WXV Trade Talk

[RaisyDaisy]

you cant discount the 6 way trade that should have passed it had 13/18 coaches approval and the 5 coaches couldnt even agree on who was losing (except Dublin) and that was a mistake.

When 6 of the 13 are involved in the deal, it's actually a 7-5 result, so just under 50% of the other teams negged it. When there is automatically 6 passes, it can be ignored for the purposes of analyzing the data

3 Fails 6 passes thats a 33% success rate. from your numbers 8.5% of trades failed. even if you add back in my tiny trades I still had 25% failures thats 3-4 times the comp average.

33% fail rate, not success rate. Your success rate is 66% for those 9 trades, and 75% in total. It's not a coincidence that the 3 trades that failed for you all involved Rio

No matter which way we decide to go there will always be the problem of coaches rating trades differently.  This will occur whether even if you have a trade committee to rule. You may have 3/4 different interpretations on a trade amongst the trade committee based on their rating of the trade. We see this in worlds voting by some saying x wins and others saying y wins by too much.
So we need to work out what is the best system going forward recognising the differing opinion of coaches on trades,

When we select the 4 coaches to join Purps, it will be coaches who have shown that they evaluate trades fairly and take all aspects of the guideline into consideration. The worst case scenario can only be a 2-2 tie and then Purps is the decider

Results will be finalized within days, and then having multiple lodgments a week will work fine too

[Ringo]

My opinion for what is worth is that Worlds were the first xv competition established and others have started using different scoring systems and different rules.

As an administrator of another competition and a coach here I can say that the differences in the 2 competitions are one of the reasons i enjoys playing both.  Would hate to see rules aligning to take the fun out of it.

Trading in Worlds in unlimited but unlike the other competitions you have a salary cap to control. 

To me there are couple of things that will improve trading in Worlds and been thinking on this in the current Worlds context.
1) Still have the weekly coaches voting but have an end time of Wednesday midnight. 
2) If 25% of coaches vote to neg a trade (5 against required) then a trades committee look at at and rule.
3) If more than 50% (10 votes) trade automatically rejected.

So we have a trades committee look at trades where 25% - 50% of coaches reject rather than Admin ruling on them. This is not intended to be a slur against Purple who is doing an excellent job but just giving him some assistance in assessing trades that are maybe marginal. Have not trawled the whole thread to see how many of the trades had 5 votes or more against but think it would not be a lot. (Purple may be able to advise)

This is a change to rules though and will have to be voted on as current rules say a vote of 8 trades automatic rejection.

[Levi434]

- Rio seemed to be a soft target, with several of their trades failing always because they were giving up too much and losing - something they can look to improve next year

Nah it's because my roster is so strong that everyone wanted a piece of it!  ;)

But yes I did have 7 trades get rejected however I did have 11 pass. I'll admit that I was probably going overboard trying to improve my best team. But as the period went along I realised that this wasn't the smartest thing to do and looked to fill gaps in my roster instead. Lots of people had to make the same adjustments I'm sure.

[Holz]

you cant discount the 6 way trade that should have passed it had 13/18 coaches approval and the 5 coaches couldnt even agree on who was losing (except Dublin) and that was a mistake.

When 6 of the 13 are involved in the deal, it's actually a 7-5 result, so just under 50% of the other teams negged it. When there is automatically 6 passes, it can be ignored for the purposes of analyzing the data

this is where i strongly disagree.

I still voted on the 6 way trade. I had to evaluate the other parts of the deal just like every other coach did. In fact I told them to fix up parts that didn't involve me at all or I would reject the whole deal. So my vote should have counted just like coaches who werent involved. Like wise there were parts of the deal that other coaches voted on that involved me.

[RaisyDaisy]

you cant discount the 6 way trade that should have passed it had 13/18 coaches approval and the 5 coaches couldnt even agree on who was losing (except Dublin) and that was a mistake.

When 6 of the 13 are involved in the deal, it's actually a 7-5 result, so just under 50% of the other teams negged it. When there is automatically 6 passes, it can be ignored for the purposes of analyzing the data

this is where i strongly disagree.

I still voted on the 6 way trade. I had to evaluate the other parts of the deal just like every other coach did. In fact I told them to fix up parts that didn't involve me at all or I would reject the whole deal. So my vote should have counted just like coaches who werent involved. Like wise there were parts of the deal that other coaches voted on that involved me.

