[Dissident]

As Im promising you since a long time, Ive been thinking about changing some of the rules, and adding some new ones.
Im gonna post my thoughts here, but as I said before, Im not gonna decide this all alone. If we get massive rejection to some of my propositions, we will keep the game as it is now.

First of all, I was thinking about a way to make the game have more to do with our actual LONG-SHOT prediction.
Second, I was thinking about a way to make our game more personal-looking, like make the teams more dear and special to its owners.
Third, I was thinking about a way to not let people suffer too much in the game just because they have some incident that avoid them from sending teams during a couple of weeks.

Well, the first thing I propose is that we keep the Wednesday night deadline for all the season. We tried that, to make people have more time to chose their teams, and make ME have more time to work the things out to make it work. I guess thats ok with all of you, right? Also, we would have rounds of play every week.

Now, the second is probably the biggest news: I was thinking it would be interesting if we could chose one player (or two if you prefer) that WOULD STAY WITH YOU FOR THE WHOLE SEASON. Therefor, you would have to chose your player in the start of the season, and keep him throughout the year, grabbing points, but no money won or lost. You pay his fee in the first week, and its YOUR ACQUISITION. You wont be able to sell him at all. And your account balance will be our initial amount MINUS your stable player value.

Finally, the third thing would be to suggest we could have a scoring system similar to the ATP RACE Rankings. We would keep the best 5 (I would suggest 10) results and all the Masters and Grand Slams. The rest goes out. Therefor, if someone misses a week of play thats not a Masters or a Slam, their ranking would not be so hurt.

Also, as an addition, we would decide the MAX number of tournaments each of us could play... Or maybe not. Probably a stupid idea. I thought about all the others for sometime, while this last one occured just now.

As for the player you would BUY definitely, I was thinking it would make it all better if we could say that no repeated players are available, and we will make the official draft based on THIS SEASON´S final standings. It would be like a prize for the players who had the best 2002 seasons, taking their advantages to the new season.
If we do like that, Martin would be the first one to pick his player, with this Monday´s value in the ranking. If Martin choses, say, Lleyton Hewitt, none else can pick Lleyton Hewitt. So the second will have to pick a different one, and it goes on like that.

So, Im dying to hear your opinions. CMON! *pumps fist*
pfff lol :wavey:

 

[TennisHack]

Hallo, hitman :wavey:

Great suggestions. I definitely like the Wednesday deadline, so I vote to keep it

I also like the idea of playing every week except Davis Cup.

Hehe, first vote for picking up the ATP scoring system, as well, if it's not too much work for you (since you tabulate our scores anyway). I'm still not completely sure how it works myself, but it's fun to learn

As for the acquiring a player . . . I like the idea, most definitely. But I think we should be allowed to have a repeating player, or else there would probably be a three-way fight over the Top 3 or 4 or 5 players. So my suggestion would be to have 2 acquired players, one that can be repeated and one that can't. So, say, if Layla and Becca and I want to buy Juan Carlos, we can, and then we'd all have to buy another player that couldn't be repeated.

Just my thoughts, however It would be incredibly difficult to just pick 1 player in the Top Ten or so and ration him off, especially if we go by seniority of points/money.

 

[Dissident]

I wasnt thinking about top ten players, to say the truth.
Just imagine the following. If you buy, say, Hewitt to keep him, you would spend almost half of all your money.
That would make your movements for each week very limited, especially in the start of the season.
If we get TWO players, and you chose two top ones, well, then you will probably be having a very hard time to pick anyone else additionally.
I have the opinion theres plenty of players to chose from, thats why I suggested that "formula"

Lets wait and see what the others think, ok?
Thanks for the input.

 

[TennisHack]

If we get TWO players, and you chose two top ones, well, then you will probably be having a very hard time to pick anyone else additionally.
I have the opinion theres plenty of players to chose from, thats why I suggested that "formula"

Well, when I said two I meant a Top Ten player and then someone who's not in the Top Ten.

There are more than ten of us playing, so it wouldn't be fair to whoever's ranked #10 to get stuck with Roddick

 

[Chloe le Bopper]

lol @ tennishack - yeah don't punish me with Roddick for not being able to play for a few weeks, pft :sad:

 

[TennisHack]

*bump* for the newest players

 

[Martin]

Definitely agree with the Wednesday idea, and also about keeping a player for the entire season Although there could be like a window in the middle of the season, say after the French Open, where you could change player, he could be injured for example, but if you did it then, then that's half way through the season.

The scoring system I'm not sure about, in a way I'd almost say what is the easiest thing for Hit to do, because he's the one doing all the calculations and stuff.

 

[Layla]

All of your ideas are great. I agree with the Wednesday deadline. I especially like your idea of the ATP scoring system, but I would prefer best of 10 (I think best of 5 is not enough somehow), but others have expressed their worries about your workload, so I'll just add my concerns as well. Are you sure you won't be too swamped. I mean I want you to enjoy the game as well and have fun with. It don't want it to become a burden for you. Oh and I don't think we should have a max. tournaments played. Some of us like to play every week.

Yes, keeping a staple player is definitely great and makes it more personal. However, I have my doubts about the no repeats rule. Seeing as I'm the highest ranked Juanqui fan, I really wouldn't want to bogard him and prevent others from buying him. Since there are quite a few Juanqui fans here who I'm sure would want him as their personal player, I don't know how that could work out.

 

[Dissident]

So you agree with everything, but overall people would prefer if we could pick our permanent player freely. So we can repeat it.

Is that right?
I need to know, so then I will start taking decisions as the dead line to chosing this player and signing up the new players we will have.

 

[TennisHack]

So you agree with everything, but overall people would prefer if we could pick our permanent player freely. So we can repeat it.

Is that right?

That would work Probably better than my idea as well, since not as much money would be sucked up.

 

[Vera]

I'm open to any rules since I'm new here so one way or the other, the rules are new to me. But I'm also against the exclusive right of Top player rule. Cos I have no ranking so it's obvious that I'll have to choose some lower rank. I won't take Roddick even if he's free.

So, Hitman, how many of you are playing?

 

[Lee]

I like to join but I also have a question. If I can't play for a few weeks or more, does it mean I will lose lots of points?

Also, I can help Hitman in compiling points. I did major in computer and statistics in my good old days although both skills are little rusty now. Actually the statisitics part is very, very rusty.