What we really need is.......

[TeaLeaf]

A Bravo availability page as part of the oldbloke.acidman.com website.  We could then promote these Bravo matches with far greater ease and they would feel more part of the competitive thang.  If some Bravos see what we do competition wise then we may engender some extra Charlie interest, you never know.

Can you add one Oldie?  Or should I get my coat?

TL.

[Dr Sadako]

Very good idea ... then we also would now how many bravos we actually got.  

[OldBloke]

It's not difficult to do it's just that I kinda regard the Bravos as a step on the way up to Charlie.

If we start arranging matches and providing availability tools for them, where's the incentive to leave Bravo?

Does that make sense?

[Dr Sadako]

I think that they could use the tool but we should not arrange any matches for them. It is up to them. Give them all power to add a match on their page. Could we have it on a separate page from our page?

[OldBloke]

I'm still not happy that it's the right thing to do.

By providing the occasional match against Charlie we demonstrate the level of teamwork and tactics only Charlie members are privy to. We want these Bravo boys to say 'I want some of that'. I realise that some Bravos will never leave their existing clans to join Charlie but there are a few good unclanned Bravos that we want to make the step up to Charlie.

More debate needed me thinks.

[TeaLeaf]

I take your point, but then it would be down to us to control the number of matches that we feed to them.  Drip, drip would be appropriate or they can be left to make their own arrangements for friendlies - I am sure that not that many would result  

We also have to remember we do not actually want everyone from Bravo coming into Charlie.  Quite a few of these peeps would not make it, so I was thinking more along the lines of making them feel more a part of dMw.  After all, there are not that many friendlies that we can arrange anyway, we just happen to be in the middle of a mad rush of them.

I found it interesting that having organised the praccies the feedback from Bravo (and some of the new Charlie) commented on how well organised we are.  Letting them use Availability (under a separate page maybe) is another opportunity to show what we can offer and this might mean that some of the Bravos become far more interested than they otherwise might have been in towing 'our line' in order to get into Charlie to play competitively.

If nothing else it would make practices Bravo v Charlie much easier to manage.  

Just my 2 cents.

Btw, is it about time we reset the stats page on availability?  It does not accurately reflect the stats of the players at the moment imo and is of no help at all when considering who to select for a Delta match.  I'll declare a personal interest here (along with those members who played in the early days as we slid from ED Div 1, through ED2 to our final resting place in ED3) - the stats show a huge number of gang rapes and peeps like me who were always available inevitably got more 0-24 matches than the rest.  It is quite disheartening to see yourself soooo far down the list due in no small part to slaughters that occured as far back as 10th November 2002.  There are also members who have not played for 6 months or more whose stats are irrelevant.  So what about resetting them and running them over a rolling 3 month period maybe?  

One final stats suggestion - at the moment we have no way of knowing if the stats are off the back of a 24-0 or 0-24 match.  What about adding a column for an adjusted score?  Very crudely you could do this by  for example taking the difference between rounds won and rounds lost and using that number to 'create' a difficulty 'quotient' to give us some idea of the ease or difficulty with which those scores were accumulated.  

For example (and it's a very crude example to prompt some discussion), imagine an avergae match with a difficulty of 1.0.  Take the difference in rounds won/lost and then subtract a proportion of that from your 'average'.  For example you could use 1/1000 to give you a proportion.  So it would work like this:

Match1: Won 14-10  (difference 4)
Player1 - 10 ct frags, 8 ct deaths, 15 t frags, 11 t deaths.
Player1 Difficulty Quotient: 1 - (4 x 1/1000) = 0.996

Match2:  Lost 10-14 (difference -4)
Player2 - 10 ct frags, 8 ct deaths, 15 t frags, 11 t deaths.
Player2 Difficulty Quotient: 1 - (-4 x 1/1000) = 1.004

In very simplistic terms the SL can read across the scores and mentally compare a set of similar stats by looking at the Index as the difference in the 'difficulty index' reflects the nature of the match that was played and that getting their scores was harder in one match than in the other.  What the individual player scores are doesn't matter as they would still be listed as per availability does now, but if the extra column were added it would allow SLs to assess players in asimilar areas of the 'difficulty index' was alongside.  Simply keep an average of the difficulty index over the 3 month period in the final column.  The method is probably not the best, but hopefully gives some food for thought.

Then again, it could be a complete waste of time as we only ever have 5 peeps available for a 5 person match so we have no need to differentiate between players anyway     Although I hope and expect that position to improve with time.

What do you think?

TL.

/TL notes that he obviously has far too much spare time onhis hands and will now go do some work.....or perhaps go get the sleep I so clearly need.

