TT Changes 2013 - Page 4 - MensTennisForums.com

MensTennisForums.com

MenstennisForums.com is the premier Men's Tennis forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.Please Register - It's Free!

Reply

Old 11-02-2012, 01:20 PM   #46
country flag mcarvalho
Registered User
 
mcarvalho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,724
mcarvalho has a reputation beyond reputemcarvalho has a reputation beyond reputemcarvalho has a reputation beyond reputemcarvalho has a reputation beyond reputemcarvalho has a reputation beyond reputemcarvalho has a reputation beyond reputemcarvalho has a reputation beyond reputemcarvalho has a reputation beyond reputemcarvalho has a reputation beyond reputemcarvalho has a reputation beyond reputemcarvalho has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

COMMITMENTS

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?

Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

YES

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?

Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)

YES

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:

GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying.

4) Late entries & SE's:

No restrictions. (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

No restrictions. (current rule)

5) Doubles commitments:

It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list.

6) Singles commitments by another person?

Yes/No (Current rule: yes)

NO

DRAWS


7) Late entries & seedings

No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

Late entries shouldn't be seeded.

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

NO

SENDING PICKS


9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

YES

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?

Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

NO

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

NO


OOP


12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)


Minimum of 6 TT matches

13) Standardizing the OOP:

No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?

No - Manager's choice (Current rule)

TB System


14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.

Yes/No (Curret rule: no)

YES

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

NO

16) PTS:

Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?

GD should be used as the PTS system.

RANKING POINTS


17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

YES

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

NO


OTHERS


19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)?


NO

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?


Diversity of continents/timezones

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline?

NO
mcarvalho is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 

Old 11-02-2012, 09:36 PM   #47
country flag Tomek.
Registered User
 
Tomek.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,402
Tomek. has a reputation beyond reputeTomek. has a reputation beyond reputeTomek. has a reputation beyond reputeTomek. has a reputation beyond reputeTomek. has a reputation beyond reputeTomek. has a reputation beyond reputeTomek. has a reputation beyond reputeTomek. has a reputation beyond reputeTomek. has a reputation beyond reputeTomek. has a reputation beyond reputeTomek. has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

COMMITMENTS

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?
Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

4) Late entries & SE's:
No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

6) Singles commitments by another person?
Yes/No (Current rule: yes)


DRAWS

7) Late entries & seedings
No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


SENDING PICKS

9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OOP

12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)

13) Standardizing the OOP:
No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?


TB System

14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.
Yes/No (Curret rule: no)

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

16) PTS:
Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?


RANKING POINTS

17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)
I think we should try it how would it work here


OTHERS

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)?
NO

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?
NO

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline?
__________________
Tomek. is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 01:37 AM   #48
country flag HawkAussie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Age: 16
Posts: 638
HawkAussie has a reputation beyond reputeHawkAussie has a reputation beyond reputeHawkAussie has a reputation beyond reputeHawkAussie has a reputation beyond reputeHawkAussie has a reputation beyond reputeHawkAussie has a reputation beyond reputeHawkAussie has a reputation beyond reputeHawkAussie has a reputation beyond reputeHawkAussie has a reputation beyond reputeHawkAussie has a reputation beyond reputeHawkAussie has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

My Answers
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
First of all, thanks for all the suggestions We're now proceeding to the next step of the changes period. This thread will be used to discuss the topics which were brought up in the suggestions thread.

The suggestions are ordered by numbers. You can vote/discuss each of the topics and also reply to posts of other players.

It's not necessary to vote for all the topics, but the players' participation is important for a decision/change to be made.

COMMITMENTS

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?

Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?

Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:

GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

4) Late entries & SE's:

No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:

It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

6) Singles commitments by another person?

Yes/No (Current rule: yes)


DRAWS


7) Late entries & seedings

No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


SENDING PICKS


9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?

Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OOP


12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)


13) Standardizing the OOP:

No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?


TB System


14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.

Yes/No (Curret rule: no)

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

16) PTS:

Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?


RANKING POINTS


17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OTHERS


19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)?

