Sorry spinner what's this prove?

And if it doesn't happen does that make me and magic liars?

Keep diggin' m8!

Well, you said i was a liar, so i create a game, and viola!

Fact is different thing happen to different people.. Doesn't make either person right or wrong.

Still wondering about thet friendly and tourney thing 1_eye..

Remember what Nick said about playing selective ranks?

"This system (current one) means that regardless of the ranking of your opponent you will gain and lose points just as easily. So there is no reason not to play anyone! "

YES WE KNOW

But I don't want points.

I want a decent game

You really can't argue with that!

Well actually i despise ''HAVING'' to play someone who is a ''newbie'', you get what i mean spinner!

Would you expect someone like 6pack_jay or _meh_ to ''HAVE'' to play someone who claims to be a newbie!

And why do you wonder about the friendly and tourny thing? Fact is with tournements you get drawn against your opponent! And with a friendly you might be warming up for a tourny or just a bit rusty from time out etc...!

And i never called you a liar, i said your research is invalid! You can't base a descion on that once you have had, or your so called research into it, your reseach didn't control the variables and that's why it's invalid, just so we're clear!!




I want a decent game

Exactley, you don't wanna be stuck playing some ''newbie'' who will try their best to put you, off and be a general nuisence!

And again why are you so against it?

Edited at 14:32 Thu 18/01/07 (GMT)

Agreed

I'd prefer 3 games with someone thats a challenge i.e player with higher ranking even if i lost rather than 30 games with someone 670 which i would only lose a very few but would still be no challenge.

I never have thats EXACTLY what i've been arguing for too!

Just read this thread and all the rest about it, i've always argued for this..

So playing 1000 games over a few months at times varying between all hours of the day, alwas with exactly the same game name and always on UK pool isn't producing a varied range of variables, whilst one persons experience of 5 games is?

Hmmmm...

(remember mine can be verified by admin)

NOTE - I am sure most people are aware tha this tangent is in jest, but just in case you dont, well, it is!


Edited at 19:59 Thu 18/01/07 (GMT)

I'm perfectly capable of reading spinner.

Frankly I'm getting sick of your sweeping repetitive statements though.

I never have thats EXACTLY what i've been arguing for too!
-WHEN?

You say things that have no real relevance but you try and use convincing words to get your point across. Then you try and demean the intelligence and belittle the people your arguing with. When in fact- as you say - there's no argument!

Come on spinner, sometimes you make good points and have a good participation on the forum, sometimes you just argue about absolutely nothing!

You remind me of a kid on the debating school, he'd always shout the loudest, the kids were scared to argue back because he sounded so convincing; but he always lost the jury's vote...

Think about it!

Right, read back through this thread and the others before it.

I suggested almost a year ago that we should have the ability to filter who enters our room. Admin explained in great detail why that couldn't work.

Then i suggested having a system (as i have still been doing here) of being able to select people of similar skill (win percentage).

What is so hard to understand about wanting to pick who you play, but respecting the decisions that have already been made?

If you look at the post above, you argued with the statement made by Nick, but only QUOTED by me.

I've been agreeing with you all along but simply trying to suggest a way of doing this that may work, since the "lets choose who can enter our game by rank" always fails, and has done since poolsharks!

As for relevance, i've been fighting pretty hard to keep this one on topic

Spinner you said Everyone should play everyone as you once did a test with 100 people and only 3 weren't pro's, so why all of a sudden after arguing with about 30 people on that other topic you end up jumping to the other side of the fence.

Why not? honestly.. If you dont understand or think i'm just being awkward, ask Squeezy, or any other top player. I had to learn from them, I'm not qualified ! LOL!



This is why i wonder how you can choose who you play in friendlies and tourneys, 'cause i sure cant! :

That was only the beginning dude! And started doing it whilst initially trying to prove exactly the same point Magic is, but it went wrong! LOL!

The important thing in any debate is to take others views on board, therefore changing your own view, as opposed to "i want THIS"

I've always been for a way to play people of similar skill.

For example, from the June 06 thread (which was looking for the option to boot people of low rank, rather than limit entry) :



Edited at 20:21 Thu 18/01/07 (GMT)

So then why did you do this study if you were completely against about it.

To put it in context its like, someone getting to the final of a tournament and purposely potting the black ball.

spinner seriously, you put up a good argument and i kinda see your point (kinda) but my advice is quit now.

You refer to facts and quotes from admin. Is this nessesary? After all, it's the users choice and opinion that matters most and clearly judging by these posts, the scales are tipping towards a 'yes' for the idea.

No need making a big deal out of it.

Quite frankly, your posts are getting a bit boring and repetative. Give others a chance to show their opinion without you 'proving' that everyone is wrong.

I really can't see any problem with this idea!

I started out to prove that if you called a room "OVER 800" then, as some here have said, hardly anyone over 800 actually entered.

However, i found this not to be the case and had to accept that fact.

I found it to be the case.

Me too. I'm not gonna post on this thread again as spinner is just gonna carry talking crap. Anybody with any type of sense will see this a good idea!

Done!

Edit: (remember mine can be verified by admin)

Did they sit in all your games then? Would this have an effect on the outcome?

Edited at 20:33 Thu 18/01/07 (GMT)

Newsgroup spam predates e-mail spam, and targets Usenet newsgroups and it consists of repetitious posting of a message (or substantially similar messages). The Breidbart Index was developed to provide an objective measure of the "spamminess" of a multi-posted or cross-posted message on Usenet. Spamming in an internet forum is when a user posts a message that is off-topic, has little relevance to the subject being discussed, or is a post that fails to contribute to the thread. Lastly, there is also the case where a person posts messages solely for the purpose of increasing his forum ranking.



says it all

I've quoted the facts and admin because people obviously dont want to read or search the forum before posting! LOL!

Al i've tried to do is help by suggesting new alternatives to the old repetitive thing thats gone on since poolsharks.

Dont worry, i wont post again on this thread. As i've said before everyone is different and experience different things.

1_eye even said users can chose who they play in friendlies and tourneys! If thats not different nothing is

I've only tried to help and break up the endless repetitive posts by suggesting solutions that haven't already been nixed.

I really hope this idea in some form gets implimented. It'll make it all worthwhile

You knew this was a mis-type, stop spinning ya yarn m8!

Ya nowt but a bloody politican!