[Dr Sadako]

Originally posted by TeaLeaf@May 22 2004, 09:31 AM

If nothing else it would make practices Bravo v Charlie much easier to manage.

That was my thought to. The bravo practices we have had so far there have been people saying I will be there that haven't showed and vice versa. A bravo availpage could do the trick.

Btw, is it about time we reset the stats page on availability? It does not accurately reflect the stats of the players at the moment imo and is of no help at all when considering who to select for a Delta match. I'll declare a personal interest here (along with those members who played in the early days as we slid from ED Div 1, through ED2 to our final resting place in ED3) - the stats show a huge number of gang rapes and peeps like me who were always available inevitably got more 0-24 matches than the rest. It is quite disheartening to see yourself soooo far down the list due in no small part to slaughters that occured as far back as 10th November 2002. There are also members who have not played for 6 months or more whose stats are irrelevant. So what about resetting them and running them over a rolling 3 month period maybe?

I was about to suggest that myself. I was also around when those rapings took place. There are lots of players not playing either and the current stat doesnt show that. Could we just save the old stats on a page and start a new one? 3-4 months seems like a good amount of time before resetting.

One final stats suggestion - at the moment we have no way of knowing if the stats are off the back of a 24-0 or 0-24 match. What about adding a column for an adjusted score? Very crudely you could do this by for example taking the difference between rounds won and rounds lost and using that number to 'create' a difficulty 'quotient' to give us some idea of the ease or difficulty with which those scores were accumulated.

For example (and it's a very crude example to prompt some discussion), imagine an avergae match with a difficulty of 1.0. Take the difference in rounds won/lost and then subtract a proportion of that from your 'average'. For example you could use 1/1000 to give you a proportion. So it would work like this:

Match1: Won 14-10 (difference 4)
Player1 - 10 ct frags, 8 ct deaths, 15 t frags, 11 t deaths.
Player1 Difficulty Quotient: 1 - (4 x 1/1000) = 0.996

Match2: Lost 10-14 (difference -4)
Player2 - 10 ct frags, 8 ct deaths, 15 t frags, 11 t deaths.
Player2 Difficulty Quotient: 1 - (-4 x 1/1000) = 1.004

In very simplistic terms the SL can read across the scores and mentally compare a set of similar stats by looking at the Index as the difference in the 'difficulty index' reflects the nature of the match that was played and that getting their scores was harder in one match than in the other. What the individual player scores are doesn't matter as they would still be listed as per availability does now, but if the extra column were added it would allow SLs to assess players in asimilar areas of the 'difficulty index' was alongside. Simply keep an average of the difficulty index over the 3 month period in the final column. The method is probably not the best, but hopefully gives some food for thought.

Then again, it could be a complete waste of time as we only ever have 5 peeps available for a 5 person match so we have no need to differentiate between players anyway  Although I hope and expect that position to improve with time.

What do you think?

I see what you are after but I don't think it will give a valid picture tbh. If we just take a look at the 12K league matches it would seem like all who played in those matches played in easy matches as we have won them all. It wouldn't reflect the difficulty of a match. Also I think the team makes a huge impact on the final score. I think that it in the end only will show that "skilled" players will have played in easy matches and vice versa. I think we actually had an example of this type of statistic in my textbook for mathematical statistics. I don't think we need this stat tbh.

My five.


What I think could be useful though is some statistic of maps. What I mean is a general statistic showing how we have done as a team on a specific map. This could be good both for practices and war arranging.
A personal map stats would be good too e.g. Squ0nk usually does great on Cbble but there is no way to tell than to keep a mental note. I think this could be useful as well when it comes to training.

[Dr Sadako]

I have been thinking a bit more about this. Maybe if we had a  won/draw/lost table for each player i.e just saying how many matches in each category the player have participated in. That in combination with your suggestion TL could help to give a more true picture. I think it would need to be for SLs only though.

This needs more thinking and discussing. I will be back.

[Dr Sadako]

Could we agree on resetting the stats and saving the current stats for nostalgia?

[OldBloke]

I'm OK with that.

[TeaLeaf]

Then make it so.  May the page of nostalgic stats be entitled "The post-traumatic effects of moving from Division I to Division III in double quick time!

TL.

[Dr Sadako]

Originally posted by TeaLeaf@May 23 2004, 12:46 PM
Then make it so.  May the page of nostalgic stats be entitled "The post-traumatic effects of moving from Division I to Division III in double quick time!

TL.

:lmfao:

Sold to the man in the funny hat!

Go go go!