[Igorche]

Originally Posted by WhoAmI?

I accepted your draw without complaints

But you can realize, it's very difficult for me to understand when people wrote q2, if they started to number the qualifiers from the beginning (so q1 = Lertcheewakarn, q2=Aoyama, q3=Shvedova), or they started numbering since this particular match (so q1=Aoyama, q2=Shvedova).

If it was specified q1 def. q2, (or even just q1 in the q vs q match) then I'd know how you started numbering (q1=Aoyama, q2=Shvedova), but writing q2 is just a wild guess (meaning in this case I count it as the numbering started from the beginning).

Now, if this kind of match was between q1 vs q2, there would be no problems. Or even q3 vs q4 would be easy to know what is meant if someone wrote the winner is q1 or q2.


All in all, to avoid the confusion in the future in the q vs q matches, it's always better to write q2 def. q1 (so the manager knows, how you started numbering).

Not a problem 30 points, leave me with 390 (13/16). But next time post draw on time or we should add official rule about numbering Qualifiers as Equipped says.

[Igorche]

Originally Posted by Hapsara

Hi WhoAmI?, I think I got 12 picks correct instead of 11 in R1...thanks

You should have put Q3 def. Q2 instead of Q2 def. Q1. Almost all have this problem.

[Equipped]

Originally Posted by Monzanator

It's much easier to write always Q1 def. Q2 or Q2 def. Q1. Numbering qualifiers after their placement is known already is useless, cause everyone will probably pick her by the name rather than Q4 or anything else.

If you know the name of the Qualifier, you should by all means write it. However, if you don't yet know the name, a numbering system would be beneficial.

For those of you who have never scored an FITD tournament, you might be surprised how much work an unclear draw can be. This suggestion about numbering is an attempt to provide the best clarity possible for our scorekeepers.

[WhoAmI?]

Originally Posted by Equipped

Maybe it's time to add a specific official rule about numbering Qualifiers? I was having similar problems in Linz this week.

There is a rule for this, see

8) If the qualifiers are still unknown when posting your picks you may add them as "Q" or "QUALIFIER". It would be really helpful if you could give each qualifier a number (e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4). This is essential if two qualifiers have to face each other as you will have to specify which qualifier you pick to win (e.g. Q1 def. Q2). If you do not do this, that particular pick will not be counted.

but who bothers reading those rules till it comes back to hurt your score

Originally Posted by serbian-tennis

Not a problem 30 points, leave me with 390 (13/16). But next time post draw on time or we should add official rule about numbering Qualifiers as Equipped says.

I try my best to post the draw on time but since the time zone can be a bit difficult, I won't stay up really late, or wake up very very early in the morning to post the draw. After all, it's just a game. I hope you understand

Originally Posted by serbian-tennis

You should have put Q3 def. Q2 instead of Q2 def. Q1. Almost all have this problem.

You see, if you (and everyone else who might be suffering because of it) actually wrote q2 def. q1, I would interpret it as q2=Shvedova, q1=Aoyama. But since most people wrote only q2, I interpret it as q1=Lertcheewakarn, q2=Aoyama.

Let me bring 2 good examples of avoiding this kind of trouble. Someone wrote bottom q def. top q, and someone else had the winner marked down as higher ranked q.

[WhoAmI?]

Originally Posted by Hapsara

Hi WhoAmI?, I think I got 12 picks correct instead of 11 in R1...thanks

Hi
The difference might be because of the qualifier vs qualifier match. Your winner is q2, and since you didn't specify otherwise, I count it as q2=Aoyama (q1=Lertcheewakarn, q3=Shvedova, q4=Sema).

[Kworb]

Originally Posted by WhoAmI?

someone else had the winner marked down as higher ranked q.

That's allowed??

[iGOAT]

I can't see the image containing the standings .

[Igorche]

Originally Posted by WhoAmI?

There is a rule for this, see

8) If the qualifiers are still unknown when posting your picks you may add them as "Q" or "QUALIFIER". It would be really helpful if you could give each qualifier a number (e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4). This is essential if two qualifiers have to face each other as you will have to specify which qualifier you pick to win (e.g. Q1 def. Q2). If you do not do this, that particular pick will not be counted.

This rule says that we are not required to number the qualifiers but if two qualifiers have to face each other we must mark who is Q1 and who Q2. There is no Q 3,4,5,...

This rule must be changed to avoid similar misunderstandings.

[Equipped]

Originally Posted by Kworb

That's allowed??

No, it is not.

[Hapsara]

Originally Posted by WhoAmI?

Hi
The difference might be because of the qualifier vs qualifier match. Your winner is q2, and since you didn't specify otherwise, I count it as q2=Aoyama (q1=Lertcheewakarn, q3=Shvedova, q4=Sema).

But there's only 1 match involved q and q...and the rules that we have to make wild guess Q1 or Q2...and I thought Q2 was Shvedova

[Buitenzorg]

Thanks for the update WhoAmI

[Monzanator]

The only problem is when two qualifiers face each other. Even when a MD entry meets a qualifier you can pick the latter bu just typing Q or Qualifier (without all the Q3, Q4 stuff). When two qualies meet, it's really all random on how it goes and you must count on pure luck or wait until the qualifiers are placed to pick the truly desired player.

[Equipped]

Originally Posted by Monzanator

The only problem is when two qualifiers face each other. Even when a MD entry meets a qualifier you can pick the latter bu just typing Q or Qualifier (without all the Q3, Q4 stuff). When two qualies meet, it's really all random on how it goes and you must count on pure luck or wait until the qualifiers are placed to pick the truly desired player.

The pure luck is all part of the fun!

[Kworb]

I'm wondering, if Aoyama had won, would you have given points to everyone who only put "Q2"? Cause there would still be the ambiguity there.

[stromatolite]

Oh dear, Vania is on her way out, so I'm screwed