PDA

View Full Version : FITD Suggestions Thread


watchdogfish
Dec 12th, 2008, 03:34 PM
Do you have an idea that could improve FITD?

Any comments on the game?

Post your suggestions for FITD in here!

Uranium
Dec 15th, 2008, 10:04 PM
Try to involve Fed Cup, we tried it last year, but it was kinda a draft:p
So let find some new kinda rules if we do do it.

watchdogfish
Dec 18th, 2008, 02:16 PM
Fed Cup's a great idea :)

crazylace01
Dec 27th, 2008, 06:19 PM
well i don't really know about fed cup, i think one of the reasons it didn't work too well when we tried it last year was that since lineups can change at the last minute, it makes it hard to make accurate picks....

as far as the race thing goes, i'd stick with your first idea, i think it will work much better :)

Uranium
Jan 31st, 2009, 12:44 AM
We could do Fed Cup by nations and have us sign up and then which ever nations do the best move on and can do the Semis and so on. We base this on the average score each nation gets.
But in your FITD, you need to pick who wins each tie, set ratio and game score.
:p

Justin SW
Feb 10th, 2009, 04:19 AM
Great idea to introduce the Fed Cup and I also liked the format with the points and the Nations (especially since I won:p:D) !!! Are all of the Canadians allowed to play in the semis from now on, or I'm only one who can play, because I was the only person getting points???

Justin SW
Feb 20th, 2009, 02:36 PM
It should be ruled that to manage a tourney, you must do round-by-round scoring.

Equipped
Feb 20th, 2009, 03:49 PM
It should be ruled that to manage a tourney, you must do round-by-round scoring.

I agree. Part of the fun of FITD is watching your fortunes rise and fall throughout the tournament. Simply learning the scores at the end of the week makes the game much less fun.

watchdogfish
Feb 20th, 2009, 04:50 PM
Great idea to introduce the Fed Cup and I also liked the format with the points and the Nations (especially since I won:p:D) !!! Are all of the Canadians allowed to play in the semis from now on, or I'm only one who can play, because I was the only person getting points???

Not sure atm but we'll decide something in time for April :p

It should be ruled that to manage a tourney, you must do round-by-round scoring.

I agree. Part of the fun of FITD is watching your fortunes rise and fall throughout the tournament. Simply learning the scores at the end of the week makes the game much less fun.

I agree too although something unexpected might happen during the week you're scoring like you might get sick or your internet might crash. So Richard I think your idea from the Memphis thread is good

I think Marco is on to something here. The expectation is that scores will be posted round-by-round (and not simply a posting of final scores 3 days after the tournament ends). When you commit to serving as scorekeeper for a tournament, you should be prepared to post scores throughout the week. If you know you can't accomplish this, you should simply contact another (experienced) scorekeeper.

For example: last week, Yarden was doing the scores for Pattaya, but she knew she wasn't going to be able to get to the Semifinal scoring as quickly as was expected. She simply PMed me and asked if I couldn't help her out with that round.

I don't think Marco was stepping on anyone's toes. He was simply trying to keep up the spirit and fun of the game. Since we have so many different people handling the scoring now, maybe we should discuss these expectations? What do others think?

It does say this in the manager's thread so the info is there:

"It's pretty easy to do the scoring but it is quite time consuming (especially Grand Slams :help:) so please only sign up if you really want to/or can. Of course if for whatever reason you can't run your tournament PM either crazylace01, Uranium, Equipped, Yarden or me ASAP and we can sort something out!"

Equipped
Feb 20th, 2009, 06:39 PM
Not sure atm but we'll decide something in time for April :p





I agree too although something unexpected might happen during the week you're scoring like you might get sick or your internet might crash. So Richard I think your idea from the Memphis thread is good



It does say this in the manager's thread so the info is there:

"It's pretty easy to do the scoring but it is quite time consuming (especially Grand Slams :help:) so please only sign up if you really want to/or can. Of course if for whatever reason you can't run your tournament PM either crazylace01, Uranium, Equipped, Yarden or me ASAP and we can sort something out!"

Thanks for this great response, Kate. People do get sick from time to time, but it's great that there are now multiple experienced scorekeepers who can pick up the slack should someone need it. Our newer scorekeepers might simply need to be made aware of the round-by round posting expectations AND the fact that they have help readily available to them if needed.

