WXV Discussion

[Ricochet]

I don't necessarily want to change to voting process in regards to passing/negging, just want it to be done quicker. NO other comp has to wait 7-10 days to find out the results of trades each week.


Also on those stats Daz, if we were looking into it like that we should look at how many passed/failed when they attracted 2+ votes? Because most trades are so simple or insignificant that they will never attract votes


But that's not my issue, my concern is the time it takes to get an answer on trades :)

[DazBurg]

I don't necessarily want to change to voting process in regards to passing/negging, just want it to be done quicker. NO other comp has to wait 7-10 days to find out the results of trades each week.


Also on those stats Daz, if we were looking into it like that we should look at how many passed/failed when they attracted 2+ votes? Because most trades are so simple or insignificant that they will never attract votes


But that's not my issue, my concern is the time it takes to get an answer on trades :)

i know your was to the time frame Rico
wasn't directing at anyone individually just as a collective for any that has thoughts the system is wrong even slight doubts

yeah i see what you mean with the vote part but then my point about we should be happy espeically with unlimted movements hence ofc some will be negged is this
if we applied Euro's 10 player movements rule (they have admin pass rights which nothing agianst you here holz i'm just saying with unlimited movements ofc a lot more will get rejected and righly so)

New Delhi would of had trades
2, 3, 7, 19, 12 pass but 10 movements would be reached so trades
17, 22, 49, 53, 54, 60, 61, 64, 67, 71, 75, 79, 86, 97, 104, 105 (also trades 41, 72, 92, but they failed anyways)
auto fail too many movements

now i know that is not our system but my point here is in a restricted movement comp (which i'm not voting for i like a free for all) but there are less amount of trades meaning a lot less complaints about rejections New Delhi got to do 5 trades

with our system they got 21 trades  that all passed and 3 that failed

so
24 trades
3 fails
of the total 13 failed for the entire period
but with a more restricted movement (again using euro's just as an example)

24 trades
5 pass
rest over movement limit

ofc i know no one would then do 24 trades but those 3 rejections came after the initial 5 so now it looks like 5 done 5 passed no rejections no complaints ;)

if your not using movements to control the trading then voting needs to imo

[Purple 77]

2014:

Moscow trade: Callum Sinclair and 4th Round Pick
London trade: Joe Daniher

failed - Sinclair was not worth JoeD

NDT give: N5
Christchurch give: TAdams

failed - adams was not worth pick 5

New York give: Mark Blicavs and Darcy Lang
Cape Town give: Nathan Vardy and Jamie Bennell

-pass

Christchurch trade: pick 92
New York trade: Shaun McKernan

-pass

Mexico City give: Zak Jones
Berlin give: Leigh Montagna

-pass

PNL Trade: #15 + Liam Jones + Tyson Goldsack + Xavier Richards
Dillos Trade: Dane Swan + #58

-pass

Mexico City give: Bryce Gibbs, Aaron Sandilands
Christchurch give: Tom Rockliff, James Sicily

-pass

Irrelevant point IMO. No matter what process it is, there will always be mistakes.

[DazBurg]

2014:

Moscow trade: Callum Sinclair and 4th Round Pick
London trade: Joe Daniher

failed - Sinclair was not worth JoeD

NDT give: N5
Christchurch give: TAdams

failed - adams was not worth pick 5

New York give: Mark Blicavs and Darcy Lang
Cape Town give: Nathan Vardy and Jamie Bennell

-pass

Christchurch trade: pick 92
New York trade: Shaun McKernan

-pass

Mexico City give: Zak Jones
Berlin give: Leigh Montagna

-pass

PNL Trade: #15 + Liam Jones + Tyson Goldsack + Xavier Richards
Dillos Trade: Dane Swan + #58

-pass

Mexico City give: Bryce Gibbs, Aaron Sandilands
Christchurch give: Tom Rockliff, James Sicily

-pass

hindsight is a wonderful thing isn't it if you want to use hindsight then

Trade 14
Cape Town trade: Tom Hawkins
New York trade: Andrew Gaff and Pick 8

rejected (your prefer this passes?)

Wellington gives: Alex Rance and Brandon Ellis
Wellington receives: Pick 1 and Adam Schneider

Dublin gives: Picks 1, 56 and 74, Scott D. Thompson and Adam Schneider
Dublin receives: Travis Boak, Brandon Ellis and Alex Rance

Buenos Aires gives: Travis Boak
Buenos Aires receives: Picks 56 & 74, Scott D. Thompson

passed (back then ok with hindsight wellington and Buenos Aires were ripped off)

[Ricochet]

Purp do you think a dual-weekly voting process or even an unstructured voting process could work??

[Purple 77]

Purp do you think a dual-weekly voting process or even an unstructured voting process could work??

Aw. It would be gosh darn messy. And I wouldn't have the right to penalise those who don't vote in time.

We could always trial it out maybe in the first week or two, and see if it works?

[Holz]

I don't necessarily want to change to voting process in regards to passing/negging, just want it to be done quicker. NO other comp has to wait 7-10 days to find out the results of trades each week.


