? about Sandbagging
Sherry
Hi,
I am hoping that someone can offer some advice to me.
On Wednesday nights, I play in a C doubles league. The team cap is a
7. Individual cap is (I think) 5.
Last night, my team played a team with a temporary rated 5 and a
temporary rated 2.
On one 501 game, the 2 was down to 40 in the 4th round. His average
was around 3.0 on cricket, and 150 on 501. I don't think he is
sandbagging, I just think that he was rated wrong to begin with.
His team has beat every other team on average of 11 games to 2 games.
No one else is willing to say anything about this guy or his team. The
only comment that I could get out of anyone was "Well, he'll wind up
busting their team." I understand that, but I don't see the point in
waiting until late in the season to do that - plus it would be unfair to
his teammate, who is a solid 5 (he's not sandbagging in the least).
I feel like shit since I am the only one who seems to be majorly
complaining about the situation. I play darts to have fun. In a
tournament I might expect to get my ass kicked, but not in a league.
The way that I wound up feeling last night was totally humiliated. I
mean none of our games were even close. I felt like we may as well of
not showed up - at least then we might have gotten some games out of it.
I guess that what I am looking for is some advice about what to do. I
am unsure about whether I should call Medalist and put in a request for
a rating review on him, or just let the whole thing go (hoping that
their team will bust before I have to play them again). I already
complained to our operator, and she was the one with the comment about
him busting their team.
Well, any comments or suggestions will be appreciated.
Thanks,
Sherry
Konrad Vandegaer
On Thu, 24 Oct 1996, Sherry wrote:
[stuff about sandbagging in what I assume is a handicap league]
That situation is why I won't participate in a handicap league.
In our regular steel-tip league we play head-up darts and our
teams are divided into divisions according to the average skill
of their players. For a couple of seasons some of our shooters
participated in the Bud Light league. I heard more about how
people were trying to keep down their averages than who won what.
BLL supposedly has a rule against sandbagging but I never heard of
it being enforced. There were just as many arguments, like Sherry's,
as there are about who belongs in what division in our league. That
being the case I'll go with head-up play because I don't see the
advantage to anyone if people are purposely throwing darts away.
Sorry, this post probably doesn't help you at all, Sherry, but I had
to get this off my chest.
Konrad
bounc...@contessa.phone.net
In <326FA0...@earthlink.net>, Sherry <sher...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> I guess that what I am looking for is some advice about what to do.
I'm playing Medallist as well, but have never run into this kind of
problem. I wouldn't do anything about it. If he really did sandbag
heavily instead of having a an off night (I'm a 7, but there are
nights I've thrown like a 2), then a rerate won't do anything but
generate bad feelings all around. A real rerate will just bust the
team on points now instead of later anyway.
You might consider talking to his teammate, to see what he thinks of
the matter. Since that could also generate a lot of bad feelings, do
it carefully.
<mike
--
Do NOT reply to the address in the From: header. Reply to
m...@contessa.phone.net instead. You have been warned.
John Fereira
In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.96102...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Konrad Vandegaer <kon...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> writes:
>
>
>On Thu, 24 Oct 1996, Sherry wrote:
>[stuff about sandbagging in what I assume is a handicap league]
>
>That situation is why I won't participate in a handicap league.
>In our regular steel-tip league we play head-up darts and our
>teams are divided into divisions according to the average skill
>of their players.
Who defines the skill of the players and how is it done? Can not
a player that should be playing in the "A" division play in the "B"
and play just well enough to win but keep their stats down? The
thing about sandbaggins is that the better player you really are
the easier it is to sandbag. A real good player can miss close and
make it look like they are trying real hard.
> For a couple of seasons some of our shooters
>participated in the Bud Light league. I heard more about how
>people were trying to keep down their averages than who won what.
>BLL supposedly has a rule against sandbagging but I never heard of
>it being enforced.
I have. At the second annual National Championship tournament a player
was kicked out of the tournament and league for sandbagging. His average
went up 10 points during the tournament. The sanction took effect just
after they had won a semi-final match and the other team ended up
competing in the finals for that event.
--
John Fereira
fer...@isis.com
Isis Distributed Systems - Ithaca, NY
John Fereira
In article <19961026.7...@contessa.phone.net> bounc...@contessa.phone.net writes:
>In <Pine.SOL.3.91.96102...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>, Konrad Vandegaer <kon...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> wrote:
>> That situation is why I won't participate in a handicap league.
>
>rated. A team has to meet certain rating requirements, but the
>matches are head-up.
I've played in the Bud Light League (about four seasons), The Medalist
League two seasons, and lots of non-handicapped leagues. Sandbagging
was most blatant, by far, in the BLDL. That was several years ago
however, and I understand that there are some new rules which handle
it a little better. I really didn't see much of the way of sandbagging
in the Medalist league.
bounc...@contessa.phone.net
In <Pine.SOL.3.91.96102...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>, Konrad Vandegaer <kon...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> wrote:
> That situation is why I won't participate in a handicap league.
I'm playing in the same league as Sherry. It's not handicapped, it's
rated. A team has to meet certain rating requirements, but the
matches are head-up.
> In our regular steel-tip league we play head-up darts and our
> teams are divided into divisions according to the average skill
> of their players.
Sounds like what we do, except there is a formal process for rating a
players skill, and teams then have to meet the rating requirements to
play in a division. These requirements keep a team from being to
strong for the division it's in. The players desire to actually have a
chance keep a team from being to weak for the division it's in.
Sherry's is the only case I've ever heard of where the system wasn't
working. But the rules deal with it - the team won't be eligible for
finals, because the 2 will be upped by enough points to bust them.
Next season, he'll have a much higher rating, and will wind up
shooting with people playing nearer his level.
> For a couple of seasons some of our shooters
> participated in the Bud Light league. I heard more about how
> people were trying to keep down their averages than who won what.
I don't hear much about that. There are a few players who shoot over
their ratings - but not by enough to distort the division. They'll be
rerated next season based on how well they threw in match play last
season, and the problem will go away.
> BLL supposedly has a rule against sandbagging but I never heard of
> it being enforced. There were just as many arguments, like Sherry's,
> as there are about who belongs in what division in our league. That
> being the case I'll go with head-up play because I don't see the
> advantage to anyone if people are purposely throwing darts away.
Yuch. Sounds bad to me.
Sherry
Me again,
I guess I did not quite make my point.
I don't mind being beaten by someone who is better than I am at all.
That is not what I was talking about.
What I was talking about is getting beaten by a team of people. One
player is the highest that he can be and play in our division, the other
is actually playing better than him - even though he is rated the same
as I am.
Let me give someone out there who might understand medalist ratings an
idea of what I am talking about. I am a 2, my teammate is a 4. The guy
I am complaining about is rated a 2 but throwing more like a 7 (at
least). His partner is rated a 5 - and he is improving slightly and
might be a 6 by the end of the season.
If you add up those team points, you should get my point. While my
team is a 6 (the team cap is a 7), the other team is throwing like a
12. That is more of an "B" league rating, not "C doubles" which is what
we are playing. These guys are throwing at least twice as well as the
other teams that they are playing.
And, contrary to what so many of you guys seem to think, I am not
complaining about losing to a better player. What my original question
related to was whether I should bring the matter to the league's
attention.
I myself have been playing in Medalist leagues for 4 years - so I am
not new to this, but anyone who is new to our league might get
discouraged. And, personally, I can't say that I would blame them. Why
would you want to play something where there is no chance in Hell that
you are going to win much more than 2 out of 13 games.
