|
On July 28 2013 11:31 SynC[gm] wrote:
I dunno, maybe a better solution is bringing in a team with a lesser number of players into the fray and either have your 2nd pot of players go join their team, or have the team, like SunKhan, be a part of Stealth Bunnies V2. That way, unless another team signs up, possibly mSj or NW Power, we won't have to have 7 teams and/or make a team primarily of free agents.
Well, it'd be really awkward to ask a bunch of players to join sB and then say "uhh actually you're going to be playing for a different team". And same for SunKhan to join sB Blue. What I'm trying to do here with having two teams is having new players on a team with good organization that won't collapse mid season, which has happened pretty much every DRTL there's been. If we have sB Red, sB Blue, SunKhan, DeSPA, TAKK, ACE, Courage, then we only have one team that might possibly bomb out halfway through if an eighth team appears, as the other teams have a pretty good track record of at least two team leagues complete without collapse as far as I know.
And ideally a reputable person or someone with good organizational skills will step up and run that eighth team really well and we'll have the best season ever. If the other teams can manage to get enough players for a Bo7 for all 10-12 weeks of the season then we could do that too, I don't mind that too much this season, but Bo5 with 8 teams is probably a bit easier on each team involved.
|
I don't trust anyone in this league to run two different teams. Even if sB has two different "captains", they are still both sB. Sorry, I'd rather the league not take a risk on something like that, especially when cheating of the nature I'm concerned about can't even be proven.
|
|
|
On July 28 2013 11:42 Sentenal wrote:
I don't trust anyone in this league to run two different teams. Even if sB has two different "captains", they are still both sB. Sorry, I'd rather the league not take a risk on something like that, especially when cheating of the nature I'm concerned about can't even be proven.
But it's not actually something that couldn't have already happened in previous leagues with separate teams. Having two sB teams (or any two teams under the same flag) just makes it slightly more likely, but for example I'm friends with people on other teams including some captains, so in previous seasons it could easily have happened before.
|
I'm going to captain the 2nd Courage team. Apply within.
|
On July 28 2013 12:31 tonight wrote:
I'm going to captain the 2nd Courage team. Apply within.
Do eet, that makes 8 teams if you're serious ;D
|
On July 28 2013 12:14 Birdie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 11:42 Sentenal wrote:
I don't trust anyone in this league to run two different teams. Even if sB has two different "captains", they are still both sB. Sorry, I'd rather the league not take a risk on something like that, especially when cheating of the nature I'm concerned about can't even be proven. But it's not actually something that couldn't have already happened in previous leagues with separate teams. Having two sB teams (or any two teams under the same flag) just makes it slightly more likely, but for example I'm friends with people on other teams including some captains, so in previous seasons it could easily have happened before.
This alone is the problem: it makes it more likely. I see no good reason to want two sB teams other than your single roster is too large; however, this is a result of your recruiting, so a large roster is a consequence of that.
|
On July 28 2013 15:41 KazeHydra wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 12:14 Birdie wrote:On July 28 2013 11:42 Sentenal wrote:
I don't trust anyone in this league to run two different teams. Even if sB has two different "captains", they are still both sB. Sorry, I'd rather the league not take a risk on something like that, especially when cheating of the nature I'm concerned about can't even be proven. But it's not actually something that couldn't have already happened in previous leagues with separate teams. Having two sB teams (or any two teams under the same flag) just makes it slightly more likely, but for example I'm friends with people on other teams including some captains, so in previous seasons it could easily have happened before. This alone is the problem: it makes it more likely. I see no good reason to want two sB teams other than your single roster is too large; however, this is a result of your recruiting, so a large roster is a consequence of that.