No

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?

Yes

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline?
HawkAussie is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 09:10 PM   #49
country flag rvugt
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
rvugt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Age: 28
Posts: 5,853
rvugt has a reputation beyond reputervugt has a reputation beyond reputervugt has a reputation beyond reputervugt has a reputation beyond reputervugt has a reputation beyond reputervugt has a reputation beyond reputervugt has a reputation beyond reputervugt has a reputation beyond reputervugt has a reputation beyond reputervugt has a reputation beyond reputervugt has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
First of all, thanks for all the suggestions We're now proceeding to the next step of the changes period. This thread will be used to discuss the topics which were brought up in the suggestions thread.

The suggestions are ordered by numbers. You can vote/discuss each of the topics and also reply to posts of other players.

It's not necessary to vote for all the topics, but the players' participation is important for a decision/change to be made.

COMMITMENTS

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?

Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

Firstly I thought, yes. But thinking about, i like it that this game becomes as close to real-life as possible. Knowing that you can always get an LE to a same sort of tournament the next week, i would vote no.
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)

Well, i don't know exactly what is meant here. During the qualifying, only if qualifying points are introduced. Gaining points at 2 events in the same week should never happen. In the first week of the grand slam. For sure they should be allowed to play, also in real tennis this is the case!
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

I know it is a hassle for managers, but people should be able to commit to tournaments early. No change should be made here, out after friday, out of qualifying. Out after sunday, out of MD! And especially the second week challengers, just get experienced manager for that!

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
4) Late entries & SE's:
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

No restrictions? (curent rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

I know it is crappy when you have to risk playing qualifying or not even playing, because you might get an SE. But i also think it is really crappy when you don't make the draw because of somebody committing last minute and taking your place because of SE. I would say, at least 24 hours before the deadline. Than other players have chance to change tournament if they want! For the rest i would suggest no restrictions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
5) Doubles commitments:
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

Both players should show up in the 2 weeks they have! So this one should change if you ask me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
6) Singles commitments by another person?
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

Yes/No (Current rule: yes)

Yes, but maybe a board member should hear from the person who allows the other to commit for him. Because otherwise problems can arise with people committing for players that don't want that. So the new board username should get a message if somebody wants somebody else to commit for him.


DRAWS

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
7) Late entries & seedings
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

Late entries should be seeded. I know it might suck, but if enough players commit, no LE will enter. And it is stupid to now seed a higher ranked player like in real life!

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

No, for sure not

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
SENDING PICKS
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post


9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

No, people should just read. Very easily, copy the oop and type from that. Only time sending to wrong person should be allowed,is when the oop is not out yet, but than you need to send to the manager.


Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

No, only in case the forum goes down. Nowadays everybody can get to the website on their smartphone. No reason why you would be able to send by email and not by pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

Would be nice, but i guess the answer is definitely no. It is just a game, you punish yourself enough for not sending.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
OOP
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post


12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)
I would say 6 is the minimum! Especially as there are always to 2 to 3 easy picks.


Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
13) Standardizing the OOP:
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?

Managers choice. Although manager should try to put the most difficult match as sr1. But this is always difficult to judge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
TB System
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post


14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.

Yes/No (Curret rule: no)

For sure. I would say that you get point for every set for the correct winner should count before shootout. Shootout is a random thing, as the OOP is sort of random. Amount of sets to correct winner is a way of saying who is the better player.
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

No, the oop is not there for nothing. You know on forehand which matches will be important.
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
16) PTS:
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?

I agree on the correct number of sets and the game differences. It is a better way of defining the better player!

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
RANKING POINTS
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post


17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

No, it is a risk trying to qualify. It should stay that way!

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

Yes! For sure! Doubles is a team sport and should be put like that. You can allow the 2 highest players on the individual race to play together if they are higher than the people on the team race, but still i think you should try to get players to play doubles together week in, week out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

OTHERS
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post


19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)?