For those of you who don't know about Medalist leagues (which by the
sounds there are a lot of you). Medalist rates it's players so that
they are playing with people who are better than they are (normally),
but so that you don't go to play each week and get the pants kicked off
of you. Yes, it is normally fine to have one really good player, but
they try to compensate by putting that person with someone who is lower
so that the situation that I am currently talking about doesn't happen.
I guess that somehow or other I am not making my point come across.
The one person who replied to my earlier post who was in a Medalist
league seemed to understand - but those of you who aren't in a Medalist
league don't seem to understand what I am talking about. :(
It seems that in this newsgroup, I should just let the matter drop. I
was looking for advice about talking to my League office, not personal
comments about my not being able to handle losing (which is not the
problem at all).
Sherry
TONGINTL
I'm a steel-tip thrower in the Minute Man Dart League, and I'm a little
confused about this thread. I am assuming (please correct me) that your
league has a handicapping system to ensure fair competition among
similarly skilled players.
In our league it is quite common to find players in lower divisions who do
not belong there and subsequently whomp the competition. There always
seems to be one team in every 9-team division that has 2-3 "Super A" (the
pro-level) shooters who haven't thrown in 2 years thus end up as far down
as the F division.
The usual way this is met is with a shoulder shrug. Sure, these players
don't belong, but personally, I relish playing and watching superior
shooters. There is nothing I find more motivating to improve than to get
my butt totally kicked and get a glimpse of what true darts excellence
really is.
Someone mentioned something about leagues being "for fun". I agree with
this, but I've also been chastised for trying to win, which is totally
unhealthy for any sport. I'm not obsessed with winning, but I will point
voraciously in cricket because I've lost many times before simply for not
getting enough points to protect my lead. Some people think pointing
beyond 25 pts is excessive and many people complain, "this is supposed to
be fun, what are you pointing so much for?", but cork-laden comebacks are
far from rare in cricket. Sports are far less fun when you lose. Where
do you draw the line?
You could also argue that there should be more achievable "all-star"
points (the things you get patches and plaques for) for the lower
divisions. Some people will throw league all their life and never T-80,
but they'll come close often. If their level of accomplishments (things
like T40s or R06s) aren't recognized, will folks become more likely to
quit from frustration since they can't reach the higher level? I recently
shot an 8-dart DIDO 301 game, but that's not covered either.
Some could argue there should be more satisfaction from hitting things
that are truly excellent (tons are just too common). To reward the
mediocre would demean the sport. But if the league is "for fun",
shouldn't you lower your standards to the more common shooter?
I don't have any answers for this either - I've had differing opinions my
whole dart life (I get more conservative as my skill increases). But it
seems to me that anyone trying to do anything, even "just for fun" should
make an effort to achieve the highest level possible. No platform
anywhere will truly be equal for all participants - it's just not reality.
The super shooters who kick butt on weaker players - all I can say is
when I totally dominate someone, I don't enjoy it nearly as much as a well
fought battle - so how much fun are they having doing it? I think any
dart player will tell you they play for the thrill of competition - that's
where the fun comes.
Just my thought, for what it's worth.
--Gregg
Josh Hayes
fer...@isis.com (John Fereira) writes:
> Who defines the skill of the players and how is it done? Can not
> a player that should be playing in the "A" division play in the "B"
> and play just well enough to win but keep their stats down?
They certainly can.
Just as an example, a league I once played in rated player strength by
"quality points" as well as won/loss record, and one got a QP for any
round of 95 or over (to accomodate the folks who like to shoot 19, I
guess); one guy I played against regularly would, like clockwork,
shoot 20, T20, and take his third dart at the 14 to stay under 95, so
he could continue to shoot "weakly" enough to stay down.
Me personally, I'd rather get killed by a good player than kill a weak
player; I learn a lot more and I focus better and - who knows? - once
in a while, I win, against the better player.
Josh
to...@cris.com
Sherry <sher...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Me again,
> I guess that somehow or other I am not making my point come across.
>The one person who replied to my earlier post who was in a Medalist
>league seemed to understand - but those of you who aren't in a Medalist
>league don't seem to understand what I am talking about. :(
> It seems that in this newsgroup, I should just let the matter drop. I
>was looking for advice about talking to my League office, not personal
>comments about my not being able to handle losing (which is not the
>problem at all).
>Sherry
Sherry...I have a couple of thoughts for you but first let me tell you
that I left Laurel, MD about a year and a half ago where I played
quite a bit of soft tip (some Medalist). I played mostly steel before
and play mostly steel now. My experience is that there is a big
difference in how leagues are set up and how people think in regards
to "proper" sportsmanship between the two. I would say neither is
wrong but they are as different as the games are. One of the things I
noticed about soft tip leagues was that people spend a lot of time and
effort to level the playing field while others spend a lot of time
trying to play the system to their advantage. Because there is so much
emphasis on keeping the playing field level, I think your subject
team is trying to play the system and should be reported. The efforts
of the soft tip leagues to give everyone a chance to compete evenly
seems to draw a lot of folks who would not play otherwise. I think
that's a good thing. Gradiations make it possible for people to move
up as their skill increases which provides a reward in itself. So, in
my opinion, in that environment, sandbaggers or even folks simply
improperly rated should be quickly removed from a division where they
clearly don't belong. On the other hand, you are right about
non-medalists not understanding...they don't. My experience is that
steel tippers sort of expect inequities and sort of roll with them
rationalizing that the people in the wrong divisions are only hurting
themselves. As I said, the expectations are different so the thought
processes are different but neither is wrong. Just like "robin
hooding" a dart already in the bull in steel tip is worth nothing but
will score you another bull in soft tip is different but neither is
wrong...as I said they are different games. Sheesh...sorry about the
length of this thing...
bounc...@contessa.phone.net
In <3276b7c...@news.magicnet.net>, bga...@magicnet.net (Brad Garner) wrote:
> Regarding pointing in cricket. When you have closed all numbers and
> only need two bulls when coming to the line, throw at the bull. Only
> a real jerk will go for points with any of his three darts.
There are situations where I throw for points when I only need two
bulls to win. Specifically, if my opponent needs one bull (to catch up
on points) and a single mark (to close the last open number) to win,
and my first two bulls miss, I'll throw for points with the last dart.
The logic is that one bull won't change things at all. However, if a
single mark causes my opponent to need a second bull, throwing that
single mark is the tactic that will most likely win the game.
Playing in a league designed to keep competing teams evenly matched,
in a cricket flight, I tend to run into this situation fairly often -
from both sides!
Sherry
At last someone who seems to understand what I am talking about!!! :}
And, at last someone who knew why I seemed to be getting a lot of flack
about the whole situation. I have never played steel tip darts, and I
was unaware of the differences between the two - I just thought everyone
was trying to give me shit. But, now I know that I just need to take
into account that the two are played with different objectives in mind
(or so it sounds). :}
Thanks for the info!
Brad Garner
On 28 Oct 1996 12:32:05 -0500, tong...@aol.com (TONGINTL) wrote:
>Someone mentioned something about leagues being "for fun". I agree with
>this, but I've also been chastised for trying to win, which is totally
>unhealthy for any sport. I'm not obsessed with winning, but I will point
>voraciously in cricket because I've lost many times before simply for not
>getting enough points to protect my lead. Some people think pointing
>beyond 25 pts is excessive and many people complain, "this is supposed to
>be fun, what are you pointing so much for?", but cork-laden comebacks are
>far from rare in cricket. Sports are far less fun when you lose. Where
>do you draw the line?