I, for one, would be happy to help someone out when they're keeping score should they need it. Waiting for only final scores (posted 3 days after the tournament) is simply not consistent with the fun and longevity of this great game.

Thanks to all of our scorekeepers, both new and "old". :worship:

watchdogfish
Nov 28th, 2009, 05:57 PM
Revived for 2010 :p

Post any ideas or suggestions you might have in here and weŽll see if we can introduce them in any way!

I have a couple of points:

This isnŽt really needed but does someone want to design a new title page for the new year?

The other point I want to bring up is the only counting your best result each week rule. Occasionally some people can get screwed over if thereŽs an International event and a Premier event on in the same week. Like say for example, you come 10th in the International event and 11th in the Premier event. With the rules you get the points for coming 10th but these are less than what you get for coming 11th in the Premier event.

What I think we could do is add up the points for both events in a particular week but still keep the 16th best tournament rule, only it would now be known as the 16th best week result instead.

What does everyone think?

Daruma.
Nov 28th, 2009, 07:33 PM
Revived for 2010 :p

Post any ideas or suggestions you might have in here and weŽll see if we can introduce them in any way!

I have a couple of points:

This isnŽt really needed but does someone want to design a new title page for the new year?

The other point I want to bring up is the only counting your best result each week rule. Occasionally some people can get screwed over if thereŽs an International event and a Premier event on in the same week. Like say for example, you come 10th in the International event and 11th in the Premier event. With the rules you get the points for coming 10th but these are less than what you get for coming 11th in the Premier event.

What I think we could do is add up the points for both events in a particular week but still keep the 16th best tournament rule, only it would now be known as the 16th best week result instead.

What does everyone think?

For me, the best should mean the points you get, not the result of tournament. If I am 4th in an event that earns me 70, and second in an event that earns me 50, I would rather get 70 points, not 50. But, it isn't sensible to get 70 + 50 IMO.

And, deleting all the points earned in the last season is not good. We should keep the rankings and defend the points. Just like ATP and WTA.

Equipped
Nov 29th, 2009, 04:14 AM
Revived for 2010 :p

Post any ideas or suggestions you might have in here and weŽll see if we can introduce them in any way!

I have a couple of points:

This isnŽt really needed but does someone want to design a new title page for the new year?

The other point I want to bring up is the only counting your best result each week rule. Occasionally some people can get screwed over if thereŽs an International event and a Premier event on in the same week. Like say for example, you come 10th in the International event and 11th in the Premier event. With the rules you get the points for coming 10th but these are less than what you get for coming 11th in the Premier event.

What I think we could do is add up the points for both events in a particular week but still keep the 16th best tournament rule, only it would now be known as the 16th best week result instead.

What does everyone think?

I think the event that nets you the most amount of points should be the one you get credit for.

watchdogfish
Dec 21st, 2009, 03:27 PM
For me, the best should mean the points you get, not the result of tournament. If I am 4th in an event that earns me 70, and second in an event that earns me 50, I would rather get 70 points, not 50. But, it isn't sensible to get 70 + 50 IMO.

And, deleting all the points earned in the last season is not good. We should keep the rankings and defend the points. Just like ATP and WTA.

Yeah we'll always keep that. Last year when the WTA decided to change their ranking system I spent the 2008 off-season going through the FITD results of that year and basically give everyone the new rankings points so we could keep the rolling 52 week system instead of having to start from scratch. It was a lot of hard work! :tape: :lol:

I think the event that nets you the most amount of points should be the one you get credit for.

Ok so we'll do what you 2 have suggested! Thinking about it, it's a good idea. :) The reason I suggested including both results in one particular week was because it might look strange to come 4th on one event but you get points for coming 11th in another. I think though, JJ-Fan you're right, it's not really sensible because say someone came 1st and 2nd in their events, it would give them an inflated ranking and I want the rankings to be as accurate as possible.

Thanks guys! :D

Broseghini
Dec 21st, 2009, 04:32 PM
Fed Cup is a great idea :D

sdtoot
Dec 22nd, 2009, 03:03 PM
I think the event that nets you the most amount of points should be the one you get credit for.

I agree. :)

watchdogfish
Dec 25th, 2009, 07:44 PM
Something that's come up before is to do with the scoring system we use.

Since FITD was created we've given points for correctly predicting the right winners in each of the rounds. This means if you pick Safina to win a tournament you get points for her wins in the final, semis, quarters etc. This system rewards the posters who successfully pick the overall winner of a tournament, so theoretically you could finish quite high even if you scored poorly in the earlier rounds.