No, no way on saying what would have happened. Especially the second example shows how wrong it would be count it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?
Ranking points and entry list quality. Continents should not be a too big problem, as everybody can send for all the slams and they are all in different timezones!

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline?
No, managers should try to post diffs in time, than players should send in time!




Sent from my iPhone using Verticalsports.com Free App
__________________
Member of Suicide tennis board!

rvugt is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 09:21 PM   #50
country flag Mahqz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Age: 29
Posts: 3,948
Mahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

In 20) we aren't talking about the players but about the managers. We have many managers for the American timezones but many weeks where only European challengers played although there are also South American ones. That was the idea of this question.
__________________
TT Singles: W 2014: Heilbronn I
TT Singles: W 2013: Marseille, Sarasota
TT Singles: W 2012: Blois Fut; QF USO
TT Singles ranking: 59 (High: 52)

TT Doubles: W 2013: Winston-Salem, Sarajevo; SF USO (w/ appleGirl)
TT Doubles: W 2012: Antalya, Tiburon; SF USO (w/ appleGirl)
TT Doubles: W 2011: Izmir CH (w/ appleGirl)
TT Doubles ranking: 31 (High: 31)


-- TT Board Member --
Mahqz is online now View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2012, 11:40 AM   #51
country flag Mae
A ROSE IS FOREVER
 
Mae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Between a rock and a hard place.
Posts: 33,628
Mae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

I like the way things are done now. My only suggestion would be to make all the rules more clear especially for the newer players. Right now there are two huge threads with "TT Rules" in them going back for years and years. This needs to be cleaned up!
__________________
THE COOL CAT IS BACK!



Mae is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2012, 12:03 PM   #52
country flag SamR03A
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 546
SamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by rvugt View Post
Late entries should be seeded. I know it might suck, but if enough players commit, no LE will enter. And it is stupid to now seed a higher ranked player like in real life!
This doesn't happen. Particularly in challengers admittedly, but still. Most Q draws have byes (understandable because no one wants to tip the hell that is challenger qualifying)

It just pisses me off when I fall to 2nd seed in Q draw and late entries push in and get byes. A compromise might be - players who commit on time get byes first, then the LE seeds.
SamR03A is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2012, 12:10 PM   #53
country flag SamR03A
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 546
SamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond reputeSamR03A has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

answers

Quote:
1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?
Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)

Unless GS qual ends on a Sunday and Challenger MD starts on the Monday. (Thinking of the Managers here)

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

4) Late entries & SE's:
No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

6) Singles commitments by another person?
Yes/No (Current rule: yes)


DRAWS

7) Late entries & seedings
No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


SENDING PICKS

9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Yes for repeated offenders/No (Current rule: no)


OOP

12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)
Need to makethe first round fair, the fate of half the players depend on it.

13) Standardizing the OOP:
No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?


TB System

14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.
Yes/No (Curret rule: no)

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

abolish the shootout please

16) PTS:
Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?


RANKING POINTS

17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OTHERS

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)?

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline? http://nooooooooooooooo.com/
SamR03A is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 09:53 AM   #54
country flag Mae
A ROSE IS FOREVER
 
Mae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Between a rock and a hard place.
Posts: 33,628
Mae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond reputeMae has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

Since I'll soon be in the last of the regular season's TTs I have one more thing to add. A 32 Player Qualifying Draw is awful! There should be more TTs opened up so players could be more evenly spread out. I would rather play a Future than go through a 32 Player Qualifying Draw!
__________________
THE COOL CAT IS BACK!



Mae is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 02:50 PM   #55
country flag Forever-Delayed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,320
Forever-Delayed has a reputation beyond reputeForever-Delayed has a reputation beyond reputeForever-Delayed has a reputation beyond reputeForever-Delayed has a reputation beyond reputeForever-Delayed has a reputation beyond reputeForever-Delayed has a reputation beyond reputeForever-Delayed has a reputation beyond reputeForever-Delayed has a reputation beyond reputeForever-Delayed has a reputation beyond reputeForever-Delayed has a reputation beyond reputeForever-Delayed has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?
Yes/No? (Current rule: yes) It would be penalizing players for doing well if they couldn't.