>
Nate Knuth
I95RKnippl wrote:
>
> Weel then, call me a jerk, which is ok,<
Not until I meet you <grin>
> I have been called a lot worse.<
Some of the things I've been called I had to look up in a
dictionary....... <laughing now>
> I
> agree with Mike. I to would go back for points. Sometimes a 2 bull lead
> is not enough.<
Depending on the game...(I didn't see the original post).. but you're
right .. in this day a 50 point advantage is hardly an advantage at
all....
> I have seen some players up by at least 4 bulls and lose
> because their opponent threw 3 double bulls. I know that is rare, but it
> happen to me.<
I've had it happen to me too.... and I did it once.... (emphasis on the
ONCE)
> So the wayI play now is if it is open, it is far game.<
The 'ole thermal-nuc. theory of cricket....
> Besides, isn't that how cricket is supposed to be played?<
Not true... in my short tenure of dart throwing I've found that for
every person who throws cricket, there are that many 'ways' to play
it... that is what is great about the game... in theory.. until that
last number is closed... you still have a chance to win.
>
> Take it Easy,<
any way I can get it.....
>
> Rick K
> WMDA<
Nate....still the biggest dog in the pound.....
--
Nate (BigDog) Knuth
nkn...@lodgenet.com
If you can't run with the Big Dogs then stay on the porch.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
\\\\\\\\\\\\\
||||||||--------]]]]]]]}}}}}}---
/////////////
////////////////
Remember....what you do today, will be remembered tomorrow,
only as what you did yesterday.
TONGINTL
In a message dated 96-10-29 21:11:20 EST, you write:
<< Regarding pointing in cricket. When you have closed all numbers and
only need two bulls when coming to the line, throw at the bull. Only
a real jerk will go for points with any of his three darts. >>
I agree completely. When you can win with a dart - go for the win.
People who throw for the safety instead of the WIN show the opponent they
have no confidence. Of course, the situation is at times different if you
can also keep your opponent from winning on his next turn by extending the
amount of corks they need to hit with some extra pts. If you find
yourself with one dart and hitting a big fat single will make sure you get
another turn - this can be smart.
What I meant was say in an earlier post is that in the earlier parts of
the game if I miss two on a number I'm trying to close, I often use that
third dart to switch and get more points, even if I have a lead, simply to
maximize the effectiveness of the dart, i.e. it's more likely I can get
hit one of my pt. number than the triple to close the open number. Often
newbies think going for ANY pts when you already have the pt lead is
"being a jerk" and that is something I can't agree with.
Hope I said that clearly.
GT
Jim Miller Jr.
>Weel then, call me a jerk, which is ok, I have been called a lot worse. I
>agree with Mike. I to would go back for points. Sometimes a 2 bull lead
>is not enough. I have seen some players up by at least 4 bulls and lose
>because their opponent threw 3 double bulls. I know that is rare, but it
>happen to me. So the wayI play now is if it is open, it is far game.
>Besides, isn't that how cricket is supposed to be played?
Not by me, or the others on my team. I've watched others in our league
play this way, but it's just unsportmanlike to me. The object is to close
the numbers before your opponent does. This does not include taking
measures solely to make things more difficult for your opponent so that
you have enough time to make your shots.
I won't say that their are not times when it is strategically important to point
against your opponent, but I will point out that a win is a win whether you
have zero points or 300. There are no bonuses for burying your opponent
other than the simple sadistic joy of being a bully.
|Jim Miller, Jr. <jmil...@lsfcu.org> Systems Administrator|
|Liberty Savings Federal Credit Union Jersey City, New Jersey USA|
|Eagle Scout - '88 Vigil - '94 Meechgalhukquot-"Redheaded One"|
|Advisor, Explorer Post 348 Hudson Liberty Council, BSA|
| NEW ADDRESS! -> http://www.stefford.com/jim/ |
I95RKnippl
Weel then, call me a jerk, which is ok, I have been called a lot worse. I
agree with Mike. I to would go back for points. Sometimes a 2 bull lead
is not enough. I have seen some players up by at least 4 bulls and lose
because their opponent threw 3 double bulls. I know that is rare, but it
happen to me. So the wayI play now is if it is open, it is far game.
Besides, isn't that how cricket is supposed to be played?
Take it Easy,
Rick K
WMDA
mike
All this is exactly why I HATE handicaps. They're too easy to manipulate
and abuse.
In article <327518...@earthlink.net>, sher...@earthlink.net says...
John Fereira
In article <19961029.40...@contessa.phone.net> bounc...@contessa.phone.net writes:
>
>In <3276b7c...@news.magicnet.net>, bga...@magicnet.net (Brad Garner) wrote:
>> only need two bulls when coming to the line, throw at the bull. Only
>> a real jerk will go for points with any of his three darts.
>
>bulls to win. Specifically, if my opponent needs one bull (to catch up
>on points) and a single mark (to close the last open number) to win,
>and my first two bulls miss, I'll throw for points with the last dart.
>
>The logic is that one bull won't change things at all. However, if a
>single mark causes my opponent to need a second bull, throwing that
>single mark is the tactic that will most likely win the game.
and you prevent that by throwing a single 15, you're chances of winning
are better then trying for the double-bull on the last dart. I personally
enjoy the pointing strategy but there's a difference between throwing enough
to win and pointing to excess.
David Shepherd
In message <19961030.7...@contessa.phone.net>
bounc...@contessa.phone.net writes:
> In <E03w1...@news2.new-york.net>, Jim Miller Jr.
<jmil...@lsfcu.org> wrote:
> > So the wayI play now is if it is open, it is far game.
> > >Besides, isn't that how cricket is supposed to be played?
> >
> > Not by me, or the others on my team. I've watched others in our league
> > play this way, but it's just unsportmanlike to me. The object is to close
> > the numbers before your opponent does.
> No, it isn't. The object is to have fun. Anyone who thinks that winning
> is more fun than losing will play to win.
There are two fuzzily different ways of playing cricket:
One is to point until doomsday and the other is to close
your marks.
The answer for any particular contest depends primarily on who you
are playing.* If they play hard, play hard. If they play fun, play fun.
*Other considerations are, how is your FORM at certain shots.
If you are in a slump on bull shots, taking the points is going to
be the best shot.. just the same way you should leave your bogey number
to your partner in doubles and set him up for his favourites in x01.
dave
(a qualified cricket umpire, ironically 8-)
Da Doofus
In article <19961029.40...@contessa.phone.net>,
bounc...@contessa.phone.net writes:
>In <3276b7c...@news.magicnet.net>, bga...@magicnet.net (Brad
Garner)
>wrote:
>> Regarding pointing in cricket. When you have closed all numbers and
>> only need two bulls when coming to the line, throw at the bull. Only
>> a real jerk will go for points with any of his three darts.
>
>There are situations where I throw for points when I only need two
>bulls to win. Specifically, if my opponent needs one bull (to catch up
>on points) and a single mark (to close the last open number) to win,
>and my first two bulls miss, I'll throw for points with the last dart.
>
>The logic is that one bull won't change things at all. However, if a
>single mark causes my opponent to need a second bull, throwing that
>single mark is the tactic that will most likely win the game.
However, a double bull will change things quite a bit. Even though I
can, in a way, understand your logic behind throwing for points in the
situation that you describe, sacrificing game dart for a better chance
of winning the game in the next round <maybe, if your opponent gives
you that opportunity>, is very risky. Even in the best case scenario,
you still allow your opponent a chance to win the game on his/her next
shot. Even if he/she doesn't, you will still have two bulls to shoot at,
and the possibility of having to throw for points also.
I know hitting two bulls and one number is tougher than hitting one
bull and one number. But, from my experiences, not going for the win
when the opportunity is there has cost more people a victory than
anything else that could possibly happen.
