|
Half Season General Meeting
|
| longshanks |
Posted on 20-01-2010 00:50
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 709
Joined: 07.10.07
|
General Meeting is on 11th Feb at Manor, S Norwood.
Motions to amend rules or constitution have to be in by 31 Jan.
Are there any changes people would like to see brought in?
Edited by longshanks on 20-01-2010 00:52 |
| |
|
|
| The_Saxtonator |
Posted on 20-01-2010 15:57
|
Super Admin
Posts: 348
Joined: 06.10.07
|
I would like to see some kind of award for the best venue. It would be a tricky one to do, as there are several different ways it could be done
1) Best venue per division
2) Best overall venue all divisions
Criteria that could be taken into account
1) Table quality
2) Bar Service
3) Quality of food
Any ideas anyone? I am sure that there would be enough money to pay for this award. Venues work hard to accomodate the league and would be nice for them to have an award to battle for as well in recognition of their hard work |
| |
|
|
| Dogger |
Posted on 20-01-2010 17:05
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 805
Joined: 02.10.07
|
Can we have an award for worst overall venue in the league please? |
| |
|
|
| Blockapocket |
Posted on 20-01-2010 17:13
|
Home From Home
Posts: 374
Joined: 09.09.09
|
Will this be the peak of the stack and rack pile ? crazy. |
| |
|
|
| andye |
Posted on 20-01-2010 17:29
|
Home From Home
Posts: 394
Joined: 02.10.07
|
That's the worst suggestion ive ever heard. It's a pool league not mcdonalds giving out gold stars!
That and it would simply go to the barmaids with the biggest tits!
Cdpl paying for champion of champions entry would be more sensible
|
| |
|
|
| Bink286 |
Posted on 20-01-2010 18:20
|
Getting The Hang Of It
Posts: 38
Joined: 22.06.08
|
I know most of you will probably just laugh at this being a stupid idea but....
If a team is 'reconstituted', at present, unless I'm misunderstanding how it works, the team is new, or deemed new, and starts at the bottom of the league system.
This might be nice from a glory hunting perspective, and 'fun' for the types of people who enjoy belittling lower league opposition, but it's not really a fair representation of what that team is about.
I'd like to suggest that CDPL has a player 'seeding' system which is utilised for valuing such 'new' teams, in order that they be inserted into a more appropriate league befitting their known abilities.
So, if a new pub joins, with players that have never been registered before with CDPL they must start in the lowest division.
However, if a team is reconstituted using 5 registered players from the top division (and only the 'best 5 players' should be of any relevance to such seeding of DNT or NT), then that team should be placed in the top or second) division, taking into account any 'shuffling' required from folding teams.
This might need a revision to the current DNT rules as well, but I'd like to propose that they get amended too, so that all DNT teams are assessed based upon the strength of their players and slotted into a league level appropriate to their previous CDPL experience. Perhaps the rule would be better if that a DNT team of the same players is registered, it could be shuffled down one league as a maximum?
As an add on suggestion to this idea, perhaps CDPL could have a player seeding system in the form of a ladder as well, which could be influenced by all official results, but also permit 'challenges' from players within 3 places of any other player's seeding?
|
| |
|
|
| Shaggy |
Posted on 20-01-2010 18:31
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 888
Joined: 02.10.07
|
It makes perfect sense. There is absoutely no point a team full of old players whose abilities are known to be high should be placed in the lowest divison. Its neither good for them or more importantly the other teams in that divison. However, it cannot be introduced without some thought given to the otehr teams that could be effected.
Your rankings dictate this team are Division 2, however their are no spaces in Div Two as all the teams re-enter. It would be against the current constitution to effectively relegate a team through all hte divisonal pyramid when they were not in an actual relegated position.
It could perhaps be modified so that if their is a natural wastage in a Divison, then a criteria set up for whether a team is shuffled up (not historically worked out as the team S/U'd have to some extent proved they were not good enough to be promoted in the first place, or the new team be put in the Divison with a gap if that is their standard.
Difficult one as team like the Eden and the Hotshots have all gone through the process of going through all the leagues depite eeryone knowing they were Div 1 standard and would get their eventually anyway.
I would doubt that based on history your idea although merited would get much commitee support, and though that isn;t essential it goes a long way to getting stuffed passed.
