[CL4] Clan League 4 - FINAL

[laughingcavalier]

What bell end American came up with the scoring system where a win is 2 points and a draw is 1 point?

Jimmy Hill got it right...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_points_for_a_win

Take a Jimmy Hill Pedro.

3 points works in the Championship because it makes every team play for the win every time. Clans are doing that anyway. And in these short matches the difference between a 7-5 win and a 6-6 draw might just be a turn or two of bad dice. It seems awful hard for a clan to drop 2 poi
nts because of that.

[josko.ri]

Settings

[*] Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only[/list]

so, are unlimited forts allowed to play in doubles or not?

[WPBRJ]

Settings

• Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only

so, are unlimited forts allowed to play in doubles or not?

Any other questions?

[sherkaner]

Settings

• Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only

so, are unlimited forts allowed to play in doubles or not?

Any other questions?

You could read it like there are only limits on trips and quads, so the question is valid. And while you're not exactly answering the question, I guess unlimited is not allowed in doubles games.

[Teflon Kris]

Unlimited is allowed only on trips and quad games, where a limit of 2 games total per home set applies (at all stages of the tournament).

[Foxglove]

Settings

• Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only

so, are unlimited forts allowed to play in doubles or not?

Any other questions?

Yes - as one of the organizers of this event, can you please be a little more professional and polite (like DJ Teflon) in response to questions from event participants?

[WPBRJ]

Settings

• Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only

so, are unlimited forts allowed to play in doubles or not?

Any other questions?

You could read it like there are only limits on trips and quads, so the question is valid. And while you're not exactly answering the question, I guess unlimited is not allowed in doubles games.

yes you are 100% right but the problem with this is that it is NOT written like there are only limits on trips and quads

it is written like this

Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games ONLY

the only at the end says its only on trips and quads

Read the rule in its entirety and do not just take a piece here and there rearrange them into another sentence and then come to a conclusion that is not there!!!!

[WPBRJ]

Yes - as one of the organizers of this event, can you please be a little more professional and polite (like DJ Teflon) in response to questions from event participants?

as a organizer i was perfectly professional and polite

Most here would have called him a moron or a idiot for repeating the same questions trying to get a different response and when those questions were clearly answered. I did not do any of these things i showed him the rules, he obviously cant figure it out even know the rest of the 900 plus players in this event can understand. i spelled it out for him and lets see if he gets it this time.

[Conchobar]

What bell end American came up with the scoring system where a win is 2 points and a draw is 1 point?

Jimmy Hill got it right...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_points_for_a_win

+1

[Teflon Kris]

What bell end American came up with the scoring system where a win is 2 points and a draw is 1 point?

Jimmy Hill got it right...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_points_for_a_win

+1

+2


It was actually me, a British bell-end.



Any scoring system that involves not having winners and losers for every act in life needs to be gradually introduced into the united-statsian mind. The concept of a draw seems straightforward to us in the rest of the world.

So, we are teaching them slowly. One day, they may be ready for us to change it to 3-points for a win.

[Foxglove]

Yes - as one of the organizers of this event, can you please be a little more professional and polite (like DJ Teflon) in response to questions from event participants?

as a organizer i was perfectly professional and polite

Most here would have called him a moron or a idiot for repeating the same questions trying to get a different response and when those questions were clearly answered. I did not do any of these things i showed him the rules, he obviously cant figure it out even know the rest of the 900 plus players in this event can understand. i spelled it out for him and lets see if he gets it this time.

The wording of the rules was unclear and, as a few people pointed out, could be interpreted in more than one way. You're actually not a very good communicator (apostrophes are useful when you use contractions), so it doesn't surprise me that this is difficult for you to understand.

(If you feel inclined to respond to this message by copying your previous message and increasing your font size, please understand that the words seem the same to me no matter what size you've typed them in, and no matter whether you've chosen to emphasize them with bold or underlined text. Repeating the same words larger or louder [in person] doesn't make them more clear if the problem is one of comprehension.)

[Finsfleet]

Any scoring system that involves not having winners and losers for every act in life needs to be gradually introduced into the united-statsian mind. The concept of a draw seems straightforward to us in the rest of the world.

