| From | Message |
aaron--
1/15/2007
15:50:26
[ report this post ] |
 Subject: Jumpy Horse p3
Message:
Time for a new page
|
aaron--
1/15/2007
15:52:31
[ report this post ] | Message from cosgrove
Message:
Hi Herrflick
Message:
So are we not even introducing new team members now? Just move 'em in, push 'em out, hurry hurry. Where's the love? the personal touch? Are we a group drawn together by a mutual interest in athletic equestrians or are we a damned Dutch w****house? Civilization teeters on the brink, gentlemen, let's not give go giving it a shove.
|
geraintfawr
1/16/2007
09:47:01
[ report this post ] | An admirable sentiment, sir.
Message:
I think we can all feel just a little bit humbled by that.
If you can imagine us all standing together in a large circle holding hands, we all just gave a momentary little clammy squeeze in agreement.
Mmm.
|
geraintfawr
1/16/2007
09:52:07
[ report this post ] | PS
Message:
Welcome aboard Mr Flick.
|
herrflick
1/16/2007
13:24:05
[ report this post ] | I sank you all
Message:
Admirable sentiments indeed. My gratitude also to Herr Aaron for his sagacious consideration of my membership application. With civilization restored, I shall seek to dedicate my modest acumen to upholding, through the fine medium of chess, the observation of jaunty beasts of burden.
Robin (Flick)
|
hubb
1/16/2007
13:39:56
[ report this post ] | Not that I've got anything against the Dutch...
Message:
It pleases me that the correct answer to the question, "Do you want to be in an equestrian athletics enthusiasts group or a Dutch w****house?" is assumed to be the former.
|
nabokovkat
1/17/2007
11:57:14
[ report this post ] | Memories...
Message:
Last time I was in a Dutch w****house I saw something in the corner that looked like out team
avatar.
|
aaron--
1/18/2007
02:39:31
[ report this post ] | Jumpy Horse cups
Message:
The leagues are in full flow as we all know. Now we have a 2 up, 2 down promotion/relegation system, the placing of people is more important than before.
Should two people finish on the same points, I propose the following 3 methods of separation, in order -
1. Their results against each other in the tourny
2. The number of team points accrued
3. The name closest to the beginning of the alphabet
4. The number of victories gained as black in the tourny
This is very much open to debate...so what do you all think? Are there any other categories? And which category should rank the highest?
|
geraintfawr
1/18/2007
07:17:11
[ report this post ] |
Message:
Rule number three is certainly an exciting newcomer. But, can anyone help me out here? How does this benefit anyone? I can't think who could possibly benefit from this. Otherwise, I think it's lovely.
|
herrflick
1/18/2007
15:16:13
[ report this post ] | Method 5..
Message:
Perhaps "the player with the most sophisticated tailor" ? I hear sartorial elegance goes a long way in the smoke and dagger filled world of online chess gaming.
On an unrelated note, it slipped my mind to mention Gieves & Hawkes do a splendid 3 piece camel-hair smoking ensemble, specially cut for occasions such as these..
|
nabokovkat
1/19/2007
03:18:28
[ report this post ] |
Message:
Following herrflick's sartorial suggestion, perhaps rule 4 should be rephrased as "The number of
victories gained while wearing black".
|
herrflick
1/20/2007
10:31:11
[ report this post ] |
Message:
But surely no self-respecting Jumpy Horse member would have the 'je m'en fous' to dare traversing the wibbly wobbly web dressed in anything other than black-tie with matching cumberbund and braces?!
|
hubb
1/21/2007
10:45:58
[ report this post ] | Hang on, that'd be 5 (including the aquaducts)
Message:
just a quick correction to aaron's post. I think you'll find that's 4 methods you mentioned there:
1. Their results against each other in the tourny
2. The number of team points accrued
3. The name closest to the beginning of the alphabet
4. The number of victories gained as black in the tourny
5. A one-on-one gladatorial combat involving over-sized leeks and a bucket on your head.
|
mpauyall
1/22/2007
06:16:19
[ report this post ] | Priorities
Message:
1. Their results against each other in the tourny
2. The number of victories gained as black in the tourny
3. The number of team points accrued
4. The name closest to the beginning of the alphabet
5. Leek or for Englishmen Chip, Combat could be an "final decider"
is the fairest system because if one person has beaten another they should get their victories, like in conkers. Wins as black takes skill and then the rest are based on chance.
|
aaron--
1/23/2007
10:42:24
[ report this post ] | Conkers and gladatorial combat...
Message:
...are inspired and creative ideas. I applaud thinking out of the box. However, it doesn beg the question as to whether we would expect cosgrove or badgerandimp to travel to the UK for such bouts, important though they would be. Also, I'm not sure the JH kitty stretch.
Any other suggestions? What do you think of a pre-arranged Blitz game as a third option instead of no. of black victories? I'm not sure why winnimg more games as black is any better that winning more as white...?
|
mpauyall
1/23/2007
13:01:21
[ report this post ] | isn't it...
