You admit then that you're stretching the possibilities in an attempt to prove your point.
Surely you agree that in any number of tight (susceptible to luck) matches, the average (most likely) score is gonna be 7 or 8.

I missed this..

But yes exactly..

I do not think this would make a boring league and the so called top teams only lose by a few frames to each other when they play twice so anything can happen really.

That may be an average, across many games, however with luck any game between closely matched players could end up with absolutely any score. If it goes badly you could end up with few points from both games. Make the swap so your better player plays their lesser player and you can reduce that luck factor and guarantee 13-15 from one match. Even if you lose the other by the same score you have achieved your points by reducing the luck (and the competitiveness) from both games and by both sides. And that is what you want to do in a points per frame only scoring system.

I happen to think that is a bad thing overall considering all aspects.

Not to mention every single one of the numerous other negatives to such a scoring system done to death previously.

How many times do you see a result posted that doesn't tell the whole story, I would say most scorelines end up being unreflective of the match whereas the outcome still is the right one. (A person didn't deserve to win 15-0, but they were the better player).

Personally, I like the new set ups we have for the forthcoming season(s). The reasoning is sound, and it travels in a fresh direction (and not a negative one). This sounds like the start of the SL, which is my favourite league most of the time and has been since the start of it.

Variety is the key to an entertaining set of competitions, when the FCL cup games were extended I found the league was quite boring as the Cup was practically the league mark II. With the smaller fixture sets (5 vs 5) it was very entertaining and worthwhile because it was anyone's to win because of the unpredictability of shorter games. It was a quick race to a certain number of frames, and that is where I feel a competition decided purely on frames won is best placed. It makes a cup competition obsolete if it runs alongside a league that acts like a cup.

It could just as likely go great, and the swap would have caused you to get less points.
Sure you could take out some of the risk with a swap, but did it guarantee you more points? no
Thought I'd explained this already, but if you want to believe there's some points gain in swapping, go ahead, I don't see it.
Now, when you don't count frames, and decide by indiv matches like the FBL has started, tactical swaps become a real possibility.

Exactly right been, said it everytime this has been argued you will swap your best players against their weakest and vice versa...stupid system.

Thank you

and something else, frames are games played, not "goals" scored in the same game. Each one should be counted, if you want the most accurate outcome.

When 2 teams of near equal strength have a match, it's decided by luck, noone knows who's gonna win, and the one lucky enough to win doesn't deserve extra points for it, they already got more points. You need to count their frames (games played), the quality of their results against all teams to decide which is better, when you let team fixtures decide it's less accurate, luck has a bigger voice.

Edited at 02:46 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

Again, that is your opinion. If it was fact do you really not think it's something that would be seen or used in any other visible and comparable competition in any other sport or game? And there are many other comparable ones out there.

We have just shown that is more likely to be beneficial in a points per frame scoring system where you are reducing risk. Where winning any game is worth exactly the same there is less benefit to doing that than where the chance of a 15-0 scoreline and the associated 15 point reward exists and exists across the whole season.

Fcl cup has always been enjoyed yet that's going for some stupid mix thing.
Fbl has been ruined when all that should have happened is 3v3 killer moved over to there where it fits, where people have the full squad to pick from and where all game types are represented individually.
None of these changes are good where you could have made three good unique leagues.
Scoring system in FBL and reduced games will take any fun out of playing in it...won't be bothering myself

Dont know how you work that out if the games are scored as they are at the moment then you're better off having someone against a top player that is going to get 5 or 6 points.
Your new system youre better off having your worst player taking the loss and your best player winning a game...not much fun for the player taking one for the team

Even if I accepted your point, which I don't, I would much rather sit and lose a game 8-0 than 15-0.

Entrants

The Professionals (list provided)
Uprising (list provided)
The Underdogs
Phoenix Storm
Wolf Pack
Ballbreakers (list provided)
Pocket Dynamos (list provided)
The Unbeatables
The Firing Squad
Fighting Eagles

Please can you send all team lists either to myself, mattywellie or pirate_steve.

