chris, you said: "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.",
you shouldn't, but that's not exactly what happened, I'd say it was
good vs average
good vs average
average vs great
see my point?

Yep - one team beat the other 2-1 overall in game types or (for all we know) one team had a huge amount of luck in the UK games.

I think what happened during those games is as hypothetical for both of us as it is irrelevant to the outcome.

but whats the point in playing destiny in a best 100 (2 point for your clan for winning, 1 if tied) if your going to lose?

i would rather have a chance by lowering the frames to best of 50 or even 25.

clan leagues are no fun if MVP won for 25 seasons (or whatever season FCL is in). What would be the point of Underdogs entering? none because they have no chance.

at least if the frames are low, any clan has a chance and league is fun, except top teams winning all the time.

just to prove my point, in FCL Cup, MVP only won once i believe in about 8 seasons and they are considered to be the best clan due to stats.

even Latin Legends beat MVP in a cup game and that was a huge win for them. If we went by your logic One clan would win everything which is no fun for other teams.

Chris that was a little rude, you know that's not the point im making

Dgen, you're right, it wouldn't be as much fun for lower clans, using the lowest possible luck factor, more accurate outcomes though

We already have cups for that (gives the little teams a chance). Why can't the big leagues find the best team?

Edited at 16:29 Sat 01/06/13 (BST)

Edited at 16:30 Sat 01/06/13 (BST)

Its not meant to be rude but I dont know what happened in those games - particularly the UK games. I dont know if there was any luck. I dont know what the mindset of the player was in the last one or two frames once the game type was lost 4-0 or 4-1. If you do know the answer to those then fair enough.

However the point remains that the aim, as a pair, is to treat each game type as an individual match and beat your direct opponents in it however you can. It is direct match play in the same way that a tournament is. Once one game type is over you put it to bed and start the next one completely fresh.

"We already have cups for that. Why can't the big leagues find the best team?"

I think to be fair that has happened in every single clan league since day 1 in the eyes of the vast majority. There are three times that it hasn't (in the eyes of the majority). On two occasions teams beat every other opponent and still lost the league and in the third it was decided by default scores.

Edited at 16:34 Sat 01/06/13 (BST)

I don't know what happened either, but luck is just as likely to have played a factor in the 4-2's as in the 5-1.
You must admit though, that 5-1 is more decisive, and luck is more likely not have chosen the winner of the game type.

I understand what the aim is with this set-up. Just pointing out the system could be more accurate.

We already have cups (inaccurate points systems that give the little teams a chance), why can't the big leagues be as accurate as possible?

What is your view on that point?

in response to:
"I think to be fair that has happened in every single clan league since day 1 in the eyes of the vast majority. There are three times that it hasn't (in the eyes of the majority). On two occasions teams beat every other opponent and still lost the league ........"

The people who feel that way have the cup's, they're run exactly how they like it.

I agree its too close a match-up for one or 2 fixtures to decide it.
That's the reason you DO need to count their results against all the other teams, unless you're gonna have them play 3 or more fixtures aginst each other (counting them all of course, not a knockout)

re-read your question: to be reflective of overall play, yes, I think you need to count everything, every frame against every team.

Edited at 17:01 Sat 01/06/13 (BST)

Of course another big draw back to counting every frame is the fact that default scores are not reflective of the game that might have been. They are reflective of the effort to play a game. At the point you accept that then simply adding up every frame won/awarded can not be reflective of the overall team unless of course it transpired that the effort of every player in every unplayed game was commensurate with their ability. Clearly not likely to be the case.

There are any number of ways of scoring a league and its up to a team to play to those scoring regimes regardless of whether they agree with them or not.

However the fact remains that the only times outcomes have been argued as not correct have been where it has been strictly frame scores only. And the main reasons behind that have been the underlying belief that clans are meant to be team based events - team vs team - not individuals vs individuals with the scores simply being added together.

