chris, I'll send lineups tonight.

so are fixtures going to be released tonight?

Waiting on the poster above you!!

yeahyeahyeah

he doesn't care i guess

Super League IV

Lets get ready to rumbleeee!!!!

First set of games can be found here...

http://funkypoolsuperleague.weebly.com/released-fixtures.html

Killer matches consist of two games each. Non-KIller games consist of 3 racks each of 8 Ball, 9 Ball and 8UK - 9 racks in total.

Please post scores on Results Thread and also remember to post the Killer order (1st to 4th) for every Killer game as this feeds into the Player Ranking table.

Please post all subs and swaps on the appropriate thread - including for any changes to Killer pairs.

Deadline for games is Midnight UK on 9/6/13.

Edited at 23:04 Sun 26/05/13 (BST)

Edited at 19:05 Mon 27/05/13 (BST)

You cant get a 1 v 1 in Killer!

Killer is easy to arrange if you go about it the right way hense why in the FBL UP & UD have already played theirs in less than a day of games being out.

Yes you can. Just needs a third person at the setting up stage. To be totally fair to both players the game has to set up with the third 'extra' player to break. They then leave the room and the next player in line should have ball in hand to break off and away they go.

in case they don't get the break, the 3rd player could leave anyway and shouldn't affect anything as at least on snooker no ball of hand is given i don't think (same with 3rd random) unless the 3rd player leaves towards the end of a rack

yup before i got confused but now i understand clearly

Super League IV

The first completed pairs game was between Elite Force and The Unbeatables with a win for The Unbeatables in Killer.

That has fed the start of the season long pairs ranking table. This covers both of the elements of the league - the Killer and non-Killer games.

An updated ranking table will be posted at the end of each fixture. The points score is based on results and each players contribution to their pairing. Ranking scores for each player will range between 0 and 200.

This has happened already...
non-killer
team A (1,0,2) v (2,3,1) team B
team A (1,2,3) v (2,1,0) team B

In my opinion neither team has outplayed the other. It's a draw.
If counting frames it would be represented that way, 9-9.
With this points system, you've given one team twice the points you've given the other! (2-4) Simply because of happen-stance.
Just an "I told you so", about how high the luck factor can be when you don't count every frame.
Something to consider next season maybe?

There is no luck factor any more than anywhere else. The primary aim is simply to beat your direct opponents - as it is in any tournament. To win a game type over 6 combined frames is the sole aim. At the point that is achieved then any other frame of that game type played is meaningless, therefore so is the outcome of that frame. Thats why there is no requirement to play it.

Team B have been shown to be better than Team A in 2 of the 3 game types in that particularly match. Why should it then be draw just because Team A plays better in the third?

Counting frames you would be overrewarding, in that example, a pair that were a lot better at UK8 than they were on the US tables.

Because the third was 5-1, a much more decisive victory.

When I see 5-1, it says to me that if they played again, the winner most likely wouldn't change. (In other words, of course the score could change slightly, but luck didn't play a part in deciding who won.)
When I see 4-2, it says to me that if they played again, there's not much telling who'll win. (The score was too close, it was almost a draw, luck probably played a part in deciding the winner.)

Edited at 15:37 Sat 01/06/13 (BST)

at end of the day its about form on the day, i mean ill use myself as an example.

On snooker i lost 5-1 in a clan match where if i was at my best i would have probably won 4-2 then had massive bad lag in killer (bad luck) which turned into a 4-2 win.

On pool the next day i played at my best nearly yet i lost 2 types and won 5-4 because the opponent played well too, no lucky shots or flukes. was only one bad shot which was the difference between winning and losing a type.

sometimes its your mistakes that cost you more than opponent fluking.

luck is apart of any sport or competition and no matter what format you use luck can never go away as it comes in all shapes and sizes.

I agree with everything you said, but some formats hold down the luck factor better than others. (with more frames played)
and some points systems hold down the luck factor better than others too.( frames better than game types, game types better than fixtures, fixtures better than overall fixtures) each one in progression leaves more results uncounted

Edited at 15:55 Sat 01/06/13 (BST)

in my opinion, the more frames you use (e.g. 11 of each type), the more chance of the 'better' player to dominate the match and i prefer a close competition.

the lower the frames the more chance of the 'lower' player to have a chance of winning.

for example if you do 1 frame of each type anyone can win, just depends on who has the better layout and plays better either potting or tactically.

personally i don't think the format matters.

Whether luck decides any score at all is absolutely irrelevant.

Based on your logic you may as well forget any fixture between, for example, The Professionals and Snooker Squad as they are generally close games and either side can beat the other. That then leaves you any clan competition being decided totally on how those teams play against weaker opponents. In reality, for any tournament to be genuinely reflective of the overall play in it then the reverse should be true.

UK and US games are totally different and players can be far stronger in UK than the US games generally due to removing potting difficulty and the ability to play simple tap snookers.

Favouring good players in one type and average players in two others against good players in two types and average players in the other is not the way I want to have the rewards.

That first part, i don't think it's just your opinion, it's fact.

you're saying you like the luck factor high (give the lower player a chance right?), an opinion you're entitled to.
I think the point is to find the best player, and the lowest player should have no chance.
But the format definately matters, it greatly affects how high the luck factors gonna be, you just said it yourself.

Edited at 16:15 Sat 01/06/13 (BST)