You can continue to just pick parts of what I'm saying, but you're not taking everything on board together as a whole

Instead of spending so much time trying to defend yourself like you feel you need to, take a leaf out of Levi's book and put your hand up and just acknowledge that sometimes you're not right. None of us are, but being able to take on suggestions and other peoples input is something that you should look into doing from time to time, otherwise that chip on your shoulder and "woe is me" attitude is never going to change, and we will just keep going around in circles

I acknowledge that you assessed all parts of the 6 way deal, but that deal is very minor in the grand scheme of this discussion and what the data showed us all

[upthemaidens]

There are a half dozen Comps. why not just join one where the rules suit your preference.   

?? It's just a discussion about how to improve the comp man. If majorirty of coaches don't like the suggestions then it stays the same. No biggy

I understand it's just a discussion, but changing the rules to mimic the other Comps. is a mistake.
  Take AXV as an example, less than half the trades done and barely any activity. Is that what you would like WXV to turn into?

Having Coaches vote on trades creates activity and debate and dare I say interest.

Think that's more to do with more active coaches here and unlimited trade movements imo
Move trades creates more interest. I know we'd be making more trades in AXV if we had more movements, throw in Holz, RD/AK, JRoo, etc in there and it'll make other coaches more active because they have offers thrown at them.

Not trying to mimic other comps at all, just trying to make the best XV comp better :)

This season we doubled the amount of list movements in Asia, but the amount of trades made didn't increase. (In fact I think they may have dropped).
    Now that's a small sample of just one season, but still it should be noted.

[Ricochet]

There are a half dozen Comps. why not just join one where the rules suit your preference.   

?? It's just a discussion about how to improve the comp man. If majorirty of coaches don't like the suggestions then it stays the same. No biggy

I understand it's just a discussion, but changing the rules to mimic the other Comps. is a mistake.
  Take AXV as an example, less than half the trades done and barely any activity. Is that what you would like WXV to turn into?

Having Coaches vote on trades creates activity and debate and dare I say interest.

Think that's more to do with more active coaches here and unlimited trade movements imo
Move trades creates more interest. I know we'd be making more trades in AXV if we had more movements, throw in Holz, RD/AK, JRoo, etc in there and it'll make other coaches more active because they have offers thrown at them.

Not trying to mimic other comps at all, just trying to make the best XV comp better :)

This season we doubled the amount of list movements in Asia, but the amount of trades made didn't increase. (In fact I think they may have dropped).
    Now that's a small sample of just one season, but still it should be noted.

We still used them all :P
this parts pretty important too

throw in Holz, RD/AK, JRoo, etc in there and it'll make other coaches more active because they have offers thrown at them.

Active coaches, breeds more discussion/interest. And we have plenty of them here. I don't think that'll drop off if we take the voting away

[meow meow]

Who would be the chosen 4?

[RaisyDaisy]

My opinion for what is worth is that Worlds were the first xv competition established and others have started using different scoring systems and different rules.

As an administrator of another competition and a coach here I can say that the differences in the 2 competitions are one of the reasons i enjoys playing both.  Would hate to see rules aligning to take the fun out of it.

Trading in Worlds in unlimited but unlike the other competitions you have a salary cap to control. 

To me there are couple of things that will improve trading in Worlds and been thinking on this in the current Worlds context.
1) Still have the weekly coaches voting but have an end time of Wednesday midnight. 
2) If 25% of coaches vote to neg a trade (5 against required) then a trades committee look at at and rule.
3) If more than 50% (10 votes) trade automatically rejected.

So we have a trades committee look at trades where 25% - 50% of coaches reject rather than Admin ruling on them. This is not intended to be a slur against Purple who is doing an excellent job but just giving him some assistance in assessing trades that are maybe marginal. Have not trawled the whole thread to see how many of the trades had 5 votes or more against but think it would not be a lot. (Purple may be able to advise)

This is a change to rules though and will have to be voted on as current rules say a vote of 8 trades automatic rejection.

I think the issue around this has been raised by others previously, in that we cant expect 18 coaches to have their votes in by Wednesday or something along those lines

Also, I'm not sure the double handling is necessary, in that it just drags things out a little longer. When you just have the committee vote, the 5 of them can have them done by Wednesday for sure, and when nothing but a 3-2 result or better is required it will streamline things, and remove the current process of X amount of votes negged, X amount go to Admin etc etc. It's just straight up 3-2 or better, results go out and we move on

Who would be the chosen 4?

