|
Post by bobhall on Jan 3, 2011 15:35:10 GMT
is there any chance of seeing some averages for the `1st half before the second half begins
|
|
|
Post by iang on Jan 3, 2011 19:39:03 GMT
Hi Rob, Yes will do I was waiting for the postponed fixtures to be played. Crawley Club are playing Windmill A on Tuesday & I will publish league tables & player averages after that & before the 2nd half starts including the top 16.
Thanks. Ian.
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Jan 3, 2011 23:56:32 GMT
Thank you ian
many thanks
bobhall
|
|
|
Post by iang on Jan 9, 2011 13:21:11 GMT
Updated League Tables, Player Averages, Team Player stats & Table Ranking for both divisions have now been sent out. If any of your players are not on the mailing list & would like to be then please let me know. Thanks. Ian.
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Jan 9, 2011 20:03:00 GMT
hi ian stats are incorrect as im afraid to say tommo has lost a leg he lost to jim at the plough lb
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2011 20:19:43 GMT
hi ian stats are incorrect as im afraid to say tommo has lost a leg he lost to jim at the plough lb Thanks for reminding me, Rob. ;D Ian's stats are correct: I've Played 9, Won 9 (including a walkover at the Crawley Club) and Lost 1. A 'lost' column isn't given. If it said Played 10 that, when divided into my total score, would unfairly reduce my average. tommo PS Stop trying to get above me in the list. ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Jan 9, 2011 20:20:38 GMT
tommo so it should read played 9 won 8 with a walkover aswell
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Jan 9, 2011 20:21:19 GMT
as mine reads played 9 won 8
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2011 20:25:23 GMT
No, a walkover counts as a win. It wasn't my fault I didn't get a game at Crawley Club. It's important, as it has a bearing on the 'Best Performance'. As it stands, I could miss one more match (to give Margo or Mick a game) and still remain in contention. If you had your way, I would have to play all remaining. ;)
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Jan 9, 2011 20:34:03 GMT
tommo all im saying is you have lost a game if you look there is a seperate walkover page so you should played 9 won 8 walkover 1 im sure ian will clear it up but i believe i am right as you have lost one if not should read played 10 won 9 walkover 1 as you still have a loss :)
|
|
|
Post by iang on Jan 9, 2011 20:46:34 GMT
hi ian stats are incorrect as im afraid to say tommo has lost a leg he lost to jim at the plough lb Thanks for reminding me, Rob. ;D Ian's stats are correct: I've Played 9, Won 9 (including a walkover at the Crawley Club) and Lost 1. A 'lost' column isn't given. If it said Played 10 that, when divided into my total score, would unfairly reduce my average. tommo PS Stop trying to get above me in the list. ;D ;D Hi. The stats are correct although a little hard to understand Tommo is correct if the score was divided by 10 it would reduce the average. the fact that Tommo has played 9 & lost 1 would then read played 9 won 8 the walk over then brings it bact to played p won 9 there are situations when you could have played 9 won 10. As Tommo says there isn't a lost column on my sheet as there is on Roy's sheet as the sheet is a MASTERS list & is sorted first on the ranking points won to decide the top 16 the best performance is then decided at the end of the season in the usual way of mumber of wins to losses. I'm quite happy to add a games lost coulmn if people feel it would be of use. I hope this helps. Ian.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2011 20:48:20 GMT
Let me explain how the columns work on Ian's Spreadsheet, Rob.
The Horsham rules for Special Performance (each division) differ from other Leagues, and specify that it goes to the person with the 'highest percentage of wins to losses, providing that they have played 90% of the games.
There is therefore a hidden column which works out that percentage by dividing the wins column by the wins plus losses column and taking a percentage (eg 19 / 20 x 100 =95 %) This hidden column will determine the two winners, one for each division, at the end of each season.
The walkover column is there just for information, as otherwise it looks odd.
The system was introduced during my time as Secretary (1982-1992) by the Committee at the time (in their extreme wisdom) and has been used ever since. :P
Thanks Ian, btw, we posted at the same time. ;D
|
|
|
Post by specialone on Jan 9, 2011 20:53:06 GMT
Do try and keep up Rob
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Jan 9, 2011 21:04:02 GMT
yer i no specialone seems silly not having lost column but hey whatever will be will be im not fussed as its only half season so i dont mind
|
|
|
Post by iang on Jan 9, 2011 21:10:43 GMT
The lost column isn't so important in Horsham because you can still climb back up the table whereas in Mid Sussex it is only about the win & the only way you can climb back up is if someone above you losses more games which is what it's all about winning.
If there is enough demand I will add an extra column ;D
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Jan 9, 2011 21:12:47 GMT
no its fine ian as its about rankings i was just curios thats all
|
|
|
Post by iang on Jan 9, 2011 21:16:18 GMT
Thanks Rob See you on Wednesday.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2011 21:28:44 GMT
............moving on, not unhealthy to have a bit of discussion on which League's Player of the Year, aka Best Performance system is better. The Horsham system of 'highest percentage of wins to losses' (separate from the Qualification for the Masters) may seem rather quirky, but here's how it came about: Check out this link and look down to 1976/77, where you will see that there were joint winners: www.horshambarbilliards.co.uk/page15.htmlJohn Thayre had Played 24, Won 21 and Lost 3. Rod Tarratt had played 20, Won 20 and Lost 0. Who was better? As Harry Hill would say, "Only one way to find out.............fight!!!!!" Seriously, the rules at the time stipulated that "most wins" took the prize. However, someone pointed out that JT had lost an eighth of his games whereas Rod had won an infinite number of games - how could his record not be considered better ? The Committee, after much discussion, decided to award joint-winners, and eventually a wording was proposed which catered for the situation, and this was accepted into the Rules.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2011 16:17:02 GMT
With just a quarter of the season left, any chance of an Averages update? ;)
|
|
|
Post by iang on Feb 16, 2011 17:41:05 GMT
Sorry Bobhall ;D ;D
I do like these people that jump the gun & pleased to see a hunger for the info. as this is the week before the next team cup round I will be sending out this weekend.
|
|