table setting perameters vote

does the present table setting system need to be changed?

yes, allow a table to be set at the host's rating (50pt intervals)
23
58%
no, leave it at -75 ~ -124 pts of the host's rating
17
43%
 
Total votes: 40

User avatar
EzRider
Active Poster
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:44 pm

table setting perameters vote

Post by EzRider » Sat Oct 15, 2005 2:45 am

should the table be set to the minimum (on the 50's) of the table host's rating?

the present system is easily bypassed by setting a table by using a high enough nic to set a desired rating, and then simply having a partner sit at the table while the host leaves and returns with a nic with a rating which compliments the table rating, as opposed to risking staying at the table with a nic 75 to 124 pts above the minimum rating required to sit.

one school of thought would be...if a person could set a table based on a more equal rating to the rating used to set the table....more games would be played, and there would be fewer people sitting idly by in the lobby waiting for a table to be set which challenged their rating.

the present system is prejudicial to the host if he/she choses to sit, as they gamble more points to a loss than they can gain for a win, should the opponents sit with nic's that merely qualify for the table rating

to clarify the question...a yes vote means you would like to see a 1501 nic able to set a 1500 table. as would a 1549. a 1553 nic would set a 1550 rating. a no vote of course means leave things as they are.

so, of course, my vote is yes....plz change this system

EzRider
Last edited by EzRider on Sat Oct 15, 2005 11:59 am, edited 2 times in total.

XAmaltheaX
Active Poster
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 2:50 pm

Post by XAmaltheaX » Sat Oct 15, 2005 3:03 am

Yes.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection

Sterlingchick123
Active Poster
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 3:06 pm
Contact:

Post by Sterlingchick123 » Sat Oct 15, 2005 7:02 am

i'd like to see the ability to set for different intervals:

if you are 1725, you could not only set for 1700, but for 1650, 1600, 1550, etc.

why? because sometimes you just want to attract people to the table and get a game - this is our problem in hearts. it's not so much the risk of losing points, we just want to get a game with people on an equal skill level.
Last edited by Sterlingchick123 on Sat Oct 15, 2005 7:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

Sterlingchick123
Active Poster
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 3:06 pm
Contact:

Post by Sterlingchick123 » Sat Oct 15, 2005 7:04 am

i did vote yes to this. mainly because its become a feature that people have created their own fix for.

why are people voting no? please add your comments to the discussion. 8)

User avatar
American Beauty
Grand Master
Posts: 3163
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 5:57 pm

Post by American Beauty » Sat Oct 15, 2005 2:34 pm

Yes.

:)
Image

The soul suffers when we make it live superficially and so seeks out things of beauty and the profound.

Grace finds beauty in everything.

User avatar
Dust In The Wind
Guide
Posts: 5343
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:29 pm
Location: North Ga Mts

Post by Dust In The Wind » Sat Oct 15, 2005 10:46 pm

I also voted yes, because I feel this would be a good change.

JUST DUST
TO BE OR NOT TO BE..... NOW WHAT KIND OF QUESTION IS THAT??? TO BE OF COURSE!!!!!

User avatar
EzRider
Active Poster
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:44 pm

Post by EzRider » Sun Oct 16, 2005 11:52 am

I dont pretend to understand the points system in hearts or spades

sure would like a post from a nay~sayer tho. if the structure and points systems are different between game formats, then this should be a euchre only poll. the only reason I can even come up with that folks would vote no is...they are a predatory player that needs this host disadvantage to boost their ratings. shed some light folks and leave a comment when you hit the NO button.

EzRider

User avatar
Sassy Katy
Grand Master
Posts: 1807
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 12:22 am
Contact:

Post by Sassy Katy » Sun Oct 16, 2005 2:26 pm

I definitely think it needs to be changed. I voted yes. This may not be the best solution, but better than the current system.
Image

User avatar
x MISSY x
Big Poster
Posts: 608
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 12:00 pm
Contact:

Post by x MISSY x » Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:02 pm

I also said yes!!!
Image

User avatar
Primal Instincts
Grand Master
Posts: 3698
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 12:40 pm
Location: Deep in The Mountains/Wash State/Wyoming

Post by Primal Instincts » Sun Oct 16, 2005 7:49 pm

I voted yes also...
Image
The Wilderness has answers to questions man has not yet learned to ask.

gary
Active Poster
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:16 pm

Post by gary » Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:21 pm

im unsure but i voted no. i think the present system is fine .i do get annoyed wen im 1774 and can only set 1650 i know there are more reasons but my head is not on form tonight i will thgink and add them soon but no keep it the way it is sorry ez

:D

gary
Active Poster
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:16 pm

Post by gary » Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:29 pm

ok im back i dont see much of a difference to be honest it would only leave it harder for low nics eg: 1300s - 1449s to get a decent game

also i know its not nice but wen u host u can kick players if u think they are too low without a vote before game start

and i dont see it creating more games.people just sit in the lobby anyway i dont know y but they dont seem interested in playing dam lobby rats get up my nose when i need 1 lol

and a point was said u can set a high nic for anything in my opinion its silly if u just want a game make a new nic get it established the more nics u have u tend to have 1 for evry rating so y risk ur big points just to have a game when u can have a game anyway with a nic thats better for u at any rating u want

so i still say no i dot see a problem with the present system sozzzz again


:lol:

User avatar
Triscuits
Noob
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:03 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Triscuits » Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:06 pm

I actually don't understand the whole system...I think it's weird and confusing....but I do know that I dis-like the fact that sometimes I have to get stuck with certain people that don't really know how to play and that messes me up cause then if my rating goes down then I can't join certain games with people I like to play with....To me this does not make any sense whatsoever... :roll:
All that we see or seen is but a dream within a dream.~Edgar Allen Poe

Red Red_ Wine
Active Poster
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:51 pm

Post by Red Red_ Wine » Thu Oct 27, 2005 10:08 pm

Triscuits wrote:I actually don't understand the whole system...I think it's weird and confusing....but I do know that I dis-like the fact that sometimes I have to get stuck with certain people that don't really know how to play and that messes me up cause then if my rating goes down then I can't join certain games with people I like to play with....To me this does not make any sense whatsoever... :roll:
Try, yesterday I had a P who will never learn to play well, she had a rating in the 1400's, she had played nearly 4000 games here and lost almost 3000 of them but I would like to reserve her right to keep playing. She obviously enjoys playing win or lose. These are the nice people.
Enjoy life

User avatar
Triscuits
Noob
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:03 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Triscuits » Fri Oct 28, 2005 1:56 pm

That is very true Red! I agree. If you pay, you should play! :mrgreen:
All that we see or seen is but a dream within a dream.~Edgar Allen Poe

Post Reply