody needs to worry about upsetting the home team but it does mean that both sides have to submit a score card. Not every team will rate a table so I have to take an average & the weekly scores aren't published. At the end of the season a best table trophy is awarded to both divisions based on the table rating combined with the away scores. Originally it was meant to highlight bad tables so the committe could do something about it I e ask the team to improve it or call in Tarrats but it never went that far.
I still feel that it has a place & value but most of the time it tells us what we already know.
|
|
|
Post by specialone on Sept 26, 2008 20:14:01 GMT
If this is a bit of fun, fine. I'm sure Tommo will keep a close eye on it.
The Mid Sussex Bar Billiards league probably has the widest range of ability and commitment of any sporting league in the world. The world number one could find himself playing the wife of a player, someone signed up for emergencies, someone who would be thrilled with a score of one thousand. This is rare in any sport.
Please can we try to avoid the situation where an away game for less committed, is an opportunity to be cannon fodder for a huge score, and a home game is an opportunity to be moaned at, because the huge score is not thought possible on their table.
Not looking to start a fight, moan, make the league a laughing stock, and I don't need things spelt out to me in large capitals.
Just pointing out that some people get enjoyment from things they are not that good at or serious about. Me and golf for example
Regards to all Shaun
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2008 21:27:38 GMT
Thanks Shaun,
Just to add that the whole point of the ladder is to be a sort of Room 101, where vent can be given to frustrations in a light-hearted manner.
We all see things differently and one man's drink is another man's poison. The next time we review H's table for instance- it won't go up a place if it becomes apparent that he's the only one who can play it !
The most interesting aspect for me will be to see in which direction the new teams' tables head - up or down ?
I'm persevering with this idea as it will break us in gently for if we have to start rating tables in an official capacity next year.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2008 10:17:48 GMT
Our visit last night was very much in an "unofficial" capacity just to have a couple of games and see how the table was playing...... ;) Changing the balls on match days is an old trick, which wouldn't bother me too much....... I just hope that the table itself doesn't get moved before Wednesday as that seems to have been the biggest problem in the past! ::) ;D There are so many ways a table can appear to have 'changed' from one day to the next (Humidity in the atmosphere, room temperature etc). It has been observed that our Handcross table 'alters as the evening goes on'. I can't put the light on too soon before the match or the table seems somehow to 'overheat' and doesn't play well for the last frame of the evening ! IanG once pointed out to me that I was doing the wrong thing putting the table cover behind the table as it was shutting off the radiator and preventing it from warming up the back. You live and learn. My table at home plays well at certain times of day and not at others - 5pm-6pm is its optimum time, just before the sun goes down, it's nice and fast then and after that it 'tightens up' and the break goes back to being difficult....... According to Sir KT, the brand new table at the Marquis of Grandby was not easily playable to begin with - until he changed the set of balls, which cured its problems at a stroke ! Experience has taught me not to expect any table to play the same way as on a previous visit !
|
|
|
Post by specialone on Sept 29, 2008 11:17:49 GMT
Stop it Dave, You are embarrising me.............
................ Oh go on then if you must. Yes some thrashings are always going to happen, and we should all try to win graciously and loose gracefully. Think you've made me have it the nasty way, at least once.
What is avoidable is a witch hunt against against teams who are not that serious, and do not give their tables hours of TLC.
None of my team played at all in the summer. I went up to the club, counted the balls, brushed the table, and screwed one leg up to correct a left hand roll. On match night asked the opposing skipper to play some balls up the table to make sure it was running straight, he thought it was fine. This is what I do, but I accept some do a lot more and some a little bit less.
The game you talk about is a good example of when I have gone to table with a poor reputation and just done the best I could with it, rather than moan and become a pain. Did this at the Brewers last year, and I think I got a good score on the, much moaned about, Windmill. Can not remember a lot about this night because of the terrible events in Moscow that night. Shaun
|
|
|
Post by H on Sept 29, 2008 14:15:59 GMT
Amen to that last sentence!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2008 23:18:45 GMT
Looks like scores over, say, 6500 will be the benchmark tonight. Nominations so far for the Watermill and Greyhound.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Jock o The Strap on Oct 2, 2008 17:53:09 GMT
I like this little thread, as long as its taken non tooooooo seriously. And yes I have been quite vocal about some table conditions including mine own, which I am happy to say is playing better than it has in while, all be it with the assistance of brackets and several screws. Brushing and ironing have helped immensely as has getting some serious cleaning chemicals onto the pockets. I even went as far as hoovering out the insides to stop all the crap getting on balls and table. Cloth is the next target as it looks like some twat has spayed a can of coke or something similar over it, but it is also booked in for recovering.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2008 18:30:16 GMT
Just enough material for an update now that the Hurst B result is in...