Also on those stats Daz, if we were looking into it like that we should look at how many passed/failed when they attracted 2+ votes? Because most trades are so simple or insignificant that they will never attract votes


But that's not my issue, my concern is the time it takes to get an answer on trades :)

i know your was to the time frame Rico
wasn't directing at anyone individually just as a collective for any that has thoughts the system is wrong even slight doubts

yeah i see what you mean with the vote part but then my point about we should be happy espeically with unlimted movements hence ofc some will be negged is this
if we applied Euro's 10 player movements rule (they have admin pass rights which nothing agianst you here holz i'm just saying with unlimited movements ofc a lot more will get rejected and righly so)

New Delhi would of had trades
2, 3, 7, 19, 12 pass but 10 movements would be reached so trades
17, 22, 49, 53, 54, 60, 61, 64, 67, 71, 75, 79, 86, 97, 104, 105 (also trades 41, 72, 92, but they failed anyways)
auto fail too many movements

now i know that is not our system but my point here is in a restricted movement comp (which i'm not voting for i like a free for all) but there are less amount of trades meaning a lot less complaints about rejections New Delhi got to do 5 trades

with our system they got 21 trades  that all passed and 3 that failed

so
24 trades
3 fails
of the total 13 failed for the entire period
but with a more restricted movement (again using euro's just as an example)

24 trades
5 pass
rest over movement limit

ofc i know no one would then do 24 trades but those 3 rejections came after the initial 5 so now it looks like 5 done 5 passed no rejections no complaints ;)

if your not using movements to control the trading then voting needs to imo

reason behind my system:

1. admin along with committee means trades can be reviewed within 1-2 days
2. admin along with committee means can negotiate one on one with the coach winning too much to make a deal fair.
3. trade movement means teams have a resemblance of structure, teams changing from one structure to another too quickly has been the cause of basically every struggling team.
4. trade movement also creates a sense of loyalty with no huge turnovers.

[Ricochet]

Purp do you think a dual-weekly voting process or even an unstructured voting process could work??

Aw. It would be gosh darn messy. And I wouldn't have the right to penalise those who don't vote in time.

We could always trial it out maybe in the first week or two, and see if it works?

Yeh that would be cool if we could. I reckon we have enough active coaches to try it anyway

[DazBurg]

I don't necessarily want to change to voting process in regards to passing/negging, just want it to be done quicker. NO other comp has to wait 7-10 days to find out the results of trades each week.


Also on those stats Daz, if we were looking into it like that we should look at how many passed/failed when they attracted 2+ votes? Because most trades are so simple or insignificant that they will never attract votes


But that's not my issue, my concern is the time it takes to get an answer on trades :)

i know your was to the time frame Rico
wasn't directing at anyone individually just as a collective for any that has thoughts the system is wrong even slight doubts

yeah i see what you mean with the vote part but then my point about we should be happy espeically with unlimted movements hence ofc some will be negged is this
if we applied Euro's 10 player movements rule (they have admin pass rights which nothing agianst you here holz i'm just saying with unlimited movements ofc a lot more will get rejected and righly so)

New Delhi would of had trades
2, 3, 7, 19, 12 pass but 10 movements would be reached so trades
17, 22, 49, 53, 54, 60, 61, 64, 67, 71, 75, 79, 86, 97, 104, 105 (also trades 41, 72, 92, but they failed anyways)
auto fail too many movements

now i know that is not our system but my point here is in a restricted movement comp (which i'm not voting for i like a free for all) but there are less amount of trades meaning a lot less complaints about rejections New Delhi got to do 5 trades

with our system they got 21 trades  that all passed and 3 that failed

so
24 trades
3 fails
of the total 13 failed for the entire period
but with a more restricted movement (again using euro's just as an example)

24 trades
5 pass
rest over movement limit

ofc i know no one would then do 24 trades but those 3 rejections came after the initial 5 so now it looks like 5 done 5 passed no rejections no complaints ;)

if your not using movements to control the trading then voting needs to imo

reason behind my system:

1. admin along with committee means trades can be reviewed within 1-2 days
2. admin along with committee means can negotiate one on one with the coach winning too much to make a deal fair.
3. trade movement means teams have a resemblance of structure, teams changing from one structure to another too quickly has been the cause of basically every struggling team.
4. trade movement also creates a sense of loyalty with no huge turnovers.

points 3 & 4 i agree with you completely was never having a go at that system just showing how it wuld look n WCv's

i think an average of 111 trades every off season is 1. more  then enough (well not really realistic at all though is it)


but again if you were to use a committee
would it be made up of current WXV coaches?
if so when they pass or reject trades why do they have a say over the rest

(i know because there chosen but my point i'm trying to say)
if the problem is that too many reject and too many pass

isn't that what your post before was about if we cannot trust the coaches already should they be coaching?

(i.e if you think the way some value players is wrong or look at trades is wrong do you doubt there ability to have a team then? )

then when one is rejected will ppl not complain?

[Holz]

but again if you were to use a committee
would it be made up of current WXV coaches?
if so when they pass or reject trades why do they have a say over the rest

(i know because there chosen but my point i'm trying to say)
if the problem is that too many reject and too many pass

isn't that what your post before was about if we cannot trust the coaches already should they be coaching?