Maybe it's just me, but if I can't hit 2 bulls in 3 darts <either a
double
bull or 2 singles>, then maybe I don't deserve to win. Just my 2 cents.
Lance Kent
Montgomery, AL
DaDo...@aol.com
Josh Hayes
This is all very interesting; this season I'm playing in a cricket
league and I have to constantly remind myself to throw as nuclear as
possible, since everyone else in the league does the same.
It's really not a question of hitting a number but still leaving your
opponent a chance to win - shooting at the bull and missing gives your
opponent a much easier chance to win. It's a question of making it as
difficult as possible for your opponent.
Case in point. I had a game against a very good opponent a few weeks
ago (and it was a terrific game; we both shot great darts. Too bad
someone had to lose), and got to the point where he had bulls closed
and I had 17 closed and everything else was dead. I had one bull, he
had no 17s. In my round, I hit one 17 to get 10 points ahead, shot at
the bull and missed, and threw one more 17 to get 27 points up: this
forced him to hit two bulls and a T17 to win, while if I throw the
bull and miss or hit just a single, he needs only ONE bull and the
T17. I thought it was good strategy.
Of course, he threw a double bull, then a single 17, then caught the
T17 on his last dart. Game over. Grrrr. I still say I was right, on
average, and that my strategy was the best way to get myself another
crack at the bulls.
The problem is, the people I shoot against are capable of hitting huge
numbers of ANYTHING. There's no such thing as getting ahead by enough,
and rarely is there a time when pointing some more is a bad idea. I'm
not as good as that, but I've won plenty of games by getting pinned to
the bull, knocking in ten or so in three rounds, and having my
opponent get nervous.
--
Josh Hayes jo...@cqs.washington.edu PDGA #9665
http://www.cqs.washington.edu/~josh
Tim Brennan
Jim Miller Jr. <jmil...@lsfcu.org> wrote:
>--=+*_=+*_=+*_52113671335=+*_=+*_=+*_
>Content-Type: text/plain
>I95RKnippl wrote:
>>Weel then, call me a jerk, which is ok, I have been called a lot worse. I
>>agree with Mike. I to would go back for points. Sometimes a 2 bull lead
>>is not enough. I have seen some players up by at least 4 bulls and lose
>>because their opponent threw 3 double bulls. I know that is rare, but it
>>happen to me. So the wayI play now is if it is open, it is far game.
>>Besides, isn't that how cricket is supposed to be played?
>Not by me, or the others on my team. I've watched others in our league
>play this way, but it's just unsportmanlike to me. The object is to close
>the numbers before your opponent does. This does not include taking
>measures solely to make things more difficult for your opponent so that
>you have enough time to make your shots.
I think the discussion is whether or not - and when - pointing in
cricket is good strategy. Regardless of the strategic value, points
are a legitimate part of the game, if somebody rack up extra points,
well, seems silly to me, but they have every right. If you think
points are unsportsmanlike, maybe you should be playing the pointless
version of cricket.
As to the strategy, if you have one dart and need 2 bulls to win, the
only shot that will guarentee you the win is the double bull. If it
is impossible for me to win on one dart, or I can make it impossible
for my opponent, I 'd go for the points, but otherwise, I assume that
if they can do it in 3 darts, they'e going to, unless I do it to them
first.
Scott Martin
Da Doofus <dado...@aol.com> wrote in article
<55cf37$1...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>...
> ... from my experiences, not going for the win
> when the opportunity is there has cost more people a victory than
> anything else that could possibly happen.
This is the key. If you have the winning dart in your hand, why would you
throw at anything else? Winning the game is the point.
I've noticed that the "point mongers" win a lot of games in the lower
divisions--and piss a lot of people off in the process--but they do win.
As they move up in the ranks, though, they have to change their style
because they run into more and more people who can beat them at their own
game. The better players don't care--if you want to play a "point game"
they are perfectly willing to oblige--but in all likelihood you won't have
the opportunity. If you're wasting darts on unnecessary points instead of
closing numbers, then you won't have much to point on!
I can enjoy a game of cricket even if I loose--if it's a good game. The
kind of game that goes back and forth and every dart counts. That kind of
game is like chess--you and your opponent are playing for that one dart
advantage and you're looking several moves ahead. Points on both sides can
climb to astronomical levels, and it's FUN.
That one dart advantage--when you're standing at the line with the winning
dart in your hand--you've gotta go for the win!
I also refuse to intentionally bust in an '01 game. It's just a bad habit
to get into.
Scott
Brad Garner
On 2 Nov 1996 02:31:08 GMT, "Scott Martin" <sco...@i1.net> wrote:
>This is the key. If you have the winning dart in your hand, why would you
>throw at anything else? Winning the game is the point.
>
That is exactly my original point. If you don't think you're good
enough to hit it, why play in the first place?
Sherman Tsien
In article <01bbc863$e071ea20$5ee74ccf@scottm>,
Scott Martin <sco...@i1.net> wrote:
stuff deleted...
>
>I also refuse to intentionally bust in an '01 game. It's just a bad habit
>to get into.
So if you're at oh, say, 16 remaining and you throw a poor second
dart and hit an 11 you "refuse" to intentionally bust with your third?
What do you do instead? Throw a 1 to leave 4? Do your partners
thank you for this good habit?
sherm "i need every point i can get" tsien
Sherman Tsien
In article <327ad3b6...@news.magicnet.net>,
There's a big difference between having confidence in one's
ability to hit a winning dart and _expecting_ to hit it
every time. The former allows one to throw well, the latter is
foolish arrogance (at least for mere mortals). Smart darters
take account of both situation and opponent and throw
accordingly.
-sherman tsien
Q: How does a darter say "fuck you?"
A: "Nice grouping."
Nate Knuth
ROTFLMAO!!^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Da Doofus
In article <01bbc863$e071ea20$5ee74ccf@scottm>, "Scott Martin"
>I also refuse to intentionally bust in an '01 game. It's just a bad habit
>to get into.
Scott,
This is where I disagree with you. If I am in a singles match, no, I
wouldn't bust. But, if I'm in a doubles tournament, and my partner is
a novice, I might have to think about it, to possibly give my partner
an extra shot or two at the double. You have to remember, even though
you may be able to hit doubles on a consistant basis, you partner
may not.
Da Doofus
In article <55f8mc$9...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, sts...@s.psych.uiuc.edu
(Sherman Tsien) writes:
>There's a big difference between having confidence in one's
>ability to hit a winning dart and _expecting_ to hit it
>every time. The former allows one to throw well, the latter is
>foolish arrogance (at least for mere mortals).
Sherman,
I have been on a really good streak at the tournaments here
in Montgomery, Finishes 1st in the last 4 that I have thrown in.
At the next tournament, a friend told me that I shouldn't expect
to win each and every tournament that I enter. I told him that
I realize that I won't, but I won't let that 'minor 8-;' detail stop
me from trying.
Maybe I do 'expect' to hit a double bull every time I aim at
it. Maybe I also 'expect' to win every game that I throw. But I
also realize that I won't be able to do either all the time. I guess
that realization is the difference between being confident and
being foolishly arrogant.
Da Doofus
>I've noticed that the "point mongers" win a lot of games in the lower
>divisions--and piss a lot of people off in the process--but they do win.
>As they move up in the ranks, though, they have to change their style
>because they run into more and more people who can beat them at their own
>game. The better players don't care--if you want to play a "point game"
>they are perfectly willing to oblige--but in all likelihood you won't
have
>the opportunity. If you're wasting darts on unnecessary points instead of
>closing numbers, then you won't have much to point on!