League week 3, high scores by the away teams on the Watermill and Greyhound lifts the Watermill off the bottom. Greyhound would have gone top but the Dazzler saved Hurst B blushes with a 6500-plus score, so the status quo is preserved. Some reasonable performances at the Handcross, Brewers, USC and CKRBL, but not quite enough to take them up a rung. Early days, and plenty of season left...........
1 Hurstpierpoint 2 Greyhound 3 Sportsman 4 Handcross 5 Clayton&Keymer 6 Laughing Fish 7 United Services 8 Royal Oak 9 Plough 10 St Francis 11 Brewers 12 Watermill 13 White Horse
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2008 12:13:10 GMT
League week 4, and all matches bar one were decided in favour of the away team. Nothing much to write home about on those in so far, but performances on the Watermill, Royal Oak and White Horse could yet be included if justified. In the meantime, St Francis goes up one on the back of SpecialOne's 8340, and the Laughing Fish also goes up a place thanks to H's 9030 and a fine pressure win by Jim Ashford (5980).
1 Hurstpierpoint 2 Greyhound 3 Sportsman 4 Handcross 5 Laughing Fish 6 Clayton&Keymer 7 United Services 8 Royal Oak 9 St Francis 10 Plough 11 Brewers 12 Watermill 13 White Horse
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2008 19:58:59 GMT
League week 5, and with just the scores from the White Horse match to come in, there are two more upwards movements (none downwards as no moans about tables): Greyhound take over as top table on the back of Peter Burchell's 7580, whilst Watermill consolidates its reputation as the most improved table in the League with a fine 7400 from Norman Cragg.
1 Greyhound 2 Hurstpierpoint 3 Sportsman 4 Handcross 5 Laughing Fish 6 Clayton&Keymer 7 United Services 8 Royal Oak 9 St Francis 10 Plough 11 Watermill 12 Brewers 13 White Horse
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2008 9:20:39 GMT
League week 6, and it's all change at the top of the table of top tables ! Hurst go back to the summit, thanks to four good scores including 7310 from BobHall and the Old Fella's 6680 - also a cracking decider. Sportsman would have gone up thanks purely to the BB Warrior's magnificent 12,300 - bad back and all; but that would mean the Greyhound slipping 2 places - which they can't do in one go. Down near the basement the Watermill table goes up yet another place in acknowledgement of Sparky's fine 9460. Which leave the Laughing Fish to exchange places with Handcross, justified by H's 12,100 on the Fish, and the wry comment by the Watermill team comparing Handcross to their own table of last season !
1 Hurstpierpoint 2 Greyhound 3 Sportsman 4 Laughing Fish 5 Handcross 6 Clayton&Keymer 7 United Services 8 Royal Oak 9 St Francis 10 Watermill 11 Brewers 12 Plough 13 White Horse
Late edit.........Brewers table goes up a place thanks to an excellent 8500 from Adam Bateup
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2008 17:39:57 GMT
League week 7, and a few swapovers with reports from the Watermill and the White Horse to come, which could yet have a bearing.... Hurst stays top without question: there were four scores in excess of 6k in the local derby; The Brewers is having a battle with the Watermill near the foot of the table, but there's plenty of time for both to rise further. This time the Brewers stood out with a fine 8970 from Sir Jock - and other good scores from the Farmer and Aunty Ros. In mid-table, the HHUSC and CKRBL swap places, no scores of 3k or over on the CKRBL, and by contrast no winning score below 3k on HHUSC - plus a fine 7010 from away player Chris Little.1 Hurstpierpoint2 Greyhound 3 Sportsman 4 Laughing Fish 5 Handcross 6 United Services 7 Clayton&Keymer8 Royal Oak 9 St Francis 10 Brewers11 Watermill 12 White Horse13 Plough Late addition following this report:White Horse 2 Watermill B 3 Colin Mansfield 6140 - 370 Gavin Boyd Uncle Max's must be the best score on the White Horse for a while, so it justifiably moves up a place.
|
|