|
Post by r0b1et on Mar 29, 2011 5:56:23 GMT -5
Does FTP use summaries to determine who the better batsman is? In which case, it's even worse then I thought! Summaries don't mean anything, they don't do anything. I'm sure you as much as anyone just realises that they're simply a weighted sum of the relevant skills. So let's not even think about talents. That's certainly the implication (you can read that thread too). Though actually I suspect the summary is actually used for ME calculations looking at my data/history. Not that it should be.
|
|
butlee
Junior Member
Posts: 88
|
Post by butlee on Mar 30, 2011 0:58:13 GMT -5
Can challenge me. I think I rate about 150 but dont have much of a batting lineup at all lol.
|
|
butlee
Junior Member
Posts: 88
|
Post by butlee on Mar 30, 2011 0:58:36 GMT -5
Does FTP use summaries to determine who the better batsman is? In which case, it's even worse then I thought! Summaries don't mean anything, they don't do anything. I'm sure you as much as anyone just realises that they're simply a weighted sum of the relevant skills. So let's not even think about talents. That's certainly the implication (you can read that thread too). Though actually I suspect the summary is actually used for ME calculations looking at my data/history. Not that it should be. I hope not. I think Ash is smarter then that.
|
|
|
Post by r0b1et on Mar 30, 2011 9:37:54 GMT -5
Can challenge me. I think I rate about 150 but dont have much of a batting lineup at all lol. Challenged... I'll try MSNing you later.
|
|
butlee
Junior Member
Posts: 88
|
Post by butlee on Mar 30, 2011 17:44:50 GMT -5
Ah sorry Rob. I've accepted Smiddie's challenge - first in first serve. But, Mr Roblet - would you be interested in a couple of friendlies to trial out this new batting weighting thing? Maybe play a couple of identical lineups and one of us just vary a) our order b) using a long/short batting lineup. Just let me know and we can chat about proper lineups etc..
|
|
|
Post by r0b1et on Mar 30, 2011 18:44:16 GMT -5
Ah sorry Rob. I've accepted Smiddie's challenge - first in first serve. But, Mr Roblet - would you be interested in a couple of friendlies to trial out this new batting weighting thing? Maybe play a couple of identical lineups and one of us just vary a) our order b) using a long/short batting lineup. Just let me know and we can chat about proper lineups etc.. sure. could perhaps try 1 really long batting lineup (depending on definition I could field 4 allrounders).
|
|
butlee
Junior Member
Posts: 88
|
Post by butlee on Mar 30, 2011 19:29:54 GMT -5
Lol, well you're the mathly man. Define your all rounders by how closely in proportion their batting is compared to your bowling. In fact, since we're only interested in the whole batting phenomenon, what stops you using (say), 10 full time bats? We could even ensure you bat first.
Say I use the same bowling lineup, and we get you to bat first... use 6 bats, then use 10 bats. And just see how aggressive your top order is with respect to your lower order changing strength. Then we can start to mix it up by changing the relative strengths of the lower order compared to the top order.
|
|
|
Post by r0b1et on Mar 31, 2011 4:28:35 GMT -5
Lol, well you're the mathly man. Define your all rounders by how closely in proportion their batting is compared to your bowling. In fact, since we're only interested in the whole batting phenomenon, what stops you using (say), 10 full time bats? We could even ensure you bat first. Say I use the same bowling lineup, and we get you to bat first... use 6 bats, then use 10 bats. And just see how aggressive your top order is with respect to your lower order changing strength. Then we can start to mix it up by changing the relative strengths of the lower order compared to the top order. Must say I did think that. Not sure I have 10 bats... but 9 and both keepers have outstanding batting summary... or Druery has expert.
|
|