This might be the best thing I have ever read on this site. Well put.

[WPBRJ]

The wording of the rules was unclear and, as a few people pointed out, could be interpreted in more than one way. You're actually not a very good communicator (apostrophes are useful when you use contractions), so it doesn't surprise me that this is difficult for you to understand.

(If you feel inclined to respond to this message by copying your previous message and increasing your font size, please understand that the words seem the same to me no matter what size you've typed them in, and no matter whether you've chosen to emphasize them with bold or underlined text. Repeating the same words larger or louder [in person] doesn't make them more clear if the problem is one of comprehension.)

The wording of the rule is clear as you possible can make it, as i stated with some one else that used that philosophy if you change the words around in a different order yes its unclear as it stands read it as it is, you cant get any clearer.

Changing font is all i can do to make him read it as it is, its obviously if some one reads and does not get it they need bigger font its a simple rule that is as white and black as you can get it.

Now lets call a spade a spade hes looking for a loop hole and i wont give him that. He knows dam well what the rule is and he does not agree with it and he is trying to catch me in saying some thing that he can turn into his favor. Don't kid yourself most will agree with me they just wont say out loud like i will i have nothing to loose by saying it. You want me out next year fine i don't get anything for running this league except crap from people trying to bend the rules or from people trying to protect there clan mate who are in the wrong.

It don't say anywhere in my contract that i have to be nice to any one but i am, most that know me know full well that i have been nothing more than nice to josko i actually really like the guy i think deep down he cars about the game and i like any one that has a passion for the game.

[freakns]

so instead of writing down simple "unlimited reinforcements are not allowed at all in doubles" you are debating is statement clear or not(and for your information, no its not clear enough... maybe some professor from Harvard would beg to differ but many ppl here are not native english speaker... something you clearly disregard) for last 10 paragraphs... and in the same time you are implying ppl would call Josko an idiot?! interesting...

[Finsfleet]

I`d go with WBPRJ here. The sentence is clear and I think josko`s english is certainly good enough to understand that. Even if it wasn`t, I doubt he wouldn`t know that after we already played 48 games per clan and when several pages are already written about this rule so far.

[WPBRJ]

so instead of writing down simple "unlimited reinforcements are not allowed at all in doubles" you are debating is statement clear or not(and for your information, no its not clear enough... maybe some professor from Harvard would beg to differ but many ppl here are not native english speaker... something you clearly disregard) for last 10 paragraphs... and in the same time you are implying ppl would call Josko an idiot?! interesting...

i expect nothing less than you to disagree with me freak

[WPBRJ]

before some one else wants to stick up for Josko

this stament was pulled form the CLA discution thread on the CL4 and the days leading up to sign ups. josko was a big part of this discusion and this was the last post on the subject and there were no other objection from this point until now!!

i have talked with dj over this and i think we herd enough on the matter there no perfect solution so were going to implement the setting with restrictions

every clan can use it 2 times per round only in trips or quad games this way no one round can be won or lost solely by this setting

this means there can be up to 4 total unlimited games per round

so not sure how we can make it any simple for josko to understand so stop the fishing expedition and lets move on

[MudPuppy]

Now lets call a spade a spade hes looking for a loop hole and i wont give him that. He knows dam well what the rule is and he does not agree with it and he is trying to catch me in saying some thing that he can turn into his favor. Don't kid yourself most will agree with me they just wont say out loud like i will i have nothing to loose by saying it. You want me out next year fine i don't get anything for running this league except crap from people trying to bend the rules or from people trying to protect there clan mate who are in the wrong.

It don't say anywhere in my contract that i have to be nice to any one but i am, most that know me know full well that i have been nothing more than nice to josko i actually really like the guy i think deep down he cars about the game and i like any one that has a passion for the game.

You don't need to be an asshole to not give Josko a loop hole. You repeatedly went out of your way to NOT answer his question.

Josko's question was worded politely and really wasn't that difficult:

I have 2 questions about clarifying the rules, because I am not sure if I understand it correct.