But those are exactly the times that it matters. Thats why in any team sports there are major moments in any season where the best play the best. Where you have only two realistic league winners then it will always be those direct fixtures that (have to) decide the true winners. Save those games to the season end (as I always aim to do) if you want, but ultimately it should be those results that matter.

If you had a league where everybody was capable of beating everyone else then that is where your frames would come in to play to decide winners in the same way as goal or points differences do.

Defaults or unplayed games can mess things up whatever system is used. I don't think counting frames exacerbates that problem.

Of course its up to a team to win within the system used regardless if they agree with it, I never suggested you change anything mid-season.

I don't argue that any outcome is incorrect, if it was provided by the system set forth at the start of a season. But I do argue that some systems have flukey outcomes, especially when it is decided by one overall fixture.

About being team-based, I don't think one system is any more than the other, they're both played by individuals and added together.

You said "(have to)", maybe that's the case in the sports you keep referring to, if they can't ensure all play all equally. We can ensure it, and we don't "have to"(have a knockout round). If you decide with one fixture at the end, it's not as accurate as reflecting on the whole season. it's like a cup match, which most agree arent as accurate as the big leagues.

Sorry, you make a lot of intelligent arguements, but I think your last paragraph is ridiculous. Even dgen agreed with me that counting frames takes any chance away from the little guy. (was what he didnt like about it)

Again, the cups are completely decided by overall fixtures, in the spirit of compromise, I'd like to see just one league completely decided by frames. But there isn't one.

you better start your own league

What dgen actually agreed with was that the longer any match the more chance there is that the better player will win. I have never disputed that fact at all.

On that basis a team winning out of The Professionals and Snooker Squad over 90 - 120 frames is the best team in the League at that format (until such time as another clan demonstrates themselves to be better than those two and assuming both clans beat each of the other clans in turn!).

My point in the last paragraph was that if more players were actually prepared to accept a challenge and join, or make, other clans instead of sitting in so called super-clans there would be more competitive leagues where more teams were actually capable of beating others. That way leagues would not be decided by one fixture or worse by an ability to flat track bully lesser clans. Only at that point should your frame count matter in differentiating between teams equal on wins or points.

Doesn't prove any point MVP said from day 1 that we would never take cups seriously and always rotated our squad accordingly. We made a decision that winning the league was the important part of the season and any cup would be a bonus. This was our choice, other clans may have decided the cup was there priority as they maybe didn't think they had a strong enough squad to win the league but could maybe win the cup thus rotating their squad accordingly as well

Just about every league ensures all play equally. The ones that dont that I can think of are the North American sports where teams generally play in Conferences hence the Play-Off systems.

You miss the point that you are not deciding over one match, you are still deciding over a whole season. However the two best teams will have beaten all of the other clans hence why it would come down to a deciding match in the last fixture between those teams.

The team winning in those circumstances will always be more worthy than one losing such a match but winning a league by virtue of winning margins over lesser or even far lesser teams before.

you're right, that is what dgen was talking about, but....
Don't you see chris, if you agree that more frames are more accurate, then you're agreeing that the more numbers you have to work with, the more accurate.
There are far more frames being won and lost than there are fixtures (or gametypes, or individual matches) to work with. So how can you deny that counting frames is more accurate?
You answered that before, said your system has plenty of numbers to work with, but counting frames still has far more, hence they are more accurate.

Edited at 00:00 Sun 02/06/13 (BST)

You just said you're not, and that you are in the same paragraph! Are you not admitting that it IS decided by one match at the end of the season?

I strongly disagree, to decide it with one match at the end of the season is no better than a cup, don't most agree that cups are the flukiest?

Yes they are more accurate in any direct match between two people/teams. If people wanted me to run a league where each individual game was 15 racks of each game type I would lol.

I have answered that before. In my opinion this is a team competition. It is about teams beating other teams. I still absolutely 100% believe that a more accurate winner derives from a team winning more team matches than the next best. Losing to your biggest rivals is crucial to me in deciding that team (subject of course to you both beating everyone else) is better than yours in that season.