Mens Tennis Forums banner

Ask the Board Thread

TT 
183K views 3K replies 185 participants last post by  anny 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
In this topic you can ask all question related with Tennis Tipping, Managers thread will be only for applying to manage tournament.

The Current TT Board Members are:

BMT360
Randy
a1canada
Shahrastani1986
dinkulpus
MikiKuba
 
#1,210 ·
What happens if a tournament gets cancelled? Are the players who originally wanted to play there allowed to commit for another tournament?

I'm thinking of the French future tournament which is scheduled for the second week of Wimbledon. It only has 8 singles commitments by now.
 
#1,213 ·
What happens if a tournament gets cancelled? Are the players who originally wanted to play there allowed to commit for another tournament?



I'm thinking of the French future tournament which is scheduled for the second week of Wimbledon. It only has 8 singles commitments by now.

Don t worry. After 1st deadline players will commit there as the other tournaments will be too busy.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App
 
#1,226 ·
hi board,

at bottom portion of User Control Panes, there is a section named 'Latest Reputation Received"

does somebody teach me on following 4 points?


#1 i would like to put reputation where I feel it appropriate. would you tell me how and where i can do it?
#2 related to #1, would you tell me how to add comment to it?
#3 what is a appropriate way to acknowledge the reputation received? what longtime mtf members do for it? just let it go?
#4 if there is a suitable thread which would answer the questions above, like a faq, or about mtf, guide thread, what so ever, let me know the link(s).

thanks for your attention.
 
#1,229 ·
I am manager of Braunschweig challenger and today I discovered that all the results and the OOP disappeared on the front page (I didn´t delete them).
Do you have any explanation?
 
#1,232 ·
I just hope he didn't freak out, I guess it0s his first tournament. I'd say to send a TT board member as a back up...but let's wait a bit more and trust the manager.
 
#1,234 · (Edited)
I can not recall the Tennis Tipping requiring pick format, would somebody help me?

For John ISNER versus Ivo KARLOVIC match, suppose there is a prediction of ISNER over KARLOVIC with scores of 76(8) 67(1) 64, what are the right formats both for PTS(Points) and SR(SetRate)?

The points I am asking confirmation are as follows;
#1 For PTS; ISNER 76(8) 67(1) 64, is this it? If not, an example would be appreciated.
#2 For SR; ISNER 21, is this it? If not, an example would be appreciated.

Singles Entry Rankings
Doubles Entry Rankings
TT FAQ/Guide
Managers Thread 2015
World Clock
#3 TT Links being available, I tried to obtaint the righton info, but could not because of massive volume. For #1 and #2, a link to the specific post which shows explicit example is most appreciated. I once checked the very post myself, but can not assess it again.

Thank you for your attention.
 
#1,238 ·
1) Make sure to put "2" in cell H20 where it asks how many days the round will last.

2) In the OOP, give "1" or "2" in column H for the correct day. Remember for day one to leave cell H21 on "1" and then change it to "2" when you're ready to give diffs for day two.

3) Make sure to get all picks in the same column. Just copy/paste day two picks above or below day one (above if you left room the first day). Remember day two picks have preference for shootout so you either have to get them on top or you have to change order of priority, which you can do in column D, "SR No", the red cells. Just make sure PTS1 on day two is marked "1", SR2/PTS2 is marked "2" and so on.

If you want day 1 picks on top, remember it's not a problem to leave empty rows in the sheet. So you can place them far enough down to be sure you have room for the next day. Just have the total number of matches correct after day 2 if you want the sheet to tell you who won.

If there is anything else, just ask.
 
#1,241 ·
We have an issue in Bastad and Bogotà with ali's commitment(s).

(time CEST)
11:18 AM: He clearly commits in Bastad thread.
12:21 PM: He commits in Bogotà thread, saying: "Bogota is 1st preference, Bastad 2nd".
12:28 PM: He adds in Bastad thread that his "1st choice is Bogota depending on acceptance there".
--
After final deadline passed and draws were made, ali stated that he wants to play Bogota and pulled out in Bastad thread.

I had decided to put him in Bastad qualy draw, as I don't think I can treat his post as a withdrawal from Bastad. If that had to be considered a withdrawal and a change to Bogota, he wouldn't have been able to come back to Bastad in case Bogota draw was full.