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes) Although I am not 100% sure on this. On one hand, if they could , it would allow players to score points twice in the same week, which would be unfair on other players, but on the other hand, would make first week challengers very weak. (that said, it would make people think about scheduling

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?
Other than issues around be careful of time zones, and plenty of lucky losers, don't see a problem with the current rule

4) Late entries & SE's:
No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

6) Singles commitments by another person?
Yes/No (Current rule: yes)


DRAWS

7) Late entries & seedings
No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
Yes/No (Current rule: no) I see no reason why this would ever be introduced as a rule. It's unlucky to draw a doubles partner in round one, but so be it.


SENDING PICKS

9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?
Yes/No (Current rule: no) With a condition - the person who posted the OOP and the manager are happy for this to happen, and this is stated in the thread beforehand. If managers are happy for this to happen, then no reason why it couldn't be done.

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes) If the board is down etc, then email picks have to be acceptable, and that is why an alternative contact is listed in the opening posts of the thread. As long as the manager has the picks before the deadline, and this can be proved that they have been sent to them, it should be accepted. Managers could also state whether they will be accepting picks solely via PM (Unless the board is down), or whether they will also accept picks by email, facebook, twitter, post, etc in the thread so that people know where they can send picks. PMs though should be encouraged for ease of managing an event.

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Yes/No (Current rule: no) The punishment is that they lose the match


OOP

12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)

13) Standardizing the OOP:
No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?
Could also be swayed by the last option to have a standard issue OOP, but definately not done by the number of differences, as it makes it harder to make up differences in matches if you do not know what is the most important match. If you know what SR1 is, then you know that if you get a difference there, it gives you a chance on SR's to win. If you don't know what SR1 is going to be when you are making a pick, then it is much harder to chase back a deficit if you do not know which matches will matter as much


TB System

14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.
Yes/No (Curret rule: no) Surely you would be tempted to just pick everything 2-1 to cover yourself if you get the match wrong.

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Yes/No (Current rule: no) TT is about picking more winners than your opponent, so should be reflected in the SR system

16) PTS:
Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?


RANKING POINTS

17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.
Yes/No (Current rule: no) A small number of points, but points nonetheless should be introduced to replicate real life. It also would help new players climb the rankings slightly quicker

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Yes/No (Current rule: no) I will also support this argument. A doubles race is a race for doubles teams. (I know that it means that players without a permanent partner might struggle, but reaching a slam final and above, or just doing well in a couple of big tournaments with one person could be enough to qualify you anyway.


OTHERS

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)?
No - it's too messy and arbitrary if a retirement affects the match via SRs

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?
All of them ideally - a range of points values and timezones and surfaces should be used to give maximum choice for players to play the event they want to.

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline?
No - a deadline is a deadline for a reason. (and if this has to go through, just change the deadline for picks to be 5 minutes after play is scheduled to get underway). And although play tends not to start on time, occasionally it does, and if someone got an early break in that 5 minutes, it gives someone picking a massive advantage if their picks count. (another option would be too allow late picks to a point, but not count any matches that would have started by then. eg. picks sent at 7.04, deadline was 7.00, any matches to start at 7.00 to be counted as a wrong pick for the person sending at 7.04, so that their picks can still be counted, but they are penalized by not having a chance to get those matches correct
Forever-Delayed is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2012, 03:35 PM   #56
country flag Daniel_amr
Registered User
 
Daniel_amr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,323
Daniel_amr has a reputation beyond reputeDaniel_amr has a reputation beyond reputeDaniel_amr has a reputation beyond reputeDaniel_amr has a reputation beyond reputeDaniel_amr has a reputation beyond reputeDaniel_amr has a reputation beyond reputeDaniel_amr has a reputation beyond reputeDaniel_amr has a reputation beyond reputeDaniel_amr has a reputation beyond reputeDaniel_amr has a reputation beyond reputeDaniel_amr has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

My answers, the ones I don't know specifically I just left'em in blank. I just started playing back in August / September so I am kind of a new member.