1. "Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only"
I am not sure how this rule applies about using unlimited forts in doubles. There are 2 explanations that I can say about this rule. which one of those explanations is correct?
1.1. "Only" may mean that restrictions applies for triples and quads, but not apply to doubles. That would mean using unlimited forts in doubles is not restricted at all.
or
1.2. "Only" may also mean that allowing maximal 2 games applies only for triples and quads, but not apply to doubles. That would mean using unlimited forts in doubles is not allowed at all.


2. "Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only"
"Championship Matches will be a 41 game clan war involving 8 doubles, 16 triples, and 16 quads. All games to be played in 2 sets - first set will be 16 quad games and 1 tie-breaker game (Random Triples - Esc, Chained, Sunny). The second set will be 8 doubles and 16 triple games."

It is clearly written that in Finals it will be 2 sets, and that 2 games total are allowed per (one) home set. does it mean it will be allowed 4 unlimited home games total, 2 in first set (quads), and 2 in second set (triples)?

The answer to the first question is "1.2." The answer to the second question (which I don't believe you have yet even acknowledged) is "a clan may select a total of 4 unlimited games in the finals (two in each home set). They can be made up of any combination of trip or quad games."

Yet, instead of just answering the question, you chose to play games with him:

Settings

• No Freestyle
• No Speed
• No Manual
• No Nuclear
• Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only

followed by:

Settings

• Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only

Josko already quoted this rule in his request for clarification of the rule. YELLING back the same ambiguous wording that he quoted to you is rude, condescending, and not at all helpful.... This is coming from a player who is not a clan mate or even an acquaintance of Josko; just someone who recognizes when a tournament organizer is going out of his way to NOT be nice to one of the participants in his tourney.

To many folks the rule's intent is clear. However to others, especially those whose first language is not English, it was not. Please just answer the question next time. Thanks to DJ for doing just that.

[sherkaner]

Yep, time to stop that discussion, and hopefully WPBRJ won't see a question as a personal attack next time (that's how I think this happened).

[josko.ri]

Part in red is the official part of this post where I ask organizer to deal with his own rules, the other part is just discussion.

WPBRJ, I do not think I should be supposed to remember what was written 2 months ago in a forum that I do not have access now to check. I think it would be easier for you to write "yes" or "not" instead increasing font and cause unnecesarry discussion for something that is just yes or no question.

As I remember from CLA discussion, the main argument for limit unlimited forts was that this settings is not popular in clan world and very low clans play it. I counted number of games with unlimited forts and with adjacent forts in CL4 Phase 1. It was played 38 games of unlimited forts (even with restriction of max 2 per set), and 19 games with adjacent forts (without any restriction). So I wonder why adjacent forts were not also restricted as number of games per that fort is double lower than number of games per unlimited fort? I remember it was said in CLA under the past discussion that adjacent is used more rarely than unlimited, but nobody cared for that comment and restricted adjacent fort too. The only logical reason I can find is personal bias towards me from organizers because argument "unlimited is not popular settings" more applies (double times more!!!) to "adjacent is not popular settings".

Now when I am sure that I understood the rule correct, I am going to officially report all games where the rule about using unlimited forts in doubles is broken. I request you to deal with your rules now. You wrote horrible rules, now it is your turn to deal with them.

Game 10613516 DBC
Game 10530455 DBC
Game 10441865 DBC
Game 10573949 TOFU
Game 10536626 TOFU
Game 10492889 PIG
Game 10482283 MYTH
Game 10441392 MYTH

so 4 clans are here among the rule breakers, and 2 of them has representatives in CLA Board. In my opinion, if clans which have representatives in CLA Board, which is the highest in clan hierarchy does not know rules and break them, how do you expect that new or lower clans know for rules and not break them?

I will give you my answer to question above: clans are not guilty that rules are terrible, guilty is who wrote such terrible rules. clans played what they enjoy/like and organizers are the ones who chose horrible rules which now may unnecesarry lead to some forfeits. Why not let people enjoy playing what they like? why limit them just because you have personal hating towards me because I always had different opinion than you? so when you had got mighty role where your decision is final, then you chose to be vindictive towards me by limiting settings which I like the most. as I said, if reason for restrict unlimited is its unpopularity, then adjacent should be restricted too as it is way less popular than unlimited, number of games played per each settings proves it. so real reason was NOT unpopularity of unlimited settings, it was personal hatings towards me.

