|July 4, 2008|
|Ratings; to move up or down or stay where your at, a comfort zone as it were.|
If there is a guide for this I did not find it.
There should be a published "schedule" or means by which teams (players) can gauge where they will be should they win or loose by any magic number and for a number of times during a specific period of time or number of tournaments. Also, depending on the type of tournament, Qualifier, Regional or any "RING" tournament, and the TOC, "Best of the Best".
Maybe give the tournaments a score factor, for 1st and 2nd, (only those, because far too many tournaments only have two teams that count for their division\age) each different type...example, Qualifier say 3 points, to win, 2 points for 2nd place. Any Ring tournament (except the TOC) will get you 7 points for a 1st place, 5 points for 2nd. A TOC win will earn you 15 points, and for 2nd 10 points.
Lets use 20 as a number for a move up...Should you only win qualifiers that allows for around 7 tournament wins depending on which they were in. I feel that is a lot without a move. Mix the tournament around and you still have roughly 4-5 tournaments and with the TOC at the end of it all a win there shouldn't matter you earned it. Move on and UP.
The opposite (loosing) should also apply. Maybe here it should be by a runs given up differential. On Equal playing and age levels, Nothing that was like say a 50 AA playing a 55AAA team. If you keep on getting beat by large numbers, say 8 or more This way the 5 run add ons and such should not become a factor in the game. You didn't show up for the game. Since scores are both very lopsided and close and teams Perhaps a large number of 250 runs might work. don't forget this is a total runs differential. So it won't be any time soon before you get dropped down.
another way might be by number of games (30) or tournaments lost (6), a 4th place finish or lower. Down you go.
As for a time frame, it would have to be from TOC to TOC. In reality a team could be moved up or down more than once within this time depending on amount they play.
Just a thought on something that could be used to gauge a team with, & not intended for the Plus team divisions, they have their own agenda.
|July 4, 2008|
|the problem is there are to many factores involed, like how the tourny is run, no slaughter rule etc, the other teams missing players, etc, your team playing over there heads, to me the difference between aa and aaa is that you do this stuff on a consitance bases, over a period of time|
|July 5, 2008|
|Those outside factors as you put it are another subject, (like dealing with the wind while hitting or pitching when the original problem might have been balls) what this was about is a way to standardize 'when' a team should 'count on' being mover up or down...To avoid the posts on "Why did we or they get moved or team X won Y number of tournaments and is still where they are. But yet we, team W only won this one or that one, yet we were moved..."|
I could not find any documents on this, maybe i missed it, but there should be a something that can be referred to so there is little doubt as to the reason...Like the rule boos being on line. Something which really need a better editing job.
SSUSA does not use the mercy rule like some other Assn's do. For myself, I like it that way. Again another subject.
My post here is something to think about sharing ideas about the when and why a team may be moved. I have no connection with any Assn. other that playing in them. I didn't carve out a stone tablet and say here it is boys, but did try to throw out an idea that is close to what I think is a reasonable time frame on the ups or down moves.
But with the complaints on why did or why didn't so and so get moved, and your the only one who took the time to post out of 175 that opened the thread. It seems to me that some are either afraid to get involved or do not want to be labeled as a trouble maker. Guess where I am. lol.
Good things have happened by voicing thoughts, most others are ignored. But unless you try you know nothing is going to happen.
Consistency might only come from a written out document. Sort of a checks and balances as it were.
People want changes, but do not vote, post ideas or get involved, Why not.
|July 5, 2008|
|The orginiations dictate what is happening players have no voice|
They all have different size home plates
to acomplish the same things.
In our teams case a new 70's team we were rated
Majors right out of the box
We were 2 wins 4 losses at our first tournament
against AAA teams
You could conclude there were some underrated AAA teams or we could have mistakenly been rated Majors.
Believe me the only person you could talk to is the person in the sky or a stick.
70's teams getting rated Majors come on !!!
A Minneapolis team moved from the 65's where they were rated majors to the 70's bracket
This team has won some Maor tournaments
They were given a Tripe AAA rating.
There couldn't have been some favoritism or
possibly somebody made a mistake
New teams should always have to prove they are Majors
|July 5, 2008|
|Taits, maybe we/they are trying to get things fixed through the appeal process before airing our opinions on this board.|
|July 5, 2008|
1. This thread is not about those you are speaking about.
2. But... I think for at least SSUSA, new teams with less than 6 or 7 players form a previous, younger team, moving to an older aged team bracket has to start out at the AAA level...
3. True, far too many in consistencies between the different Assns.
4. Perhaps gathering numbers like the Plus teams have done will work your concerns and I'm sure others have the same views on.
5. I'm sure many teams are on both of the fence... underrated as well as overrated.
6. The "person in the sky" does reply, but in his own time and in his own way... One may or may not like how he decides to answer a request.
7. I'd favor the favoritism call on that one...
Should you want to reply back please reply ONLY about the system I proposed or START another thread. I'd gladly reply there as well. This way we can focus on one thought at a time. My senior "mind' get confused....
As for R-bob's stuff off subject but...
I'd agree to that. As it should me. There should also be a document that can be viewed, like the rule book so one may know going into the process if they have a case or not. Something in black and white is easier to decipher than a verbiage over the phone or even in person. Words can change in speech, a written text is there to go back to.
I just think reading is easier than hearing. Providing your not illiterate, and\or deaf.
Down sides are written words incorrectly done, like many in the rule book, or spoken words miss interpreted. miss understood.
My thoughts only... ?
to reply or add to a discussion or post your own message and start a new discussion. If you don't have a message board account,
. It will only take a moment.