Please note that team lists will be checked by the league runners who will make a decision on the viability and reliability of each before accepting their entry to the competition.

As all three leagues are asking for team lists at the same time, if you provide us with one we will use it for all of the leagues that you enter - unless you make us aware of any differences that you require there to be

lmao, do I detect a case of "can't be wrong"?
What we have shown is exactly the opposite. We've shown that there is NO benefit when you count frames, and when you only count indiv match wins the benefit becomes real. You would simply need to avoid match-ups that would likely end up 8-0, so as not to waste talent (for example, you wouldn't waste your best player on their worst, because anyone in the team could prob beat him), because all you need is 5-3 for a wash-out score, because that scoring system can't see the difference between the 2 outcomes.
You lost this arguement a few posts back chris, you just fail to see it.

I believe that was all fact, you have to twist your view of things, and see a team fixture as a game to hold your opinion. Thing is, a team fixture isn't a game, it's a whole bunch of games. When you dumb down the numbers, you lose accuracy=fact (When a top player plays an average player in a race to 2,the average player has a chance, in a race to 20 he doesn't= accuracy in numbers)
I don't know of any other sport or game that guarantees all teams play each other an equal # of times, without that, counting game wins isn't possible. I think that's why they have knockouts, when you can't count the games won, it's the next best thing

Edited at 14:53 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

I'm finding it hard to follow this but from what I can make out, you're doing away with the frame counting to have a results table more like the one from football? (i.e. the team winning, drawing or losing as a whole and getting 3/1 or 0 points) All well and good, but as stated before, you'll get more tactical subs then the Royal Navy. I can't see it working very well to be honest. Plus it's not exactly going to be much fun for whoever plays dvz, seb, pete et al other than the top players. Imagine Pros, Uprising and SS against any of the 'smaller' teams...there'd be no point in even playing the fixture as it's very unlikely (but not impossible) that the 'smaller' team will register any points against them. Instead of it being trying to get as many frames as you can and hopefully getting to 5+ first, it's now purely down to whoever can get to 5 first, so as soon as one player does that, the other will feel there's no point playing the rest as it won't matter.

I can't see it working or being a very fun league tbh.

makes plenty of sense, and I agree it makes tactical subs a real problem
they've done it to the FBL (indiv match wins tho, not team as a whole, tho they're giving a bonus there too), and some of them want it done to the FCL as well.
it'll work, they'll get a winner at the end, question is, will it be the best team, or just one of the best who happened to be luckier (and did smarter tactical subs)? Noone will know because they havent counted games played, they will have counted indiv matches instead

Edited at 13:47 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

I've been quiet up to now but I happen to agree with the 2 above posts, it's meant to be a team game/league. The new proposals or are they already 'chosen' seem to orientate more around the individual players than the team collective.

I don't mean to be cynical but the new scoring sytem or proposals seem to advantage the so called 'bigger teams' than the new ones or those who have finished lower down the table.

There needs to be a common ground which will give incentive for all whether they win or lose, the frames players win are through their own merit, maybe an element of luck but they still had to arrange to play and make time to play. Without incentive I can see a lot of partial matches and even defaults tbh.

As for tactical subs, this goes on regardless but you may as well let the teams make their own fixtures if this happens.

I just wanted one league that would minimize the luck factor and be as accurate as possible, by counting frames alone. Instead we now have
SL, decided by team fixtures in the end like a knockout
FBL, decided by indiv matchs and a bonus for team fixture wins
and FCL, continues with a compromise between frame count (games won) and team fixture wins.
If they truly wanted 3 different leagues, FCL would drop the compromise and count frames, and there would be a league that satisfies every opinion.
Instead I'm left unsatisfied, losing interest in playing leagues at all.

Edited at 14:21 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

Edited at 17:56 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

you asked if its a proposal or if its chosen, I'll bet the latter. Haven't you noticed? chris can't be wrong, I've never seen him change his mind about anything, unless it was already his idea to do so.