*I do not have any personal hatings by reporting those games. I just searched ALL doubles games with unlimited forts in phase 1 and posted it here, I did not care for name of clans who broke it*

[WPBRJ]

Part in red is the official part of this post where I ask organizer to deal with his own rules, the other part is just discussion.

WPBRJ, I do not think I should be supposed to remember what was written 2 months ago in a forum that I do not have access now to check. I think it would be easier for you to write "yes" or "not" instead increasing font and cause unnecesarry discussion for something that is just yes or no question.

As I remember from CLA discussion, the main argument for limit unlimited forts was that this settings is not popular in clan world and very low clans play it. I counted number of games with unlimited forts and with adjacent forts in CL4 Phase 1. It was played 38 games of unlimited forts (even with restriction of max 2 per set), and 19 games with adjacent forts (without any restriction). So I wonder why adjacent forts were not also restricted as number of games per that fort is double lower than number of games per unlimited fort? I remember it was said in CLA under the past discussion that adjacent is used more rarely than unlimited, but nobody cared for that comment and restricted adjacent fort too. The only logical reason I can find is personal bias towards me from organizers because argument "unlimited is not popular settings" more applies (double times more!!!) to "adjacent is not popular settings".

Now when I am sure that I understood the rule correct, I am going to officially report all games where the rule about using unlimited forts in doubles is broken. I request you to deal with your rules now. You wrote horrible rules, now it is your turn to deal with them.

Game 10613516 DBC
Game 10530455 DBC
Game 10441865 DBC
Game 10573949 TOFU
Game 10536626 TOFU
Game 10492889 PIG
Game 10482283 MYTH
Game 10441392 MYTH

so 4 clans are here among the rule breakers, and 2 of them has representatives in CLA Board. In my opinion, if clans which have representatives in CLA Board, which is the highest in clan hierarchy does not know rules and break them, how do you expect that new or lower clans know for rules and not break them?

I will give you my answer to question above: clans are not guilty that rules are terrible, guilty is who wrote such terrible rules. clans played what they enjoy/like and organizers are the ones who chose horrible rules which now may unnecesarry lead to some forfeits. Why not let people enjoy playing what they like? why limit them just because you have personal hating towards me because I always had different opinion than you? so when you had got mighty role where your decision is final, then you chose to be vindictive towards me by limiting settings which I like the most. as I said, if reason for restrict unlimited is its unpopularity, then adjacent should be restricted too as it is way less popular than unlimited, number of games played per each settings proves it. so real reason was NOT unpopularity of unlimited settings, it was personal hatings towards me.

*I do not have any personal hatings by reporting those games. I just searched ALL doubles games with unlimited forts in phase 1 and posted it here, I did not care for name of clans who broke it*

your right the DD's should have caught these games n ow that i am aware of it we will enforce the rules appropriately the first contact should have never acsepted these games from there players.

[MudPuppy]

your right the DD's should have caught these games n ow that i am aware of it we will enforce the rules appropriately the first contact should have never acsepted these games from there players.

At the risk of asking another clarification question... what are the consequences when a game with invalid settings gets made and played out? I scanned through but missed the part in the rules that designates a penalty for it. I saw the penalty for going over the 2 map limit results in a forfeit and that the penalty for exceeding the maximum player limit results in a draw if that game was won by the offending clan.

What, if any, is the penalty for having requested & won a game with improper game settings?

[MichelSableheart]

I'm expecting that they'll handle it the same they would handle a missed third invite: the clan violating the rule can't win the game for league purposes; if they do win, the game will be declared a draw. I can't find a definite answer in the rules, however.

Any indication on when the divisions for phase 2 will be finalized? Deciding which players play which games against which clans may take some time, and we can't start with that till we are certain who our opponents are.

[Bruceswar]

I would think games in violation would be seen as loses?

[Qwert]

Game 10482283 MYTH
Game 10441392 MYTH
------------------------------
well you have to much rules,so its normal that people can not catch all.
Consider that we win first game against G1,and we lost other game against AKA, if you change these two to opponent win,these will not change anything in final standing.