What do you think?
 
#1,245 ·
Can a board member please check Randy's ruling on my doubles match in Atlanta? There's no feasible or logical way on earth his interpretation is correct. Thanks
 
#1,246 ·
well i'll just explain here my "Not feasible" logic


Doubles match

match is tied (score) SR is tied as well

Donaldson won 2 sets to 1. on PTS1

Chowda went Donaldson 21,
Ozone went Devvarman 20

Daneil_Amr went Donaldson 20
Cah_ Went Donaldson 20

the logic makes quite sense, team Daniel_amr has 2 correct picks on PTS1, Chowda/Ozone only has 1... am i wrong?
 
#1,247 ·
I only see one person who got the actual winner and set ratio correct. If that doesn't lead to us winning that's the most disturbingly flawed and insane rule I've ever seen. Would completely defy common sense :lol:
 
#1,248 ·
i completely get what you're saying, But i'm fairly certain that Having 2 correct picks is more important than having 1, Just like how SRs only come into play if the scores are tied, You don't look into SRs until after you look at the correct Picks. I feel like this game would be a lot more tedious if it was the way that 1 pick could trump 2 right picks if the 1 pick had the correct score line.


Like: another way to look at it: if you have 2 Aces, and they have 3 Two's.... They win (kinda hope you get at where I'm going with this, doesn't matter quality in this game, it matters quantity )


However: I did PM you the rule until the Board get's a chance to look at it, Sorry for any confusion :D
 
#1,249 ·
What is the point of set ratios being the tiebreaker? Why reward the team who got the set ratio wrong twice? There's no way.
 
#1,251 ·
right, but the first tiebreaker (when you match the picks) is correct picks, I sent you a PM with the rule...it's the exact same case (And on it it says, even though they picked more SRs, the number of correct winners comes firs)

team a went 1 right pick , 1 right SR
team b went 2 right picks, 0 right SR

Team B won


http://www.menstennisforums.com/showpost.php?p=3316147&postcount=58 it's case #2
 
#1,253 ·
Nothing at all against you randy by the way. Obviously you dont write the rules :lol: but if that is the ruling then that rule is beyond a joke. Literally bullshit :haha: we literally have the exact same score and set ratios. The set ratio 1 tiebreaker, which rewards GUESSING SET RATIOS CORRECTLY, was only correctly picked by our team, and the team who managed to get it wrong twice is rewarded with a win :haha: What a criminal, disgusting, downright idiotic and ignorant rule. Nicely done guys :thumbsup:
 
#1,257 ·
It shouldn't be called "set ratio" then, because for "set ratio 1" the only team who got the correct SET RATIO was our team. If the tiebreaker was "picking the correct winner but missing the set ratio twice" then I could see why we lost. It's beyond the rhelm of idiocy and ignorance to try and justify the fact that the team who actually got the most important set ratio SPOT ON on more occasions than their opponents still lost, period. The exact same amount of winners and set ratios were chosen in the match. The first tie breaker is the first SET RATIO match. We nailed it COMPLETELY SPOT ON while our opponents completely, 100% missed
It clear as day. To award our opponents a win is laughable at best, complete ignorance to logic at worse. There is no possible way to justify it the way the rules are laid out and the wording of the tiebreakers is layed out plain and simple. The rule is a joke and completely flawed. Period. Randy, again, I hope you accept my apologies because it certainly looked as though I was blaming you initially. That wasn't my intention, you are clearly one of my favorite managers. I understand you are doing nothing more than following this disturbing rule, and my interpretation of it was somehow incorrect. Didn't think it was possible for the reality to be what it is. Hope no other deserved winners get blatantly screwed by this rule in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Randy
#1,259 ·
The first tiebreaker is set ratio, yes, and there you were completely equal. You were separated by the second tiebreaker, not the first.

In a one-match OOP where you score 1+1 and your opponents 2+0, would you expect to win?


As for deserved winners, you yourself admitted to sending Becker by mistake and gained a point this way....your opponents were definitely the better predictors of the day.
 
#1,260 ·
That's quite the cheap shot to make me look like a sore loser. Clearly, my argument has been centered around what I think is a clearly logical interpretation of the rule in question. Not really sure where the justification of your comment comes from.
 
Top