1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?
Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)
If qualy points are introduced that wouldn't make much sense.

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

4) Late entries & SE's:
No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE? NO, you have to commit on time.

5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?
No, but in my case I don't have a problem since I have a regular doubles partner. It gets tricky when you commit someone who isn't aware of.

6) Singles commitments by another person?
Yes/No (Current rule: yes)



DRAWS

7) Late entries & seedings
No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


SENDING PICKS

9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OOP

12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)
yes, a minimum number of matches, at least 6 in 1st round.

13) Standardizing the OOP:
No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?


TB System

14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.
Yes/No (Curret rule: no) NO

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

16) PTS:
Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system? GD IS BETTER


RANKING POINTS

17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.
Yes/No (Current rule: no) Yes, absolutely but not in Ch (I'll regret this) perhaps only in GS and ATP 1000. If accepted, there should be a little extra topic to see in what topurnaments and what rounds gets qualy points.

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)
Too much complicated

OTHERS

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)?

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones? With this pace (number of TT players) by mid 2013 we may have to increase numbr of tourneys per week, there are like 4-8 NR players every week.

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline? NO WAY, unless there were rain delays in actual matches but still, not very fair to accept extensions to the ones who sent on time.
__________________
TT Ranking

Singles: 176 (High 166 Feb 3 - 2014)
Finals: 0-1
2013 RU: Salinas CH

Doubles: 93 (High 93 Jun 09 - 2014)
Finals: 4-6
2012 W: Villa Allende CH; Guayaquil CH // RU: Tashkent CH; Buenos Aires CH; Marbella CH (w/SamR03A)
2013 W: Mons CH (w/Renaud); Yeongwol CH;// RU: Guayaquil CH (w/cserkinho) Chennai (w/SamR03A)
2014 RU: Mohameddia CH (w/dinkulpus)
Daniel_amr is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 07:12 PM   #57
country flag Deathless Mortal
♤23♤
 
Deathless Mortal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 30,111
Deathless Mortal has a reputation beyond reputeDeathless Mortal has a reputation beyond reputeDeathless Mortal has a reputation beyond reputeDeathless Mortal has a reputation beyond reputeDeathless Mortal has a reputation beyond reputeDeathless Mortal has a reputation beyond reputeDeathless Mortal has a reputation beyond reputeDeathless Mortal has a reputation beyond reputeDeathless Mortal has a reputation beyond reputeDeathless Mortal has a reputation beyond reputeDeathless Mortal has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)

Yes!! It is very ugly to lose when for example you'd win your match if a player only wins 1 set, which he does, and you think you've already won, but then a retirement happens meaning you've lost your match.
If needed count it only if a first set has been completed and if the player that retired was in a losing position, but please do count it.
__________________

"a kad me opet gore vrati zahvalit' ću Mu prvo
što nam je dao komad zemlje što je za sebe sačuv'o"
Deathless Mortal is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 08:01 PM   #58
country flag Nixer
Registered User
 
Nixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Age: 26
Posts: 2,613
Nixer has a reputation beyond reputeNixer has a reputation beyond reputeNixer has a reputation beyond reputeNixer has a reputation beyond reputeNixer has a reputation beyond reputeNixer has a reputation beyond reputeNixer has a reputation beyond reputeNixer has a reputation beyond reputeNixer has a reputation beyond reputeNixer has a reputation beyond reputeNixer has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathless Mortal View Post
19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)

Yes!! It is very ugly to lose when for example you'd win your match if a player only wins 1 set, which he does, and you think you've already won, but then a retirement happens meaning you've lost your match.
If needed count it only if a first set has been completed and if the player that retired was in a losing position, but please do count it.
I agree, but just for SR, not PTS.
__________________
Nadal Verdasco Bolelli Lopez Almagro Fognini Dimitrov Mahut Phau Lacko Volandri Guccione Bozoljac Davydenko Darcis Haas Becker Dancevic Monfils Mathieu Ginepri Karlovic Montanes Kudla Cuevas Tipsarevic Kohlschreiber Seppi Monaco Andreev L.Mayer Tursunov Gil Ilhan Udomchoke Copil Ram Janowicz Llodra Rochus Brown
Nixer is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 06:26 PM   #59
country flag FERNET
Registered User
 