I do see where you're coming from, but I just don't see it happening. Of course, I'm somewhat biased 
I would really like to have 8 well run teams, although changing to a 12 week season with 6 teams and Bo7 isn't a bad compromise. If tonight is serious about running a second Courage team then that's 8 teams with a good track record, which would be the best season yet I think assuming they all stick it out.
|
I have a question before signing: every match must start at 11:00 MDT or can be reflexible because it's 11pm in Vietnam
|
On July 28 2013 16:11 phamchienthang[V] wrote:
I have a question before signing: every match must start at 11:00 MDT or can be reflexible because it's 11pm in Vietnam
Usually you can postpone matches if you arrange it with your opponent in time.
|
On July 28 2013 16:02 Birdie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 15:41 KazeHydra wrote:On July 28 2013 12:14 Birdie wrote:On July 28 2013 11:42 Sentenal wrote:
I don't trust anyone in this league to run two different teams. Even if sB has two different "captains", they are still both sB. Sorry, I'd rather the league not take a risk on something like that, especially when cheating of the nature I'm concerned about can't even be proven. But it's not actually something that couldn't have already happened in previous leagues with separate teams. Having two sB teams (or any two teams under the same flag) just makes it slightly more likely, but for example I'm friends with people on other teams including some captains, so in previous seasons it could easily have happened before. This alone is the problem: it makes it more likely. I see no good reason to want two sB teams other than your single roster is too large; however, this is a result of your recruiting, so a large roster is a consequence of that. I do see where you're coming from, but I just don't see it happening. Of course, I'm somewhat biased I would really like to have 8 well run teams, although changing to a 12 week season with 6 teams and Bo7 isn't a bad compromise. If tonight is serious about running a second Courage team then that's 8 teams with a good track record, which would be the best season yet I think assuming they all stick it out.
Hes not serious. We might not even have enough for one. And ofc you are biased about yourself lol.
|
I don't see what the problem is with having two sB teams with two different rosters playing in the league. Just make them play eachother in the first or second week and you can be pretty sure that nobody would want to throw games so early and won't be able to do so later...
|
On July 28 2013 21:05 ggrrg wrote:
I don't see what the problem is with having two sB teams with two different rosters playing in the league. Just make them play eachother in the first or second week and you can be pretty sure that nobody would want to throw games so early and won't be able to do so later...
It isn't nearly as simple as "who wins head to head" between them. Last season the top 3 teams were all 6-2, and the 4th and 5th place teams were 5-3. With standings that insanely close, it makes individual sets tons more important, since it actually matters if you win 5-0 rather than 3-2 or something.
|
On July 28 2013 21:26 Sentenal wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 21:05 ggrrg wrote:
I don't see what the problem is with having two sB teams with two different rosters playing in the league. Just make them play eachother in the first or second week and you can be pretty sure that nobody would want to throw games so early and won't be able to do so later... It isn't nearly as simple as "who wins head to head" between them. Last season the top 3 teams were all 6-2, and the 4th and 5th place teams were 5-3. With standings that insanely close, it makes individual sets tons more important, since it actually matters if you win 5-0 rather than 3-2 or something.
I still don't understand how there is any potential for throwing if the two teams play in the first two weeks.
Or do you think they will intentionally go for a 3-2 score in week 1? Any rigged results in the beginning of the season are about as likely to end up screwing up both teams as they are to help them, especially if the season ends up being as close as it has been last time.
|
On July 28 2013 21:39 ggrrg wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 21:26 Sentenal wrote:On July 28 2013 21:05 ggrrg wrote:
I don't see what the problem is with having two sB teams with two different rosters playing in the league. Just make them play eachother in the first or second week and you can be pretty sure that nobody would want to throw games so early and won't be able to do so later... It isn't nearly as simple as "who wins head to head" between them. Last season the top 3 teams were all 6-2, and the 4th and 5th place teams were 5-3. With standings that insanely close, it makes individual sets tons more important, since it actually matters if you win 5-0 rather than 3-2 or something. I still don't understand how there is any potential for throwing if the two teams play in the first two weeks. Or do you think they will intentionally go for a 3-2 score in week 1? Any rigged results in the beginning of the season are about as likely to end up screwing up both teams as they are to help them, especially if the season ends up being as close as it has been last time.
