I have already stated IF I was ever to able to 'force' a scoring system on the FCL it would not be the current one.

The FCL has not changed at all. If you want to complain about the FBL change then discuss it over there because that is a new format.

Every competition guarantees that all teams play to the same conditions. There still isn't one that opts for a points per frame type scoring format.

You actually state that your preferred option produces the best and fairest team outcome. No it doesn't, it actually produces the best outcome for individuals and disregards the team aspect to a large extent. It also works in favour of those that cherry pick opponents, play for defaults, play for last minute subs against weaker opponents, get lucky with the season's match schedule and would prefer that a team's best players play every single game for the clan with little or no rotation.

But OK I lost the argument a while back so I am now happy to move on towards the new season.

Edited at 15:02 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

I know you're smart enough to understand, if you'll get off your highhorse and try. I'll repeat,
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.
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)

Can't believe an advocate for knockout formats is complaining about "getting lucky with the season's match schedule"
Thats absurd, it's a problem everywhere(mind you the only way its a problem when counting frames is when a team's quality changes during a season, through loss or gain of players), but more of one in knockout format
Almost every problem you just named is a problem with any format, some of them more of a problem in the way you want to do things.

Edited at 15:20 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

Edited at 15:47 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

As I said, I lost the argument a while back.

I disagree with your opinion. The best matches are between equal(ish) teams. If they are decided by luck then lets do away with those games and just have games between the best and worse and let the overall winners be decided by the biggest winning margin!!

Not answering the points I raise is not advancing your cause.

Tight matches are decided by luck, noone knows who will win them, and the winner will very likely lose the next time they meet.
I believe I have answered any seemingly valid point, some of them made no sense, had no bearing on the options being discussed, or had already been proven wrong, and you failed to notice.

Edited at 15:30 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

No it's not, there's a lot of tactics involved. Be it which players are picked (not necessarily the strongest, but ones who will be more favourable to score points against those specific opponents). There's also tactic subs and swaps when a sub/swap is necessary as well as players changing their playing style depending on which players they come against. Some are more adaptable and some will shine with their own style regardless. That can influence a captains decision who could even mention it to their player as to how best to approach a game.

The fact pros/MVP would always win FCL yet SS would always win SL shows that it's not luck that determines who the winner is as that would mean they would both have an equal amount of FCL and SL titles when they've been head to head.

The fact that we've come from a league that is decided purely on points and that has been changed to include bonuses for wins rather than pure frames says everything. Going back to pure frames would be a huge huge step backwards. If you're going to change something, you wouldn't change it back to something people didn't end up liking in the first place.

Move forwards not backwards. This is something that hasn't been done before as far as I'm aware and that's where the best competitions have been grown from. The fact that there are now 3 leagues and there have been 2 others (I think) which now aren't in existence show that difference is the key and people want new things not old. Sometimes the new doesn't work but it's the start you need to find something new and good. You can't find that from the old styles which were rendered obsolete for the league .

If you lion further down the league you would also see that bonuses incentivise the lesser teams to gain a short term goal rather than just having the one long term goal which they would gain little reward from

Are you saying you can predict who will win when Pros play SS? Didnt think so. Noone knows who will win in just one team fixture.

They won the formats that suited their strengths, I'm talking about one fixture, not a whole season.

I wasn't here when it was originally changed to include bonus points, but I guarantee there were playeres who didnt want the change.
My argument is some of us (In one vote I believe it was over 40% of us) want a league that just counts frames (games won), why can't just 1 out of 3 do that? Everyone would have at least one league they like.

Edited at 15:53 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

Because, having it discussed it at length amongst many people and having considered all of the pros and cons, and not just some like has been the case here, the view has been that the formats announced offer the best and most diverse experiences for each. You can't expect people to run any competition that they either do not believe in or that they believe there is a better way of doing things in.

That doesn't preclude anyone from arranging anything else themselves.

Lack of predictability of an outcome doesn't relate to luck. That means anytime a result has gone against what would be predicted it is down to luck and not tactical decision which is absurd.

As a matter of fact I did predict the outcome of SS and pros correctly and if you look at the predictions thread I was pretty spot on. FCL would be pros, uprising, SS. SL would be SS, uprising, pros. FBL would be uprising, pros, SS (got this last one wrong but I wasn't far out). I said I think pros would beat SS in FCL and FBL, SS would win in SL. So please tell me why these things can't be predicted?

Because the majority of people don't want it and that's how democracy works, nothing stops you from running a fourth league. Different clans would enter different leagues then, but you'd have what you want. It's up to the people running the league to decide what they want in their own league, and they took a vote between a select numbers and agreed on the formats. If you want something else you need to sort it out.