Another system that has been proposed earlier this year involves only giving points once to a player depending on what stage they finish. This system favours the posters who may have scored highly in the early rounds but who's predicted tournament winner lost early.

Personally I'm not in favour of changing a scoring system that has worked so well for the past 4/5 years. Part of it's charm is that FITD is a really quick and simple game to play that's easy to follow, plus predicting a tournament winner is difficult to do at the beginning of the week. But that's only my opinion, what does everyone else think?

Equipped
Dec 27th, 2009, 07:52 AM
Something that's come up before is to do with the scoring system we use.

Since FITD was created we've given points for correctly predicting the right winners in each of the rounds. This means if you pick Safina to win a tournament you get points for her wins in the final, semis, quarters etc. This system rewards the posters who successfully pick the overall winner of a tournament, so theoretically you could finish quite high even if you scored poorly in the earlier rounds.

Another system that has been proposed earlier this year involves only giving points once to a player depending on what stage they finish. This system favours the posters who may have scored highly in the early rounds but who's predicted tournament winner lost early.

Personally I'm not in favour of changing a scoring system that has worked so well for the past 4/5 years. Part of it's charm is that FITD is a really quick and simple game to play that's easy to follow, plus predicting a tournament winner is difficult to do at the beginning of the week. But that's only my opinion, what does everyone else think?

I think our current system is not only fantastic (and quite simple), but it is the very foundation of FITD. The goal is to fill in the draw, right? Those who do that best should be rewarded, and since predicting the champion is much more difficult than picking the winner of a 1st round match, players should be rewarded accordingly.

No use in changing a good thing! :)

watchdogfish
Feb 26th, 2010, 12:06 AM
Would anyone be interested in an ITF league, a bit like the one we had in the 2008 off season? Only this time it will have it's own set of rankings, schedule etc. and perhaps have a season-ending event as well.

hellas719
Feb 26th, 2010, 04:53 AM
As soon as I saw this thread I was just going to suggest that :lol:
I think that maybe we should start with the 100K's :shrug:

hellas719
Feb 26th, 2010, 04:57 AM
Also, I think it's strange that there is FITD Juniors but not Challengers :shrug:

watchdogfish
Feb 26th, 2010, 08:30 PM
Yeah that sounds good cos 100ks aren't too far off an International :)

I was thinking of starting with the Spanish 75k at the end of March, as there aren't too many 100ks. I think we definitely shouldn't do any ITFs under 50k

Uranium
Feb 27th, 2010, 12:08 AM
My only problem with this is how late the draws are released, but it's a good idea.

watchdogfish
Oct 17th, 2010, 02:46 PM
I'm thinking of converting the ranks into the divisor system. Mainly because it will be quicker for me to update and will be easier for everyone to follow, but also because it's probably a better representation of who's doing well in FITD as all tournaments will count towards the ranking.

I'm definitely going to tweak the ranking points distribution so there's more to play for during the International tournament weeks. Also, I feel that the points need to be spread out more evenly. I think it's a bit silly that you get 550 points for winning the lowest Premier but only 280 points for winning an International.

Richie's
Oct 18th, 2010, 08:40 PM
:)

I think we can have the same point system as WTA Tour events.

Equipped
Oct 19th, 2010, 04:36 PM
I'm thinking of converting the ranks into the divisor system. Mainly because it will be quicker for me to update and will be easier for everyone to follow, but also because it's probably a better representation of who's doing well in FITD as all tournaments will count towards the ranking.

I'm definitely going to tweak the ranking points distribution so there's more to play for during the International tournament weeks. Also, I feel that the points need to be spread out more evenly. I think it's a bit silly that you get 550 points for winning the lowest Premier but only 280 points for winning an International.

I like the current point system, but I will definitely trust any idea our fearless leader may have. :cool:

watchdogfish
Jan 4th, 2011, 07:54 PM
Well I made a version of FITD rankings using the divisor system and it heavily favours players who don't play often but score big. It's not really fair to those who show commitment to the game. I think the divisor system will work if you apply a different minimum divisor depending on the number of tournaments played but I believe in keeping things simple :p So we'll stick to the current system.

What I have done is apply the 2011 ranking points so there will be some movement in the new year rankings, especially amongst the 100-211 range (:scared:). There'll also be a new look to the rankings sheet with breakdowns of points earned.