Andy Murray vs Robin Haase, Thursday, Time - 1:00pm BST - Discuss the match
MurraysWorld  >  Playground  >  Read-the-Round  >  Rule change proposals
Poll
Please pick the 7 following choices
RTR should be started again - 14 (15.7%)
RTR shouldn't be started again - 1 (1.1%)
Should do a winner just for each tournament - 10 (11.2%)
Should do a winner just for the whole year - 0 (0%)
Should do a winner for each tournament AND the whole year - 4 (4.5%)
Just do grandslams - 4 (4.5%)
Do grandslams + masters - 11 (12.4%)
Just do a tournament if somebody decides to make a post for it - 2 (2.2%)
Only award points for an exact match in sets and the winner - 4 (4.5%)
Keep the points scoring the same - 5 (5.6%)
Keep banker option - 6 (6.7%)
Remove banker option - 4 (4.5%)
Post every match for the day and let people pick which matches to guess on (up to an amount) - 5 (5.6%)
Keep it the same so post starters choiose which matches people pick - 7 (7.9%)
Make it so players should post their own scores in the match thread - 4 (4.5%)
Keep it so organizers add up all the scores - 8 (9%)
Total Voters: 16

Pages: 1 [2] Reply

Rule change proposals

Quote

That's looking complicated again. Unless you have someone dedicated and prepared to do all the scoring, the simpler the better.
IP Logged
Quote

How would you know who voted for what though? I don't think it gives names out like that on these polls.

Yes thats why mark would need to modify it, ive seen that feature on othet forums. But it would be very handy .

Like the idea, just worried about whether organisers will be able to do this and also sometimes matches can be late in being added on Oddschecker

Those would be the main limiting factors. I don't know how many people would understand how to do it??
[ Last edit by laundry June 01, 2015, 09:16 PM ] IP Logged
Quote

Yes thats why mark would need to modify it, ive seen that feature on othet forums. But it would be very handy .

Those would be the main limiting factors. I don't know how many people would understand how to do it??

I know I could do it, if we have enough people who feel they could do it then we can we definitely give it a try.
IP Logged
Quote

For me the main thing is timing. In the old RTR matches often weren't posted by the time I was going to work and by time I got back the deadline was passed.
IP Logged
Quote

Well something for Mark to maybe look at:

http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=432527.0
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=500412.0

If that was working the system I propose trying would look like so.

Pick your 4 winners in the poll:
  • Murray
  • Ferrer
  • -
  • Nadal
  • Djokovic
  • -
  • Federer
  • Wawrinka
  • -
  • Nishikori
  • Tsonga

(Can add the - as poll options to seperate the matches clearly, different points could be added for the players or not).

This would mean removing the banker option though, and for practicality we would have to stick to the thread starter picking a smaller amount of matches in the early rounds. But the clear advantage is that the scores could be added up accurately and easily in no time even if different points were used it would still be a lot quicker, easier and more accurate than before.
[ Last edit by laundry June 02, 2015, 02:56 PM ] IP Logged
Quote

A few of the proposals have quite split views, so maybe we could have a trial tournament?
IP Logged
Quote

A few of the proposals have quite split views, so maybe we could have a trial tournament?
I presume you're hinting at Queens.

I would be interested in seeing how possibly doing scoring for players would go because although it's perhaps going away from the idea of simplifying things a bit I just think it would make the game a lot more fun. In any case I have found a good site to use for it, valuechecker.co.uk ; say for Stuttgart: http://www.valuechecker.co.uk/tennis/mens-singles/atp-stuttgart-3245/

13:00    Benjamin Becker    1.75    Andreas Seppi    2.10    
13:00    Sergiy Stakhovsky    1.75    Samuel Groth    2.20    
14:00    Tommy Haas    1.73    Mikhail Kukushkin    2.20    
14:08    Mate Pavic    2.20    Alexander Zverev    1.67    
14:30    Matthias Bachinger    2.30    Peter Gojowczyk    1.73    
15:30    Jerzy Janowicz    2.10    Dustin Brown    1.83    

That's a straight copy/paste of the matches, what's good is that it is in a very nice and convenient format. Also all the odds are given with 2 decimal places so we could simply just multiple all the odds by 100 to make nice neat scores. ie:

13:00    Benjamin Becker    175    Andreas Seppi    210    
13:00    Sergiy Stakhovsky    175    Samuel Groth    220    
14:00    Tommy Haas    173    Mikhail Kukushkin    220    
14:08    Mate Pavic    220    Alexander Zverev    167    
14:30    Matthias Bachinger    230    Peter Gojowczyk    173    
15:30    Jerzy Janowicz    210    Dustin Brown    183    
IP Logged
Quote

I have just knocked up a quick spreadsheet also that anyone could use: http://goo.gl/tvN62u

You can try it out if you go to http://www.valuechecker.co.uk/tennis/mens-singles/atp-stuttgart-3245
 then just copy all the match text starting with the cursor just before the 1st match time and ending with the last match odds.

Then paste it into the spreadsheet in cell B3. It will then give you the text in a usable format in row J which you can just copy/paste on here. Like so:

13:00  Benjamin Becker (175 Pts) vs Andreas Seppi (210 Pts)
13:00  Sergiy Stakhovsky (175 Pts) vs Samuel Groth (220 Pts)
14:00  Tommy Haas (173 Pts) vs Mikhail Kukushkin (220 Pts)
14:08  Mate Pavic (220 Pts) vs Alexander Zverev (167 Pts)
14:30  Matthias Bachinger (230 Pts) vs Peter Gojowczyk (173 Pts)
15:30  Jerzy Janowicz (210 Pts) vs Dustin Brown (183 Pts)
[ Last edit by laundry June 09, 2015, 06:07 PM ] IP Logged
Quote

Great work- Thanks!

It seems quite usable to me, I think Queens would be a good choice to have a trial tournament as even though it isn't a masters or a slam, I would expect that most on MW will be interested in and watching the tournament. Then if everything goes well we can start properly at Wimbledon.
IP Logged
Quote

Well it will probably be usable to some and a confuddle to others lol. I guess I need to guess how many people are able/willing to start threads using this system?

If everyone who does so plans on using the spreadsheet then I would probably also suggest making the scores a little simpler by multiplying by 10 instead of 100 rounding to the nearest 10 like I original suggested (as the spreadsheet would take care of all that).  Then it would look a simpler:

13:00  Benjamin Becker (18 Pts) vs Andreas Seppi (21 Pts)
13:00  Sergiy Stakhovsky (17 Pts) vs Samuel Groth (22 Pts)
14:00  Tommy Haas (17 Pts) vs Mikhail Kukushkin (22 Pts)
14:08  Mate Pavic (22 Pts) vs Alexander Zverev (17 Pts)
14:30  Matthias Bachinger (23 Pts) vs Peter Gojowczyk (17 Pts)
15:30  Jerzy Janowicz (21 Pts) vs Dustin Brown (18 Pts)

Much easier numbers for people to get a grasp on.

And I should mention that while this looks a little more complicated it is also simpler in other areas than the previous scoring system.

1) People would only need to put the players names down instead of the set numbers, which would make casting your predictions a lot easier and I believe would allow for more matches to be able to be predicted upon. I see no reason why people couldn't pick from 8 matches at the start of the tournament?

2) I'm going to presume that we are sticking with the system of organizers (or unofficial representatives) to add up all the scores in the match thread. While the numbers are longer (and thus more difficult to mentally tally) it will be much easier for an organizer to see the result of a prediction as they will only need to look at the winner and not the set score. It will also lead to less mistakes if any were being made before, seeing the difference between player names is a lot easier than seeing the difference between 1-2 and 2-1.
IP Logged
Quote

I think having unofficial organizers should be fine and so there then should always be someone available to start the thread. And yes multiplying by 10 will be simpler for both managers and players to manage. But I'm not sure how many people are willing to become organizers?
IP Logged
Quote

But I'm not sure how many people are willing to become organizers?
Well that's a key thing to gauge, I guess somebody needs to ask lol.

An idea that I've had is you have 'unofficial organizers' that should be starting the match threads, any of them can start a thread but they have a deadline of say 9pm the previous day (or whatever is convenient for the time zone of the tournament). Then if none of the organizers have started a thread by that deadline, the other players should be aware of that deadline and should then know that one of them needs to start the thread or contact somebody who knows how to do it if they do not.

This way a majority of threads should be started by organizers which is good for consistency and accuracy but if nobody does it should still get done by somebody.
IP Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Reply