Scott,
I can define 'point mongers' into 4 basic groups.
1) This person is probably a more skilled player than the opponent. All
he/she wants to do is rack up as many points as possible. Probably to
brag to their friends "I beat so-and-so by 300 points in Cricket".
2) This person has a number that he/she can't shoot well at, usually the
bulls. This person will try and rack up as many points as possible to
provide some sort of cushion to have more time in hitting that number.
3) The person wants to introduce some psychological warfare in the
game. This person may have a 75 to 100 point lead, but not quite cinched
up the game. This person will score more points to 'piss off' the
opponent,
taking his/her mind out of the game.
4) The person knows his/her opponent very well. Maybe this person
knows that his/her opponent is particulary weak on the number that
he/she has closed. Going for points will cause his/her opponent to
try and score points on that number that he/she is weak on, or force
him/her to play catch-up.
Even though some may consider point mongering poor sportsmanship,
like it or not, points are part of the game.
Scott Martin
habit
> >to get into.
>
> Scott,
> This is where I disagree with you. If I am in a singles match, no, I
> wouldn't bust. But, if I'm in a doubles tournament, and my partner is
> a novice, I might have to think about it, to possibly give my partner
> an extra shot or two at the double. You have to remember, even though
> you may be able to hit doubles on a consistant basis, you partner
> may not.
>
Lance,
I posted a reply to Sherman Tsien in which I modified my statement to
singles matches only. As you say, when playing with a partner it's a
different story.
It's not that I am "able to hit doubles on a consistant basis"--far from it
some (most?) nights. It's just a psychological thing. I need to feel that I
am progressing toward a goal and busting intentionally seems like a step
backwards. Again, I'm talking singles matches here, but even in doubles, if
my partner is in that situation and asks me for my preference, I will never
ask for a bust.
Scott Martin
St. Charles, MO
sco...@i1.net
Konrad Vandegaer
> Sherman Tsien <sts...@s.psych.uiuc.edu> wrote in article
> > So if you're at oh, say, 16 remaining and you throw a poor second
> > dart and hit an 11 you "refuse" to intentionally bust with your third?
> > What do you do instead? Throw a 1 to leave 4? Do your partners
> > thank you for this good habit?
On 3 Nov 1996, Scott Martin wrote:
> Please excuse me. I was thinking more of singles. If I have a partner, I
> would naturally ask them for their preference, as I would hope they would
> do for me. But if I'm alone, then, yes, I would throw at the 1 to leave 4.
Even in singles that's a poor choice. I'd bust it because, if I shoot S8,
S4 on my next shot I've got D2 with my third dart. If you hit S2, S1 on
your next shot you've busted and don't get a third dart. I feel, you've
got to play the percentages in that situation and not risk wasting darts.
Konrad
Josh Hayes
I'll just add a story to this; it's about the first (and only!) time I
got thrown out of a dart match.
In that league, we awarded "Quality Points", both in x01 (95 points or
better) and in cricket (5 scoring marks). We played a team with a
really good cricket player; we had no one who could take him, so one
of our weaker shooters - a woman, as it happens - volunteered to get
killed against him.
Sure enough, he got WAY out in front, then rather than shoot bulls to
win, shot at his best number - 19 - in order to rack up as many "Q"s
as possible. (the chalker indicates a "quality point" by writing up a
"Q" on the board for each one.)
I was chalking, and I was getting pretty steamed at this guy. So, one
round he threw S19, then hit the T19, then aimed carefully and hit a
single 7. I wrote up a "P" on his side.
"What's the P for?" he asked, as he pulled his darts.
"Pussy darts." I replied, succinctly.
After a brief exchange of fists, we were escorted outside, and left to
stand in the rain while they finished the match. I still don't regret
it a bit.
tong...@aol.com
>Scott,
> I can define 'point mongers' into 4 basic groups.
>
>1) This person is probably a more skilled player than the opponent. All
>he/she wants to do is rack up as many points as possible. Probably to
>brag to their friends "I beat so-and-so by 300 points in Cricket".
But anyone who is familiar with the game will know this is a hollow
accomplishment. The pt differential is meaningless, only the win is
important. I'd be much more impressed by, "I won the game, I had 535 and
they had 520.", thus showing it took a lot of back and forth pointing to
win.
--Gregg
Josh Hayes
Another (possibly irrelevant) point here is that one can fail to bust
properly - I have seen people sitting on 16 throw an 11 to leave 5,
then disgustedly throw the left side of the board to bust and bounce
the dart. D'oh.
David Shepherd
In message <Pine.SOL.3.91.96110...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Konrad Vandegaer <kon...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> writes:
It makes statistical sense, but it's a negative mental attitude.
I use to have mental wrangles about busting but they disappeared
when I improved my game to a high double out certainty.
You should throw every dart at every double with the confidence of
hitting it. All doubles are the same size. OWN them. Don't let
D1 or D18 or D3 or Dtop or ANY of them scare you into avoiding them.
If these things are on your mind as you throw, your throw is not
100% focussed & in the long run you'll finish worse.
dave
Konrad Vandegaer
On 4 Nov 1996, Josh Hayes wrote:
> In that league, we awarded "Quality Points", both in x01 (95 points or
> better) and in cricket (5 scoring marks). We played a team with a
> really good cricket player; we had no one who could take him, so one
> of our weaker shooters - a woman, as it happens - volunteered to get
> killed against him.
>
> Sure enough, he got WAY out in front, then rather than shoot bulls to
> win, shot at his best number - 19 - in order to rack up as many "Q"s
> as possible. (the chalker indicates a "quality point" by writing up a
> "Q" on the board for each one.)
>
> I was chalking, and I was getting pretty steamed at this guy. So, one
> round he threw S19, then hit the T19, then aimed carefully and hit a
> single 7. [snipped part about untimely ejection]
This can happen in our league, also. So, we include in the rules
the option for the opposing captain to protest if the shooter is
obviously not trying to close out the game. The rule, however, has
never beeen enforced. Such problems are usually taken care of by
peer pressure of the sort Josh spoke of but usually not to the extent
that someone gets thrown out. Captains talk to their players and while
threats to cut-off points doesn't stop people from getting extras,
at least it makes them try to end the game each round. If a shooter, for
example, keeps hitting triples but somehow can't manage to hit that last
bull (good player, of course) they'll be harassed so bad by both teams
they take it out to escape the abuse.
Konrad
tong...@aol.com
This story is funny, but truly, fighting has no place in ANY sport.
Didn't someone start this thread saying darts night is for FUN?
Even if the guy is a jerk -- why do your rules reward his behaviour?
"Quality Points?"
--Gregg
=======================
I'll just add a story to this; it's about the first (and only!) time I
got thrown out of a dart match.
In that league, we awarded "Quality Points", both in x01 (95 points or
better) and in cricket (5 scoring marks). We played a team with a
really good cricket player; we had no one who could take him, so one
of our weaker shooters - a woman, as it happens - volunteered to get
killed against him.
Sure enough, he got WAY out in front, then rather than shoot bulls to
win, shot at his best number - 19 - in order to rack up as many "Q"s
as possible. (the chalker indicates a "quality point" by writing up a
"Q" on the board for each one.)
I was chalking, and I was getting pretty steamed at this guy. So, one
round he threw S19, then hit the T19, then aimed carefully and hit a
tong...@aol.com
-------------------Begin Quote------------------
I posted a reply to Sherman Tsien in which I modified my statement to
singles matches only. As you say, when playing with a partner it's a
different story.