Oh, and the idea of a ladder had actually been implimented by Marc Bennett for any leagues in Surrey that wanted to administrate it. I think its relatively basic software but nobody actually wanted to take over the task.
Edited by Shaggy on 20-01-2010 18:37
House!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| |
|
|
| Bink286 |
Posted on 20-01-2010 21:20
|
Getting The Hang Of It
Posts: 38
Joined: 22.06.08
|
Thanks for the supportive response.
Every season there is shuffling going on as teams disappear, and a team can be promoted despite not being in a promotion place.
Perhaps the highest 'seeded' 'new team/DNT' could vye for the highest vacant slot alongside the team that would otherwise be shuffled upwards?
Although if a team doesn't finish in a promotable position I don't see the current system as being that equitable as it is allowing teams to promote that didn't earn it.
Perhaps I can get our team secretary to contact yours with a view to being a seconder for any such motion?
I'd like to see a CDPL player-seeding 'ladder' on either the left or right hand side of this website's pages, and I'm pretty sure Mr Saxton has the IT skills to convert the data from official games, although admittedly it would be an additional administrative duty which would either interfere with w*rk or his time on the table!
Perhaps Paul could express an opinion about the workability of such an idea, when he reads this?
Edited by Bink286 on 20-01-2010 21:24 |
| |
|
|
| GrantS |
Posted on 21-01-2010 00:13
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 165
Joined: 18.03.09
|
Am not a secretary but wanted to offer support to your idea - this problem has occurred over the years and never been tackled. Off the top of my head maybe criteria for deciding where to place such a 'new' team could stem from the existing CDPL rankings viewed over say past three seasons - this idea is primarily aimed at the top players who would almost certainly have appeared regularly near the top of the CDPL rankings, just create a formula/table for this e.g. if a new team has over 5 players signed up who made the top 20 over the past 2 of the past 3 seasons then the should go into div 2, 25-50% div 3, etc.? And if 5 players were ranked 20-50 div 3/4, and so on... As for how to go about it if the division they would qualify for based on said citeria is full and has no-one dropping out, don't have any bright ideas, sorry.
As regards committee support, from my time with Pat Flynn's team when he tried proposing rule changes which were I am given to understand effectively torpedoed before any vote took place I would say that is absolutely essential. |
| |
|
|
| andye |
Posted on 21-01-2010 17:33
|
Home From Home
Posts: 394
Joined: 02.10.07
|
The rankings thing is a bit of a nonsense as not everyone takes part in all events
I'm something like 190 wayne is 100+ shaggy is 60 and last year Morray was 350+
so if we joined a new team it would start in the 5th div!
I'm pretty sure we could hold our own there! |
| |
|
|
| Bink286 |
Posted on 21-01-2010 18:47
|
Getting The Hang Of It
Posts: 38
Joined: 22.06.08
|
Cheers for the support GrantS
I see from what andye is saying that there may be issues with the existing player seeding system.
Perhaps the league should take note of the CDPL divisions players have played in (or at least won games in) .
To make it simple for the committee perhaps the following might work?
If you've played 3 or more games in any CDPL top division within the last five years, with a win rate at or above 50% of those games you get a maximum seeding, or 10pts.
If you've played 3 or more games in any CDPL top division within the last five years, with a win rate of below 50% of those games you get a seeding of 9pts.
If you've played 3 or more games in any CDPL 2nd division within the last five years, with a win rate at or above 50% of those games you get a seeding of 8pts.
If you've played 3 or more games in any CDPL 2nd division within the last five years, with a win rate of below 50% of those games you get a seeding of 7pts.
If you've played 3 or more games in any CDPL 3rd division within the last five years, with a win rate at or above 50% of those games you get a seeding of 6pts.
If you've played 3 or more games in any CDPL 3rd division within the last five years, with a win rate of below 50% of those games you get a seeding of 5pts.
If you've played 3 or more games in any CDPL 4th division within the last five years, with a win rate at or above 50% of those games you get a seeding of 4pts.
If you've played 3 or more games in any CDPL 4th division within the last five years, with a win rate of below 50% of those games you get a seeding of 3pts.
If you've played 3 or more games in any CDPL 5th division within the last five years, with a win rate at or above 50% of those games you get a seeding of 2pts.
If you've played 3 or more games in any CDPL 5th division within the last five years, with a win rate of below 50% of those games you get a seeding of 1pt.