As Sent said, it's not only about head to head. With 2 teams, you have more control over who else makes the playoffs. Throwing or even taking a 3-2 win instead of a 5-0 to control who makes the 4th spot can be done. Of course, nobody is saying they will do this, but the potential is there, and there will be unwanted suspicion if any curious results occur.
|
I throw hard. KaiGreene hard ;D
<3 Kai.
|
On July 28 2013 21:39 ggrrg wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 21:26 Sentenal wrote:On July 28 2013 21:05 ggrrg wrote:
I don't see what the problem is with having two sB teams with two different rosters playing in the league. Just make them play eachother in the first or second week and you can be pretty sure that nobody would want to throw games so early and won't be able to do so later... It isn't nearly as simple as "who wins head to head" between them. Last season the top 3 teams were all 6-2, and the 4th and 5th place teams were 5-3. With standings that insanely close, it makes individual sets tons more important, since it actually matters if you win 5-0 rather than 3-2 or something. I still don't understand how there is any potential for throwing if the two teams play in the first two weeks. Or do you think they will intentionally go for a 3-2 score in week 1? Any rigged results in the beginning of the season are about as likely to end up screwing up both teams as they are to help them, especially if the season ends up being as close as it has been last time.
As Sentenal mentioned, last season we essentially had 3 teams all vying for the last playoff spot in the last 1-2 weeks, complicated by postponements and such. The spot was essentially sealed by one team taking walkovers against a second team, the second team being unmotivated to play out the games since they were out of playoff contention.
If we enter a similar situation with 2 allied teams we can easily have, say, SB2 throwing a series against a playoff contender (let's say contender A) under the logic that SB1 will have an easier time against A than against contender B or C. This will easily put B and C out of contention, completely screwing over all their hard work up till that point.
|
On July 28 2013 22:43 KazeHydra wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 21:39 ggrrg wrote:On July 28 2013 21:26 Sentenal wrote:On July 28 2013 21:05 ggrrg wrote:
I don't see what the problem is with having two sB teams with two different rosters playing in the league. Just make them play eachother in the first or second week and you can be pretty sure that nobody would want to throw games so early and won't be able to do so later... It isn't nearly as simple as "who wins head to head" between them. Last season the top 3 teams were all 6-2, and the 4th and 5th place teams were 5-3. With standings that insanely close, it makes individual sets tons more important, since it actually matters if you win 5-0 rather than 3-2 or something. I still don't understand how there is any potential for throwing if the two teams play in the first two weeks. Or do you think they will intentionally go for a 3-2 score in week 1? Any rigged results in the beginning of the season are about as likely to end up screwing up both teams as they are to help them, especially if the season ends up being as close as it has been last time. As Sent said, it's not only about head to head. With 2 teams, you have more control over who else makes the playoffs. Throwing or even taking a 3-2 win instead of a 5-0 to control who makes the 4th spot can be done. Of course, nobody is saying they will do this, but the potential is there, and there will be unwanted suspicion if any curious results occur.
But this would not benefit any of the sB teams!
That's not a fair concern because every other team can potentially do the same. Also, there has to be a certain situation occuring at the end of the season in order for playoff manipulations to be possible at all. sB with 2 teams might be more likely to end up being able to control such a situation than a particular other team, but certainly not as likely as any of the other teams.
edit:
On July 28 2013 22:51 EchOne wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 21:39 ggrrg wrote:On July 28 2013 21:26 Sentenal wrote:On July 28 2013 21:05 ggrrg wrote:
I don't see what the problem is with having two sB teams with two different rosters playing in the league. Just make them play eachother in the first or second week and you can be pretty sure that nobody would want to throw games so early and won't be able to do so later... It isn't nearly as simple as "who wins head to head" between them. Last season the top 3 teams were all 6-2, and the 4th and 5th place teams were 5-3. With standings that insanely close, it makes individual sets tons more important, since it actually matters if you win 5-0 rather than 3-2 or something. I still don't understand how there is any potential for throwing if the two teams play in the first two weeks. Or do you think they will intentionally go for a 3-2 score in week 1? Any rigged results in the beginning of the season are about as likely to end up screwing up both teams as they are to help them, especially if the season ends up being as close as it has been last time. As Sentenal mentioned, last season we essentially had 3 teams all vying for the last playoff spot in the last 1-2 weeks, complicated by postponements and such. The spot was essentially sealed by one team taking walkovers against a second team, the second team being unmotivated to play out the games since they were out of playoff contention. If we enter a similar situation with 2 allied teams we can easily have, say, SB2 throwing a series against a playoff contender (let's say contender A) under the logic that SB1 will have an easier time against A than against contender B or C. This will easily put B and C out of contention, completely screwing over all their hard work up till that point.