It's not that I am "able to hit doubles on a consistant basis"--far from
it
some (most?) nights. It's just a psychological thing. I need to feel that
I
am progressing toward a goal and busting intentionally seems like a step
backwards. Again, I'm talking singles matches here, but even in doubles,
if
my partner is in that situation and asks me for my preference, I will
never
ask for a bust.
Scott Martin
Another (possibly irrelevant) point here is that one can fail to bust
properly - I have seen people sitting on 16 throw an 11 to leave 5,
then disgustedly throw the left side of the board to bust and bounce
the dart. D'oh.
-------------------End Quote------------------
The point is being missed here. The first person said:
"It's just a psychological thing. I need to feel that I am progressing
toward a goal and busting intentionally seems like a step backwards."
In singles or doubles, the goal is WINNING, not getting to a double out.
When you start with 16 and take it to 5 with one dart remaining - the bust
gives you the highest probability for success towards the correct goal -
WINNING (if you don't know, ask and I'll tell you why 16 left is better
than 4). Trust me - psychologically, winning will be better for your
darter's self-esteem.
Regarding hitting the wire trying to bust (I know you were kinda kidding),
that holds no weight. You can just as easily bounce out trying to make 5
into a 4. To bust a five, you have practically the entire left side of
the board, from 19 to 20. Surely it's a higher probability of bouncing
when you're aiming at the 1 slice than the entire left bust area?
--Gregg
Josh Hayes
As it turns out, the rules about "quality points" were changed the
next season, in part because of abuses like that one, so that there
was a limit of two Q's per cricket game - so once you had your two,
there's no point in shooting for more.
Da Doofus
In article <19961104173...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
tong...@aol.com writes:
>>1) This person is probably a more skilled player than the opponent.
All
>>he/she wants to do is rack up as many points as possible. Probably to
>>brag to their friends "I beat so-and-so by 300 points in Cricket".
>
>But anyone who is familiar with the game will know this is a hollow
>accomplishment. The pt differential is meaningless, only the win is
>important. I'd be much more impressed by, "I won the game, I had 535 and
>they had 520.", thus showing it took a lot of back and forth pointing to
>win.
Gregg,
I, and probably 95% of us, agree wholeheartedly with you. However,
you have the small minority who gets some vicarious pleasure of just
pounding points just because they can. Personally, I want to end a
game of Cricket as quickly as I can. I don't really care if I score any
points, as long as I can win. After all, that's the ultimate objective,
right?
John Fereira
In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.96110...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Konrad Vandegaer <kon...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> writes:
>
>
>On 4 Nov 1996, Josh Hayes wrote:
>> better) and in cricket (5 scoring marks). We played a team with a
>> really good cricket player; we had no one who could take him, so one
>> of our weaker shooters - a woman, as it happens - volunteered to get
>> killed against him.
>>
>> Sure enough, he got WAY out in front, then rather than shoot bulls to
>> win, shot at his best number - 19 - in order to rack up as many "Q"s
>> as possible. (the chalker indicates a "quality point" by writing up a
>> "Q" on the board for each one.)
>>
>> I was chalking, and I was getting pretty steamed at this guy. So, one
>> round he threw S19, then hit the T19, then aimed carefully and hit a
>
>This can happen in our league, also. So, we include in the rules
>the option for the opposing captain to protest if the shooter is
>obviously not trying to close out the game. The rule, however, has
>never beeen enforced.
In several leagues that I have played in highlights like three in a bed
or a white horse are not awarded unless it was necessary for closing a number
and/or generating "necessary" points. Both captains have to initial
all highlights and in the case described there would be no way that I
would have put down *my* initials.
Jim Miller Jr.
>>This can happen in our league, also. So, we include in the rules
>>the option for the opposing captain to protest if the shooter is
>>obviously not trying to close out the game. The rule, however, has
>>never beeen enforced.
>
>In several leagues that I have played in highlights like three in a bed
>or a white horse are not awarded unless it was necessary for closing a number
>and/or generating "necessary" points. Both captains have to initial
>all highlights and in the case described there would be no way that I
>would have put down *my* initials.
Our league has tried to avoid this by not awarding what we call "All star"
points (95 or better in x01, C-6 or better in Cricket) unless they were shot
by the person winning the game. I don't see how this helps, since you are
likely to win if you use this strategy to rack up huge point leads. This is
the first year for this rule, and I may complain about it's possible results
when I next see the guy who runs the league.
Now to figure out how to write the rule that would do what it should.
"No All-star points shall be awarded on any round that does not close
the game when it is possible to do so." is close, but would not award
points for a T20 with T80 to go in x01.
Any ideas on how such a rule could be written?
|Jim Miller, Jr. <jmil...@lsfcu.org> Systems Administrator|
|Liberty Savings Federal Credit Union Jersey City, New Jersey USA|
|Eagle Scout - '88 Vigil - '94 Meechgalhukquot-"Redheaded One"|
|ASM-Troop 305 AA-Post 348 Hudson Liberty Council, BSA|
| http://www.stefford.com/jim/ |
Bob Lanctot
(to...@cris.com) writes:
> bga...@magicnet.net (Brad Garner) wrote:
>
>>On 28 Oct 1996 12:32:05 -0500, tong...@aol.com (TONGINTL) wrote:
>>Regarding pointing in cricket. When you have closed all numbers and
>>only need two bulls when coming to the line, throw at the bull. Only
>>a real jerk will go for points with any of his three darts.
>
> I disagree. IF your first dart is a bull then throw your second at the
> bull. If your first dart misses, make sure you have enough points to
> protect your lead, For example, if my opponent has one bull and only
> one number open, lets say the 15's, he could close the 15's with one
> dart and throw a double bull and single bull to win...unless I have
> enough points to cover. Its a gut call based on your relative skill,
> your oppents skill and pure luck. By the way...if I can irritate my
> opponent by pointing, I'll have a better chance to win as he loses
> concentration to anger. Maverick didn't come here to lose. Conversly,
> I only point to protect myself, I will not prolong the game by
> UNNECESSARY pointing.
You are 100% correct. No one plays to lose. I think some people forget
that the object of cricket is not to just close all the numbers, it's to
WIN. You have to point your opponent as necessary to win. You must play
the points. If I'm ahead, but only just ahead, I will try to force my
opponent to play MY way. Cricket is a game of control: you control the
board, you control your opponent. If I need points to force my opponent to
play my game, I'll build up my point lead BEFORE I close the bulls. I've
seen too many games lost because of one bad throw with no points to offer
protection.
--
_________
/ \ | Bob Lanctot |
o===========|======OOOOO))**))**))-------| Ottawa, Ontario, Canada |
\_________/ "Have darts, will travel!" | ae...@Freenet.Carleton.CA |
Da Doofus
In article <55nuqj$8...@transfer.stratus.com>, fer...@isis.com (John
Fereira) writes:
>In several leagues that I have played in highlights like three in a bed
>or a white horse are not awarded unless it was necessary for closing a
number
>and/or generating "necessary" points. Both captains have to initial
>all highlights and in the case described there would be no way that I
>would have put down *my* initials.
John,
Not to cause any heartburns, but describe what 'generating necessary
points' means. I know the case that Josh brought up was excessive, but
there are cases where one captain will initial the highlight, but another
one won't. Who becomes the final determination? To me, the above rule
is too subjective.
I know that you want to prevent someone to rack up Quality Points/
All-Star Points in this fashion. But to impose rules that will only
hamper
the vast majority to stop the childness of a slim minority, IMHO, will
cause
more headaches in the long run.