Each player for any new team is awarded the points from the highest level he/she is eligible for on the scale above.
The highest rated 5 players are selected and their scores added together.
All new teams scores are then compared and ranked, with the highest being eligible to slot into the highest 'vacated' position provided that their rating is better than that of the team that under existing rules would be eligible to shuffle up into that vacated position.
Only if there are no 'vacated' league positions, do new teams automatically be placed in the bottom division.
Is this workable?
|
| |
|
|
| longshanks |
Posted on 21-01-2010 19:14
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 709
Joined: 07.10.07
|
I think the principle is sound but I think setting a formula is too prescriptive. I would suggest that the Committee be given the discretion to place any new team in a higher division than the bottom one, if they have prior knowledge of the ability of the players registered. |
| |
|
|
| Bink286 |
Posted on 21-01-2010 19:19
|
Getting The Hang Of It
Posts: 38
Joined: 22.06.08
|
longshanks wrote:
I think the principle is sound but I think setting a formula is too prescriptive. I would suggest that the Committee be given the discretion to place any new team in a higher division than the bottom one, if they have prior knowledge of the ability of the players registered.
That would be ideal, but in order to avoid potential accusations of bias, it might be an idea to have a formula which they may then refer to when utilising said discretion.
Obviously, in some cases it will be so blindingly obvious that referring to that formula will not be necessary! |
| |
|
|
| beardy |
Posted on 23-01-2010 15:54
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 50
Joined: 01.04.09
|
You may get support from teams in division 4 with any new motion because as you can see from the league table the untouchables are storming the league. As a view player we have now seen the untouchables win summer and winter leagues by some margin.we are a new team with mostly new players so rightly we start at the bottom and its good to learn the rules and gain experience but its clear untouchables were far better than the other teams and it does spoil it for the other teams because you know very early on you have no chance of winning the league. Its not untouchables fault they are just doing what they have to do and fair play to them but they also get unfair stick from the rest of the teams in the division who are annoyed at getting thumped. I think a rules change allowing common sense would be good for the league. |
| |
|
|
| Teach |
Posted on 23-01-2010 16:34
|
Home From Home
Posts: 484
Joined: 16.10.07
|
I'm still not convinced that this is as big a problem as others seem to think. If the Untouchables are that good, they will only be in that league for one season, and there are still two other spots for others to gain promotion. It is also an opportunity for the other teams to test themselves against 'better' opposition, and possibly learn some things from them (and it is only twice in a season!)
I would put forward a couple of small changes that I hope might be supported by others.
1) I would ask that the divisions be renamed so that the top division becomes the Premier, the next becomes Div 1, etc just like we have in the Thursday singles league. It would give a little more prestige to each division and would make promotion to the Premier even more special!
2) I think the Summer league needs to have a promotion / relegation of three teams, rather than the current two. This would give teams more to play for at the end of the season.
Alternatively, we could bring in a play-offs system where we stick to two teams automatically up / down, but then the next two teams meet in a play-off to decide promotion and relegation. Although this would create some 'pressure' matches, it would liven up the Summer league a little more - particularly towards the end of it! This could be kept to the top three divisions, if the lower leagues are not keen!
Any views / support? |
| |
|
|
| GrantS |
Posted on 23-01-2010 17:42
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 165
Joined: 18.03.09
|
Teach, understand your points but have to disagree. This has happened numerous times over the years and when you do get a team of mainly old hands running away wth a division it isn't much fun for the others, and gives the winners another easy trophy. The point of any league should be fair competition.
Your other ideas sound good to 'jazz things up' - I had one additional suggestion concerning draws for competitions. Maybe they could be made at a local venue where two volunteers from teams could draw names from a 'hat' so anyone can watch if they wish - bit like the FA cup draw? At present we only really meet people from other teams at presentation night and AGMs. Just a thought to drum up more interest. |
| |
|
|
| sly294 |
Posted on 23-01-2010 18:41
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 166
Joined: 02.08.08
|
Teach wrote:
I'm still not convinced that this is as big a problem as others seem to think. If the Untouchables are that good, they will only be in that league for one season, and there are still two other spots for others to gain promotion. It is also an opportunity for the other teams to test themselves against 'better' opposition, and possibly learn some things from them (and it is only twice in a season!)
Teach... STFU n00b,
What are you rambling about ???