Team X having secured their playoff spot, throws their final game against playoff conteder Y, because it thinks that it will have an easier time against them in the finals rather than against team Z or V.
This will easily put Z and V out of contention, completely screwing over all their hard work up till that point.
This could apply to any team....
|
On July 28 2013 23:08 ggrrg wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 22:43 KazeHydra wrote:On July 28 2013 21:39 ggrrg wrote:On July 28 2013 21:26 Sentenal wrote:On July 28 2013 21:05 ggrrg wrote:
I don't see what the problem is with having two sB teams with two different rosters playing in the league. Just make them play eachother in the first or second week and you can be pretty sure that nobody would want to throw games so early and won't be able to do so later... It isn't nearly as simple as "who wins head to head" between them. Last season the top 3 teams were all 6-2, and the 4th and 5th place teams were 5-3. With standings that insanely close, it makes individual sets tons more important, since it actually matters if you win 5-0 rather than 3-2 or something. I still don't understand how there is any potential for throwing if the two teams play in the first two weeks. Or do you think they will intentionally go for a 3-2 score in week 1? Any rigged results in the beginning of the season are about as likely to end up screwing up both teams as they are to help them, especially if the season ends up being as close as it has been last time. As Sent said, it's not only about head to head. With 2 teams, you have more control over who else makes the playoffs. Throwing or even taking a 3-2 win instead of a 5-0 to control who makes the 4th spot can be done. Of course, nobody is saying they will do this, but the potential is there, and there will be unwanted suspicion if any curious results occur. But this would not benefit any of the sB teams! That's not a fair concern because every other team can potentially do the same. Also, there has to be a certain situation occuring at the end of the season in order for playoff manipulations to be possible at all. sB with 2 teams might be more likely to end up being able to control such a situation than a particular other team, but certainly not as likely as any of the other teams.
Well, you are wrong. If you can't get it even after several people try to explain it, not much more we can do.
|
On July 28 2013 23:13 Sentenal wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 23:08 ggrrg wrote:On July 28 2013 22:43 KazeHydra wrote:On July 28 2013 21:39 ggrrg wrote:On July 28 2013 21:26 Sentenal wrote:On July 28 2013 21:05 ggrrg wrote:
I don't see what the problem is with having two sB teams with two different rosters playing in the league. Just make them play eachother in the first or second week and you can be pretty sure that nobody would want to throw games so early and won't be able to do so later... It isn't nearly as simple as "who wins head to head" between them. Last season the top 3 teams were all 6-2, and the 4th and 5th place teams were 5-3. With standings that insanely close, it makes individual sets tons more important, since it actually matters if you win 5-0 rather than 3-2 or something. I still don't understand how there is any potential for throwing if the two teams play in the first two weeks. Or do you think they will intentionally go for a 3-2 score in week 1? Any rigged results in the beginning of the season are about as likely to end up screwing up both teams as they are to help them, especially if the season ends up being as close as it has been last time. As Sent said, it's not only about head to head. With 2 teams, you have more control over who else makes the playoffs. Throwing or even taking a 3-2 win instead of a 5-0 to control who makes the 4th spot can be done. Of course, nobody is saying they will do this, but the potential is there, and there will be unwanted suspicion if any curious results occur. But this would not benefit any of the sB teams! That's not a fair concern because every other team can potentially do the same. Also, there has to be a certain situation occuring at the end of the season in order for playoff manipulations to be possible at all. sB with 2 teams might be more likely to end up being able to control such a situation than a particular other team, but certainly not as likely as any of the other teams. Well, you are wrong. If you can't get it even after several people try to explain it, not much more we can do.
I bet you were the captain of your debate team...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