John Fereira
In article <55sagf$l...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> dado...@aol.com (Da Doofus) writes:
>
>In article <55nuqj$8...@transfer.stratus.com>, fer...@isis.com (John
>Fereira) writes:
>
>>In several leagues that I have played in highlights like three in a bed
>>or a white horse are not awarded unless it was necessary for closing a
>number
>>and/or generating "necessary" points. Both captains have to initial
>>all highlights and in the case described there would be no way that I
>>would have put down *my* initials.
>
>John,
> Not to cause any heartburns, but describe what 'generating necessary
>points' means. I know the case that Josh brought up was excessive, but
>there are cases where one captain will initial the highlight, but another
>one won't. Who becomes the final determination? To me, the above rule
>is too subjective.
If both captains don't sign it then the points are not awarded. I have
always thought that any issue that comes up during a dart match should
be resolved between the captains. If one of the captains is going
to be adament about what he or she considers excessive points it can
be escalated to a league director. I don't recall the actual wording
in the leagues that I've played in but if one the players have an equal
number of numbers closed and already has at least a "triples" advantage
I consider it excessive to throw more then another triple or points.
I might suggest that if someone has a 150 point advantage that they
not be awarded quality points by throwing five marks on a number they
already have closed. It allows at least one round of quality points
in a given cricket game, even if the person is ahead. If someone
is behind on numbers and/or points they are more likely going to
try for those three triples. I don't understand the rationale for
not awarding quality points if the shooter doesn't win the game.
Josh Hayes
fer...@isis.com (John Fereira) writes:
> I might suggest that if someone has a 150 point advantage that they
> not be awarded quality points by throwing five marks on a number they
> already have closed. It allows at least one round of quality points
> in a given cricket game, even if the person is ahead. If someone
> is behind on numbers and/or points they are more likely going to
> try for those three triples. I don't understand the rationale for
> not awarding quality points if the shooter doesn't win the game.
I dislike this idea - what if my opponent has closed 20 down through
17, but I only have 20, 19, and 16 - but I'm 150 points "up" - am I
really 150 points ahead, when they have two closed numbers to my one?
As I said, in our league in Texas, we wound up just capping it at two
QPs per cricket game, max. This encouraged shooters to "get down to
business" and win the game.
As for the last comment (not awarding QPs to the loser of the game), I
too find that very weird. Hard-fought cricket games between good
shooters often have many rounds of 5, 7, or even 9. If you shot 'em,
you should get credit for 'em - the QP system was in place, I think,
to let good shooters on lousy teams still have good ratings, because
even though they get no support in doubles and triples matches, they
can generate QPs for themselves (which were factored into ratings).
David Shepherd
In message <19961105173...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
tong...@aol.com writes:
> In singles or doubles, the goal is WINNING, not getting to a double out.
> When you start with 16 and take it to 5 with one dart remaining - the bust
> gives you the highest probability for success towards the correct goal -
> WINNING (if you don't know, ask and I'll tell you why 16 left is better
> than 4). Trust me - psychologically, winning will be better for your
> darter's self-esteem.
> Regarding hitting the wire trying to bust (I know you were kinda kidding),
> that holds no weight. You can just as easily bounce out trying to make 5
> into a 4. To bust a five, you have practically the entire left side of
> the board, from 19 to 20. Surely it's a higher probability of bouncing
> when you're aiming at the 1 slice than the entire left bust area?
If you're worried about 5 being a tough out or wire bounces,
you need to think less and throw more.
Trust me, I've been there, worried about that, and now
overcome it by practicing until it's no more of a worry than
'getting 3 in the board'.
Other things that wear off:
Fear that you'll never finish.
Thinking trebles are really tiny.
Stopping to work out 2 dart outs.
Searching around the board for 13.
The shiny look on new darts ;)
dave
Steve Boon
In article <199611051...@zetnet.co.uk>, David Shepherd
<drd...@zetnet.co.uk> writes
>> > > So if you're at oh, say, 16 remaining and you throw a poor second
>> > > dart and hit an 11 you "refuse" to intentionally bust with your third?
>> > > What do you do instead? Throw a 1 to leave 4? Do your partners
>> > > thank you for this good habit?
>
>
> hitting it. All doubles are the same size. OWN them. Don't let
> D1 or D18 or D3 or Dtop or ANY of them scare you into avoiding them.
> If these things are on your mind as you throw, your throw is not
> 100% focussed & in the long run you'll finish worse.
>
>
>dave
>
Were I am we play in one league were a *no* bust rule applies,
You're 0n D16 hit 16, then hit 11 throw a 20 but you're still on 5!
Confusing at first but if you don't want to worry about it then hit the
doubles first time.
Of course it also works the other way for weak players, if they're stuck
on 3 then the first dart hits a 1 then no matter what happens they are
still left 2 (unless they hit D1 naturally).
I never intentially bust, had one come out in a league game - cost me
the game!
||||||||
- ||||| Steve Boon
/ ||@||
= || | Phat...@boonie.demon.co.uk
|||| |
| | http://www.boonie.demon.co.uk
/ \ (Virtual Blubberman!)
/ | | |
/ | | |
/ | | | @----------------------------@
/ | | | | British Lead Mills |
/ TTTT | | Peartree Lane |
|==========| | Welwyn Garden City |
\ / | Herts. |
\ / @----------------------------@
\ | | British Lead milled to |
\ | | British Standards (BS1178) |
\ | @----------------------------@
[_____|
baris
> >he/she wants to do is rack up as many points as possible. Probably to
> >brag to their friends "I beat so-and-so by 300 points in Cricket".
>
> But anyone who is familiar with the game will know this is a hollow
> accomplishment. The pt differential is meaningless, only the win is
> important. I'd be much more impressed by, "I won the game, I had 535 and
> they had 520.", thus showing it took a lot of back and forth pointing to
> win.
>
I agree that scoring points in cricket while it isn't really needed is
no fun. But, and this is important for lesser players, there's no harm
in choosing the numbers you are throwing at in a way that maximizes the
chance of scoring.
If, for example, your shooting at 15 and you by accident shoot t10, You
should continue at 15 if your opponent hasn's already closed 15. any
stray dart into 10 then scores. these points might just give you the
edge when at the end of the game you can't hit the bull and your
opponent can.
Jelle
DaDo...@aol.com
In article <E0GLA...@news2.new-york.net>, Jim Miller Jr.
<jmil...@lsfcu.org> writes:
>Our league has tried to avoid this by not awarding what we call "All
star"
>points (95 or better in x01, C-6 or better in Cricket) unless they were
shot
>by the person winning the game. I don't see how this helps, since you are
>likely to win if you use this strategy to rack up huge point leads. This
is
>the first year for this rule, and I may complain about it's possible
results
>when I next see the guy who runs the league.
>
>Now to figure out how to write the rule that would do what it should.
>
>"No All-star points shall be awarded on any round that does not close
>the game when it is possible to do so." is close, but would not award
>points for a T20 with T80 to go in x01.
>
>Any ideas on how such a rule could be written?
Jim,
I would not put any sort of restriction on ASPs. In x01, there is a
finite number of ASPs that you can earn in a game. In Cricket, any
restriction that you might want to put on will either a) hurt the throwers
who can get the ASPs without point mongering or b) wind up with rules
so complex that it takes a rocket scientist to figure them out.
My only suggestion is either accept the fact that you are going to
have some people who will run up the ASP total in Cricket or don't
even count them at all.
tong...@aol.com
>Were I am we play in one league were a *no* bust rule applies,
>You're 0n D16 hit 16, then hit 11 throw a 20 but you're still on 5!
>Confusing at first but if you don't want to worry about it then hit the
>doubles first time. Of course it also works the other way for weak
players, if >they're stuck on 3 then the first dart hits a 1 then no
matter what happens they >are still left 2 (unless they hit D1 naturally).