I think the two ideas that have been floated so far are that either all 18 teams vote (but cannot vote for themselves) and the Top 4 vote getters are in, or Purps just selects 4 that he believes will form a committee to support him. In the case of Purps selecting, if there is an uproar I guess it could go to a vote, but I would like to think that Purps knows enough about all the coaches that we would back in whoever he selected

[GoLions]

Are assistant coaches allowed to put their hand up?

[Holz]

throw in Holz, RD/AK, JRoo, etc in there and it'll make other coaches more active because they have offers thrown at them.

Active coaches, breeds more discussion/interest. And we have plenty of them here. I don't think that'll drop off if we take the voting away

If anything i have contemplated, just giving up on discussion and just posting my team and reading what purp has to say. This is all because of the rules.

[Holz]

Are assistant coaches allowed to put their hand up?

don't see why not. Just as much a right i say.

however I reckon purp should chose more then it going to a vote.

[Ringo]

My opinion for what is worth is that Worlds were the first xv competition established and others have started using different scoring systems and different rules.

As an administrator of another competition and a coach here I can say that the differences in the 2 competitions are one of the reasons i enjoys playing both.  Would hate to see rules aligning to take the fun out of it.

Trading in Worlds in unlimited but unlike the other competitions you have a salary cap to control. 

To me there are couple of things that will improve trading in Worlds and been thinking on this in the current Worlds context.
1) Still have the weekly coaches voting but have an end time of Wednesday midnight. 
2) If 25% of coaches vote to neg a trade (5 against required) then a trades committee look at at and rule.
3) If more than 50% (10 votes) trade automatically rejected.

So we have a trades committee look at trades where 25% - 50% of coaches reject rather than Admin ruling on them. This is not intended to be a slur against Purple who is doing an excellent job but just giving him some assistance in assessing trades that are maybe marginal. Have not trawled the whole thread to see how many of the trades had 5 votes or more against but think it would not be a lot. (Purple may be able to advise)

This is a change to rules though and will have to be voted on as current rules say a vote of 8 trades automatic rejection.

I think the issue around this has been raised by others previously, in that we cant expect 18 coaches to have their votes in by Wednesday or something along those lines

Surely most coaches would log on once in three days though - Even the stragglers if they know every wednesday is a vote day will log on that day.

[Ricochet]

My opinion for what is worth is that Worlds were the first xv competition established and others have started using different scoring systems and different rules.

As an administrator of another competition and a coach here I can say that the differences in the 2 competitions are one of the reasons i enjoys playing both.  Would hate to see rules aligning to take the fun out of it.

Trading in Worlds in unlimited but unlike the other competitions you have a salary cap to control. 

To me there are couple of things that will improve trading in Worlds and been thinking on this in the current Worlds context.
1) Still have the weekly coaches voting but have an end time of Wednesday midnight. 
2) If 25% of coaches vote to neg a trade (5 against required) then a trades committee look at at and rule.
3) If more than 50% (10 votes) trade automatically rejected.

So we have a trades committee look at trades where 25% - 50% of coaches reject rather than Admin ruling on them. This is not intended to be a slur against Purple who is doing an excellent job but just giving him some assistance in assessing trades that are maybe marginal. Have not trawled the whole thread to see how many of the trades had 5 votes or more against but think it would not be a lot. (Purple may be able to advise)

This is a change to rules though and will have to be voted on as current rules say a vote of 8 trades automatic rejection.

I think the issue around this has been raised by others previously, in that we cant expect 18 coaches to have their votes in by Wednesday or something along those lines

Surely most coaches would log on once in three days though - Even the stragglers if they know every wednesday is a vote day will log on that day.

Yeh my suggestion was more in regards to when trades go out to votes. Say you put a trade in Monday morning, votes go out Sunday night, with a deadline of Wednesday night. That's 9-10 days waiting for a trade to be processed. If it's negged, you fix it that day, then it could be another 7 days before you have a verdict

But if we have trades go out twice a week (say Wed and Sunday), then it'll be too much to ask coaches to submit votes every 3-4 days week in week out.

I think we can find a way to have trades processed quicker. Personally i think a trade committee would help here

[RaisyDaisy]

Surely most coaches would log on once in three days though - Even the stragglers if they know every wednesday is a vote day will log on that day.

This is what I said too Ringo, but then

But if we have trades go out twice a week (say Wed and Sunday), then it'll be too much to ask coaches to submit votes every 3-4 days week in week out.

I think we can find a way to have trades processed quicker. Personally i think a trade committee would help here

Which is a far comment too, so the committee with a Sunday/Wed lodgment should streamline everything