FERNET's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Age: 27
Posts: 3,783
FERNET has a reputation beyond reputeFERNET has a reputation beyond reputeFERNET has a reputation beyond reputeFERNET has a reputation beyond reputeFERNET has a reputation beyond reputeFERNET has a reputation beyond reputeFERNET has a reputation beyond reputeFERNET has a reputation beyond reputeFERNET has a reputation beyond reputeFERNET has a reputation beyond reputeFERNET has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

1) YES

2) YES

3) Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

4) Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team

6) Yes

7) No restrictions

8) Yes

9) No

10) Yes and facebook

11) no

12) no restrictions

13) No - Manager's choice (Current rule)


TB System

14) no

15) no

16) Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines

17) no

18) Yes

19) no

20) no

21) no
__________________
TT RESULTS
SINGLES
W: (13) ATLANTA (12) BELGRADE, (11) BASEL (10) KUALA LUMPUR, LOS ANGELES, OJAI CH (09) BELGRADE, LONDON, YUBA CITY CH (08) SOFIA CH, POZNAN CH
F: (14) MIAMI (13) KUALA LUMPUR (11) RG, MARSEILLE, BASTAD, MONTREAL (10) BELGRADE (09) PARIS, BANGKOK, CARSON CH (08) FERGANA CH
DOBLES
W: (14) ACAPULCO(13) KUALA LUMPUR, ATLANTA, EASTBOURNE, BARCELONA (12) BARCELONA (W/ Gallina)(10) BRISBANE (W/ Davidcuervacho) (09) DELRAY BEACH (W/ Gallina), SOFIA CH (08) SOFIA CH (W/ kai-soad), POZNAN CH, CORDENONS CH (W/ Davidcuervacho)
F: (14) HAMBURG, SYDNEY(13) ROTTERDAM (12) TOKIO (W/ Gallina) (11) CHENNAI (10) PARIS (W/ Maru angi) (08) RECANATI CH (W/ Exponente), ISTANBUL CH, WACO CH, MONS CH, NASHVILLE CH (W/ Davidcuervacho)
FERNET is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 02:13 PM   #60
country flag Allez-Alejo
Registered User
 
Allez-Alejo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8,582
Allez-Alejo has a reputation beyond reputeAllez-Alejo has a reputation beyond reputeAllez-Alejo has a reputation beyond reputeAllez-Alejo has a reputation beyond reputeAllez-Alejo has a reputation beyond reputeAllez-Alejo has a reputation beyond reputeAllez-Alejo has a reputation beyond reputeAllez-Alejo has a reputation beyond reputeAllez-Alejo has a reputation beyond reputeAllez-Alejo has a reputation beyond reputeAllez-Alejo has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

COMMITMENTS

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?
Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami? Keep the same

4) Late entries & SE's:
No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list? keep the same

6) Singles commitments by another person?
Yes/No (Current rule: yes) no, player should have to commit


DRAWS

7) Late entries & seedings
No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


SENDING PICKS

9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OOP

12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)

13) Standardizing the OOP:
No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?


TB System

14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.
Yes/No (Curret rule: no)

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

16) PTS:
Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system? use GD


RANKING POINTS

17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OTHERS

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)? Yes

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline?
no
__________________
Tennis Tipping 2011:
Singles:
Entry - 43(46) Race - N/A
Doubles: W - US Open(w/orangehat)
Entry - 35(49) Race - 28


Proud supporter of University at Buffalo, Niagara University, Drexel University, Fairport and Kenmore West athletics....and Chelsea FC and Atlanta Braves

Fairport's Angels - Always in our Hearts 6.26.07
Allez-Alejo is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Copyright (C) Verticalscope Inc
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007, PixelFX Studios