Message:
...because as black you start at a disadvantage?
|
aaron--
1/24/2007
00:27:08
[ report this post ] | That is certainly true
Message:
However, imagine you have two players -
Player A has won 5 as white and 0 as black. Conversely, Player B has won 0 as white and 5 as black. Under the above ruling, B goes through.
Granted, B has won more games as black - all of which he started at a disadvantage. However, he also got turned over more as white, in which he started in an advantageous stituation.
Is it like an away goals ruling in football?
|
geraintfawr
1/25/2007
01:20:03
[ report this post ] | yeah, kinda.
Message:
a win is just more impressive than a loss is disappointing.
|
mpauyall
1/25/2007
05:36:01
[ report this post ] | for deffo...
Message:
...and though in the above example it may seem unfair, black wins should count as better when the normal scores are tied. (like in footie winning away)
It's better than an arbitrary "alphabet" decision on (user)name, or team points where older team members, or those who play more games are at an advantage.
Do you concur?
|
nabokovkat
1/25/2007
07:50:24
[ report this post ] | Settling ties
Message:
Deffo speed of play.
|
geraintfawr
1/26/2007
03:07:23
[ report this post ] | yibyib...
Message:
speed of play is nice...
|
aaron--
1/26/2007
06:14:39
[ report this post ] | Okely dokely
Message:
If we scrap team points due to being potentially unfair to those newer members amongst us, we are left with the following thus far -
Their results against each other in the tourny
The number of victories gained as black in the tourny
Speed of play
Speed of play is a tricky one. It would advantage those of us who are desk bound during the day, and disadvantage those who do real work. Is that sending out the right signal? What are we saying with that kinda rule?
|
herrflick
1/26/2007
09:53:29
[ report this post ] | To cast my humble oar..
Message:
Average move time, while possibly making for a more intense challenge, can't be fair to all. However, the number of moves taken in tourny (or possibly just in games against the drawing player) might make for a more intellectual "speed of play" statistic. Possibly even more worthy of credit than victories as black?
|
herrflick
1/26/2007
09:55:44
[ report this post ] | ...
Message:
Or for that matter even the balance of games won against said drawing player.
|
ascidian
1/28/2007
05:40:34
[ report this post ] | my two cents .... plus a bit more
Message:
Here's my thinking:
I think we should try to split two drawn players on the basis of their performance against each other in the tourny first, if that fails, then their overall performance in the tourny and if that fails their overall performance in the team. With that in mind :
1. results against each other in the tourny
2. number of victories as black in the tourny
3. least number of moves made in the tourny (not too sure about that one? maybe only in victorious games? or only versus the other drawn player?)
4. percentage of team games won (rather than team points to balance it out for newer team members)
Also thought about:
- player with the lower rating (but they change daily so when do you measure it?)
- balance of games (points) between the two drawing players (but would that would be an incentive to draw the game out for the winning player or resign too early for the loser?)
- player with least team time-outs (clutching at straws now!)
- speed of play (prob not fair to all)
I must have too much time on my hands......
|
herrflick
1/28/2007
06:17:31
[ report this post ] |
Message:
You certainly do. Agreed I think number of moves criterion would only work if you compare games against the drawing player.
Who is actually going to do these rankings or can you set up the rules for the league manually?
|
ascidian
1/28/2007
06:40:33
[ report this post ] | unless i am mistaken,
Message:
we will have to calculate these stats ourselves, the mini-tounament rules are quite restrictive.
|
aaron--
1/31/2007
13:29:56
[ report this post ] | My brain hurts
Message:
Some good input on this - like it. However, my brain is starting to melt down.
I don't like deciding on the least no. of moves - finishing games quickly indicates a certain playing style, but not necessarily the best style. Some people go for the jugular from the off, whereas others prefer to be more patient/ponderous (depending on your point of view).
I also don't like deciding by looking at team points. It is nice to have these tournys as stand alone unconnected events.
I do like the lowest rating idea as it rewards the lower rated player for having performed above expectations. It adds to the Cup Glory if underdogs are supported...it is also easy to work out. If put into practice, the rating will be taken from today…in subsequent tourneys, it will be taken from day one.
I personally am not so keen on the victories as black thing, as I am not convinced that more losses as white is better that more as black. However, I hear the horses neighing in their herds in support of this option.
I therefore propose the following the following deciding categories -
Their results against each other in the tourny
(The number of victories gained as black in the tourny)
The lower ranking player
Personally, I'd like to omit the second one, but if there is enough response on here, then I'll keep it in. So have your say people - yay or neeeiigghhh. Not enough support, and we’re down to two options.
I've noted down everyone's rating today, so they will be the final decider whatever happens.
Right gentlemen, I'm off for some paracetamol and a nice glass of brandy. ;)
|
geraintfawr
2/01/2007
08:47:59
[ report this post ] |
Message:
It's a threefold yay from me, sir.
|
mpauyall
2/05/2007
01:48:33
[ report this post ] |
Message:
all three yay.