Here's the link to the predictions thread for the season just passed
http://www.funkypool.com/thread/19477/predictiions/6#1604243

My league standing predictions are on the previous page and head to heads of SS and pros are on that page above

Sure it does

and again Im talking about predicting the outcome of one team fixture, not a season. I looked at your link, wd on your accuracy of predictions, but even you were unsure who was gonna win the team fixture.

For that last part, I thought they said they wanted to please everyone, yes a slight majority wants it their way, so give them 2 leagues, give the other 40% one league, everyone could be happy.

Edited at 16:02 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

And I did predict the outcome of 1 fixture, I did it correctly 3 times. That's not down to luck.

But that leaves 60% of people with a league format they don't want which doesn't make sense. Not every clan will play every league, there's no guarantee that will happen. To make one league a less attractive prospect is silly, if the minority was that big then they would form a fourth league quite comfortably.

You make it sound like the 3 leagues have an identical system when they don't each league is different and people will prefer one to the other two. To change something wanted into something largely not wanted could mean upsetting a similar minority (who would hold that particular league as their favourite) and going against the majority's wish on format. It's just not feasible and the obvious solution is a fourth league for that "40%". If the number is that high then there's no problem in the setting up because there would be a lot of interest.


I wasn't sure for FBL yes as there were more factors to take into consideration, but the other two leagues weren't down to luck

Edited at 16:23 Fri 31/01/14 (GMT)

You know there isn't room for a 4th league, some say 3 is too many. I think 3 is plenty enough to make room for everyone. Even if one ends up less popular, everyone would have one they like.

and you seemed pretty unsure about the pros vs SS match, reading it, it looked more like a guess than a prediction.

Let's leave it there before we start going in circles, everything has been said (and overdone!) before.

Back to the other issue raised....

It should be the first option Captains and Vices ONLY can make the subs. Reason is if there is an outstanding match say between 2 players say on a level par ability wise, come deadline day that team if still eligible could ensure their strongest players online and pretty much 'target' the oppositions weakest player for their own gain.

This has been done, a team tried to do this to us and I stood our ground and posted 'NO ONE from my team were to sub in'. IF Captains or Vices are only responsible then this would eradicate any 'selective fixture setting'.

Also the default is to assist a team not to punish them, people are quick to think the latter. IF a player has been trying to make contact for the whole fixture why the hell should they be punished because they aren't online on 1 day of the particular fixture. This is Unfair.

Could this not be resolved by the Captain sending in proof to the League Runners before deadline day this bringing a halt to any deadline day match taking place?

With that option captains or vices would have to make every sub/swap, meaning you wouldn't be able too post who can and can not sub in.

With sending proof you are still relying on a league runner to be online and to check every single substitution for eligibility.

I still prefer the flexibility of the current system where it's purely down to the clans, if you don't want people to sub in then tell them that, if they don't listen or don't understand then that is an internal clan issue.

The issue with captains/vices make every sub is that you are relying on one of your captains/vices and one of the opponents being online when the subs need to be made.

A 4th league would be an alternative league not an extra league. Last season every clan entered all leagues as far as I can see, which has changed from when a few clans wouldn't because they thought it was too much. Seeing as some people don't want to play certain leagues for reasons other than demand then I see no reason why they couldn't play in a 4th league and drop one of the other 3. If you consider SL then clans half themselves by adding two teams in which effectively means running 4 teams in the the same clan (1 FCL, 1 FBL, 2 SL). That shows a fourth league could be feasible if clans went to one team in SL or just drop out of one they don't like as a collective. Obviously not every clan could cope, but most clans would not participate in 4. Personally I think Uprising could cope and the more games the better, as long as they get played having 10 leagues is fine by me. The addition of a 4th league doesn't mean clans have to join all four, but the demand is now higher. When it was just FCL people thought 2 leagues were too much, it just shows demand is slowly growing with the clan size as it currently is (which I don't think is a bad thing).

No the proof were in the cases of their opponent being offline for a while, and no action taken by their Captain.

The flexibility suits the bigger teams so they can act like vultures and attack/force their prey to play there and then. IF that's fair then I beg to differ. That goes on, I'm very appreciative no one from my team went against my request, this may not be the case for other sides. I'm trying to find a fair and suitable precedent for all teams.

With being a Captain and a Vice, this brings responsibility. What if a team gets refused a sub during the fixture then they don't hear a word until oh how convenient they end up playing the player who they were refused?

There wasn't just one pros vs SS match though. In FCL I showed conflict between what I wanted and what I thought, that resulted in a compromise which I sided with Pro's. Not a guess at all, if I wasn't sure I wouldn't have picked a side because it was a predictions thread not a guessing thread. In the SL I went quite confidently for SS, and I showed in my league prediction that pro's wouldn't make the final which isn't something you would "guess".