(i.e if you think the way some value players is wrong or look at trades is wrong do you doubt there ability to have a team then? )

then when one is rejected will ppl not complain?

in the euro I actually dont have a formal committee. I have about 5-6 people I trust and most of them are active so i either jump on chat on send a PM if im unsure of a trade I normally get a response. Not everyone is in the euro but everyone I speak too knows DT. I put alot of effort into looking at trades myself, I read reports from a few sources to get an informed decision, analyse the numbers etc..  this is on the 10% of trades i think are quetionable or if anyone PMs me.

[Ringo]

As I have said before no system is perfect and we have to work with whatever system we agree with.

My opinion for the 8 votes against trade auto fails is that taking out the 2 or more coaches involved if vote against then 50% of coaches remaining are against the trade so by democracy should be rejected. Conversely imo if less than 1/3 of coaches reject a trade it should auto pass with admin only ruling on the so called grey area trades  between 33% and 50%,

Regarding twice weekly voting would also like to trial if not too cumbersome. If coaches no there are 2 per week then they will make the effort. As a query Purps how many times during the season did we not have all coaches voting by Wednesday.  So my suggestion for a trial Votes sent each Monday and Thursday with cut off times Wednesday and Sunday. May have to tweak a little to allow renegotiations.

Interestingly when we look at the stats only 11% actually fail so are we putting to much effort into refining a system that has minimal trade fails.

[DazBurg]

but again if you were to use a committee
would it be made up of current WXV coaches?
if so when they pass or reject trades why do they have a say over the rest

(i know because there chosen but my point i'm trying to say)
if the problem is that too many reject and too many pass

isn't that what your post before was about if we cannot trust the coaches already should they be coaching?

(i.e if you think the way some value players is wrong or look at trades is wrong do you doubt there ability to have a team then? )

then when one is rejected will ppl not complain?

in the euro I actually dont have a formal committee. I have about 5-6 people I trust and most of them are active so i either jump on chat on send a PM if im unsure of a trade I normally get a response. Not everyone is in the euro but everyone I speak too knows DT. I put alot of effort into looking at trades myself, I read reports from a few sources to get an informed decision, analyse the numbers etc..  this is on the 10% of trades i think are questionable or if anyone PMs me.

and that is a great job you do in euro's
but in WXV's if we were to make a committee
what is to stop complaints when they have made a decision?
what makes it different to now
(i see in term of turn around it will be quicker by i'm referring to the overall satisfaction of the outcome in regards to rejection of trades)


(* enjoy the discussion we have going here i'm on my last day off after having the week off and your doing a fantastic job of giving me some good discussion and awesome reading and overall something to pass the time ;) )

[Ringo]

We have a trade committee in British and still get complaints Daz so i think whatever system you use there will always be complaints.  Basically it is human nature with people being upset at rulings against them.

[DazBurg]

We have a trade committee in British and still get complaints Daz so i think whatever system you use there will always be complaints.  Basically it is human nature with people being upset at rulings against them.

this is what i was getting at
our system is fine not that many rejections tbh
ofc certain trades can look dodgy with hindsight we can agree for either side using hindsight

but changing the way there will still be complaints no matter what
i think it is fine the way it is and good all comps have there own way to make them unique

[Holz]

but again if you were to use a committee
would it be made up of current WXV coaches?
if so when they pass or reject trades why do they have a say over the rest

(i know because there chosen but my point i'm trying to say)
if the problem is that too many reject and too many pass

isn't that what your post before was about if we cannot trust the coaches already should they be coaching?

(i.e if you think the way some value players is wrong or look at trades is wrong do you doubt there ability to have a team then? )

then when one is rejected will ppl not complain?

in the euro I actually dont have a formal committee. I have about 5-6 people I trust and most of them are active so i either jump on chat on send a PM if im unsure of a trade I normally get a response. Not everyone is in the euro but everyone I speak too knows DT. I put alot of effort into looking at trades myself, I read reports from a few sources to get an informed decision, analyse the numbers etc..  this is on the 10% of trades i think are questionable or if anyone PMs me.

and that is a great job you do in euro's
but in WXV's if we were to make a committee
what is to stop complaints when they have made a decision?
what makes it different to now
(i see in term of turn around it will be quicker by i'm referring to the overall satisfaction of the outcome in regards to rejection of trades)


(* enjoy the discussion we have going here i'm on my last day off after having the week off and your doing a fantastic job of giving me some good discussion and awesome reading and overall something to pass the time ;) )

we can negotiate it though. the frustrating thing is 4 people think you won 4 people think you lost now negotiate. I have had quite a few times when i had no clue what i needed to do to get it passed.

in my system if its 2 v 2 then i pass the trade if its say 4 v 1 then i talk to the winning team to negotiate and normally we get it done in a few PMs.

I do get complaints by the way via PM but i discuss it as its not 18 peoples opinion i need to juggle its just a few.

thats the big difference.

I personally actually dont complain if a trade is rejected with say 7 say im winning by too much (ok i do but not much)

i complain when i get the 4 wins 4 loss stuff and then frustrated that i cant fix it.