Untouchables in my eyes will dominate all divisions till they get to Div 2, and even then i'd bet they make it to Div 1 via promotion place ( 1st - 3rd etc ).
I also hear that 2 Untouchable players have made it through London trials.
Untouchables record in Div 5 (summer and winter) and Div 4 (present) Lost 3 games ??? and 2 of those were at the begining of there first season when we were still getting a team together.
And point earlier about Hotshots and Eden making it throught the divisions..... Untouchables arent far from that standard... and i seems to recall Hotshots winning Div 1 a few times 
If Carlsberg made pool players they would play like me.
Before Snickers 
After Snickers  |
| |
|
|
| sly294 |
Posted on 23-01-2010 19:00
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 166
Joined: 02.08.08
|
The_Saxtonator wrote:
I would like to see some kind of award for the best venue. It would be a tricky one to do, as there are several different ways it could be done
1) Best venue per division
2) Best overall venue all divisions
Criteria that could be taken into account
1) Table quality
2) Bar Service
3) Quality of food
Any ideas anyone? I am sure that there would be enough money to pay for this award. Venues work hard to accomodate the league and would be nice for them to have an award to battle for as well in recognition of their hard work
Paul !!! Great Idea !!!
1, My best Venue is Hurricanes Rooms in Thorton Heath. (For division 4 that is)... They will never Disappoint you in !!! (aslong as u dont expect to get in the venue within 20 mins or expect to get served within 20 mins and expect to play pool/snooker)
Table Quality.....
Has to goto Hurricanes Rooms again !!! awesome tables there, and the rips in cloth, dead cushion are only for show !!!! Did i mention they do rolls ???
Bar Service.....
Please....!!! Hurricanes rooms hands down here !!!!!!!!!
You;ll Never be standing around at the bar waiting to get served !!! (Probably because you;'ll still be outside in the cold buzzing the door to get in !!)
Top Notch service !!!
Quality of food....
Well despite the Cooker upstairs and not in use.. My vote again HURRICANES ROOMS !!!
Why ??? because they give you pizza !!! (does it count if they ordered it ??)
If that dont count you'll be Sh!ting yourself with the Curry certain members of staff brought in !! and if the Sh!ts dont kill ya then there fooking food poising will !!!!
Right well a re-cap....
I vote Hurricane Rooms for my SH!T LIST !!!!!!!!!
And my vote for Venue is........... Cant FINK at mo (you understand that one Nelio LoL)
If Carlsberg made pool players they would play like me.
Before Snickers
After Snickers |
| |
|
|
| longshanks |
Posted on 23-01-2010 19:36
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 709
Joined: 07.10.07
|
Teach wrote:
I'm still not convinced that this is as big a problem as others seem to think. If the Untouchables are that good, they will only be in that league for one season, and there are still two other spots for others to gain promotion. It is also an opportunity for the other teams to test themselves against 'better' opposition, and possibly learn some things from them (and it is only twice in a season!)
I would put forward a couple of small changes that I hope might be supported by others.
1) I would ask that the divisions be renamed so that the top division becomes the Premier, the next becomes Div 1, etc just like we have in the Thursday singles league. It would give a little more prestige to each division and would make promotion to the Premier even more special!
2) I think the Summer league needs to have a promotion / relegation of three teams, rather than the current two. This would give teams more to play for at the end of the season.
Alternatively, we could bring in a play-offs system where we stick to two teams automatically up / down, but then the next two teams meet in a play-off to decide promotion and relegation. Although this would create some 'pressure' matches, it would liven up the Summer league a little more - particularly towards the end of it! This could be kept to the top three divisions, if the lower leagues are not keen!
Any views / support?
I hate all that Premier League and Championship bollox in football, would not like to see it brought in to the Pool League. |
| |
|
|
| Whatapisstake |
Posted on 23-01-2010 22:13
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 521
Joined: 02.12.07
|
beardy .... as u will find u left out the wandering dogs lol.. the untouchables were formed as a new team last summer/winter we have added to our team only because players have left we are doing well in the league so far but there is still along way to go... we look 4ward to the return match at ours p.s we will b using the stop-watch lol...
just on a note things that are said are put on here as mere banter, we do have a moan ref tables but who doesnt i do think a few comments from some of my players are not out to insult teams in div 4, 
am not sticking my acheivements down the list is too long lmao  |
| |
|