Hurrah!
|
aaron--
2/05/2007
09:24:24
[ report this post ] | That's enough support for me
Message:
The final deciding factors should 2 or more people have the same result are then -
1. Their results against each other in the tourny
2. The number of victories gained as black in the tourny
3. The lower ranking player
Now we just need to ensure that some folk finish on the same score to make this discussion feel worthwhile. :)
|
gforcemcpotter
2/05/2007
10:49:08
[ report this post ] |
Message:
What happens if they have the same rating? Eh? Then what? See - your 'system' is in meltdown already!
|
aaron--
2/07/2007
05:24:53
[ report this post ] | Clearly...
Message:
...we resort to the alphabet system again. You know, I don't know what your problem with that one was in the first place.
|
mpauyall
2/07/2007
06:28:09
[ report this post ] |
Message:
none of us were on the same rating were we?
(I have henceforth also chaged my name to Aaa Aaa, just in case)
|
aaron--
2/10/2007
01:11:23
[ report this post ] | This team ladder business
Message:
For those interested, I got this through -
Notice from GameKnot:
To all team captains:
Thank you for all your comments and suggestions. By popular demand, the team ladder rules have been adjusted to minimize any big movements of the teams in the ladder. Instead of exchanging positions, the winning team will now be moved up half the distance between its current position and the losing team's positions, and the losing team is only moved one position down. The current ladder rankings have been recalculated using the new rules.
|
aaron--
2/12/2007
09:39:27
[ report this post ] | Aaa Aaa
Message:
No, none of us were on the same rating...but should it happen in the future that you do find yourself in that situation, you will be remarkably well placed...2nd only to the 8ball :)
|
aaron--
2/20/2007
12:53:08
[ report this post ] | Good God
Message:
The tournaments are exciting right now
|
mpauyall
3/03/2007
12:59:21
[ report this post ] |
Message:
timeout nightmare again!
Sorry all there was no internet connection for me.
|
mpauyall
3/27/2007
02:12:38
[ report this post ] | Oh Dave,
Message:
Dave Dave Dave.
|
badgerandimp
3/27/2007
12:25:14
[ report this post ] | ???
Message:
Matt, Matt, Matt
|
mpauyall
3/28/2007
02:47:58
[ report this post ] | because...
Message:
Your last Tournament game.
If you'd won, then I wouldn't be joint second place - invoking the possibly byzantine "equal points decider rule"
|
mpauyall
3/28/2007
02:52:40
[ report this post ] | Dutch w***houses
Message:
Hi All.
New Team Member - But nothing on the board?
wtf?
|
aaron--
3/29/2007
07:39:35
[ report this post ] | Good point...
Message:
Welcome Dan (danaktivix) to the team.
|
aaron--
3/29/2007
07:42:23
[ report this post ] | Next tournies
Message:
While Dan is finding his way to the message board, something else to think about -
I see that all of the games are now underway in the two tournaments and there is still a lot up for grabs. Of course, the 2000 guineas cup seems to have been decided - can't see anyone overtaking me now...but there are promotion/relegation places to be fought for. ;)
With the end of these tournies (/tournys...how do you spell that?) in sight, minds are turning to the next ones. It looks as though it may well be a 3 division event, with 5 in each - but that will depend on the number of people who want to play.
So can you all let me know if you're in? Send me a message, or post it up on the messageboard - the poor unused space needs a shot in the arm.
That goes out to our three newer members also - danaktivix, herrflik and soon to join gingerly.
|
gforcemcpotter
3/29/2007
08:47:52
[ report this post ] | Next tournaments...
Message:
Watch your back mister aaron-- I'm coming to get you in JH2000... Ready and waiting for the next tournament and preparing to defend my crown (unless some ba**ard stops me getting it in the first place).
|
8ballphoenix
3/29/2007
10:28:49
[ report this post ] | Next tourney
Message:
Count me in - I'm gonna have too much time on my hands very soon..........
|
killpaul
3/29/2007
11:57:49
[ report this post ] | Count me in...
Message:
Of course I'll be there. How's it going to work? Top five from first league, bottom two from top plus top three from second, and then bottom two plus three new ones?
BTW, I wouldn't rule out Gez as a dark horse in this one. I think he might get at least a share of the winnings.
|
mpauyall
3/29/2007
14:55:43
[ report this post ] | Tourny
Message:
Yes, I'm game.
As Paul says though, how will it work?
|
aaron--
3/30/2007
01:12:20
[ report this post ] | Hadn't thought about placings...
Message:
Well, presuming we have the 15 players we're expecting, there are a couple of options.
I like Paul's suggestion of the middle division being made up of 2 going down and 3 going up. The 3 new members could then all start in the lower league.
I guess the other option is to place new members according to rating...but that all sounds a bit complicated.
Waddayall reckon?
|
aaron--
3/30/2007
01:34:53
[ report this post ] | Congratulations Gary
Message:
On breaking into the 1700s. Good going sir! (It also means I get even more rating points when I whoop you in the next tourny ;) )
|
mpauyall
3/30/2007
02:26:53
[ report this post ] | 1700
Message:
Yeah, congrats, you're closer to getting that "In X Place" on your profile which is the wet dream of every gameknot player. What's that? Just me? Yes well.
As for the new tourney placing that idea gets my vote, ratings are too complicated because some of us play more games in the league (and my rating is low too, self interest anyone?)
When can we start the next one?
|
| | Maximum number of reply messages has been reached |
|