I never intentially bust, had one come >out in a league game - cost me the
game!
So if you have 2 left and hit a single 1 -- what happens?
--Gregg
Josh Hayes
baris <ba...@publishnet.nl> writes:
> If, for example, your shooting at 15 and you by accident shoot t10, You
> should continue at 15 if your opponent hasn's already closed 15. any
> stray dart into 10 then scores. these points might just give you the
> edge when at the end of the game you can't hit the bull and your
> opponent can.
*blink*
Wait a minute. You're pointing on TENS? Now, that's low.
(Seriously. Are we talking about different games? In the States,
standard cricket only uses 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, and bull.)
Jon Beever
Any ideas on how such a rule could be written?
>
>Jim,
> I would not put any sort of restriction on ASPs. In x01, there is a
>finite number of ASPs that you can earn in a game. In Cricket, any
>restriction that you might want to put on will either a) hurt the throwers
>who can get the ASPs without point mongering or b) wind up with rules
>so complex that it takes a rocket scientist to figure them out.
> My only suggestion is either accept the fact that you are going to
>have some people who will run up the ASP total in Cricket or don't
>even count them at all.
>
>Lance Kent
>Montgomery, AL
>DaDo...@aol.com
>
In our league we don't seem to have this problem. All Stars are
earned with 101pts and up in x01. Cricket is 6 marks and above or 4
Bulls and above. It requires (except for the 4 Bulls) that at least 2
darts have to be in a triple or double, making it that much more
difficult to get an All Star. I believe the All Star distribution
through out the league is the same (percentage wise), even though the
requirements are harder, there is just a smaller grand total of them.
The fact that the all stars are more difficult to get discourages
"your good shooters" from racking up the points just for All Stars or
QP's
tong...@aol.com
What are you, stupid AND illiterate? Then you bust. It says so in the
original post. There - I've flamed myself.
--Gregg
Anyways, I don't agree with this "No Bust" rule. You're just penalizing
the players who are smart enough to use it. IMO, an intelligent player
will beat a better skilled player 6 times out of 10 (and every edge
counts).
Scott Martin
Josh Hayes <jo...@pogo.cqs.washington.edu> wrote in article
<1ybgcs...@pogo.cqs.washington.edu>...
In my league we play a cricket-like game called "Spanish" in which 10s are
used as an inning (20 through 10, no bulls), however it is ALWAYS played as
a "call" game and therefore the slop 10s would not have counted.
baris- please clarify!
Mike Smedley
dado...@aol.com wrote:
>
> In article <1ybgcs...@pogo.cqs.washington.edu>, Josh Hayes
> <jo...@pogo.cqs.washington.edu> writes:
>
> >> If, for example, your shooting at 15 and you by accident shoot t10, You
> >> should continue at 15 if your opponent hasn's already closed 15. any
> >> stray dart into 10 then scores. these points might just give you the
> >> edge when at the end of the game you can't hit the bull and your
> >> opponent can.
> >
> >*blink*
> >
> >Wait a minute. You're pointing on TENS? Now, that's low.
> >
> >(Seriously. Are we talking about different games? In the States,
> >standard cricket only uses 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, and bull.)
>
> think
> that the rules are the same as American Cricket, except that the numbers
> in play are 20 thru 10, and bulls.
The game is called Tactics in the UK too. The
numbers used vary from place to place and person to
person. However, since we don't play the game in
any organised leagues it doesn't really matter what
rules are used. I personally can't abide the game
so I'm glad we don't use it as aleague format.
--
Mike Smedley (m...@sss.co.uk)
3S (Software) Ltd
Salford
They say you can tell the time by the sun...
I've never been able to make the numbers out
myself.
Konrad Vandegaer
> > > Sherman Tsien <sts...@s.psych.uiuc.edu> wrote in article
> > > > So if you're at oh, say, 16 remaining and you throw a poor second
> > > > dart and hit an 11 you "refuse" to intentionally bust with your third?
> > > > What do you do instead? Throw a 1 to leave 4? Do your partners
> > > > thank you for this good habit?
> > On 3 Nov 1996, Scott Martin wrote:
> > > Please excuse me. I was thinking more of singles. If I have a partner, I
> > > would naturally ask them for their preference, as I would hope they would
> > > do for me. But if I'm alone, then, yes, I would throw at the 1 to leave 4.
> Konrad Vandegaer <kon...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> writes:
> > Even in singles that's a poor choice. I'd bust it because, if I shoot S8,
> > S4 on my next shot I've got D2 with my third dart. If you hit S2, S1 on
> > your next shot you've busted and don't get a third dart. I feel, you've
> > got to play the percentages in that situation and not risk wasting darts.
On Tue, 5 Nov 1996, David Shepherd wrote:
> It makes statistical sense, but it's a negative mental attitude.
> I use to have mental wrangles about busting but they disappeared
> when I improved my game to a high double out certainty.
> You should throw every dart at every double with the confidence of
> hitting it. All doubles are the same size. OWN them. Don't let
> D1 or D18 or D3 or Dtop or ANY of them scare you into avoiding them.
> If these things are on your mind as you throw, your throw is not
> 100% focussed & in the long run you'll finish worse.
What negative mental attitude? With five left and a dart in my hand,
I bust. It's got nothing to do with whether I like or dislike D2.
Of course, believing you can hit any double is a good attitude to have,
but not to the degree that you'd discard one of the strategic aspects
of the game just to prove it. That attitude is for when you're left
with no choice. Not going for a bust when it could help you on your
next shot is just cutting down on your odds and a bad play in my book.
Konrad
Steve Boon
In article <19961108175...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
tong...@aol.com writes
>>Were I am we play in one league were a *no* bust rule applies,
>>You're 0n D16 hit 16, then hit 11 throw a 20 but you're still on 5!
>>Confusing at first but if you don't want to worry about it then hit the
>>doubles first time.
>So if you have 2 left and hit a single 1 -- what happens?
>
Double 1/2! (be sensible - end of throw)
Steve Boon
In article <19961108222...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
tong...@aol.com writes
>What are you, stupid AND illiterate? Then you bust. It says so in the
>original post. There - I've flamed myself.
>
>--Gregg
>
>Anyways, I don't agree with this "No Bust" rule. You're just penalizing
>the players who are smart enough to use it. IMO, an intelligent player
>will beat a better skilled player 6 times out of 10 (and every edge
>counts).
I don't agree with it, but we're stuck with it in one league. IMO it
doesn't penalize players that use it. In theory (and that's what I tell
the other players) it should not matter (esp. if you're skilled).
Anyway nice to hear from you Gregg
Jon Beever
On Mon, 11 Nov 1996 10:17:12 +0000, Mike Smedley <m...@sss.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>The game is called Tactics in the UK too. The
>numbers used vary from place to place and person to
>person. However, since we don't play the game in
>any organised leagues it doesn't really matter what
>rules are used. I personally can't abide the game
>so I'm glad we don't use it as aleague format.
>--
>Mike Smedley (m...@sss.co.uk)
>3S (Software) Ltd
>Salford
>
>They say you can tell the time by the sun...
>I've never been able to make the numbers out
>myself.
Mike,
I'd never heared of the game until I came to live in the States. I
didn't "get" the game at first, but now, it's my favourite game There
is an element of strategy (tactics if you will) in actually playing
the game. A mediocore player can beat (and does more often than not)
a good player if they use the right (better) strategy. I consider
myself to be a "good" player and I reguarly beat "very good" palyers
purley because of strategy.
Tactics (Cricket) is a game of the mind as well as skill.
Jon
pata...@aol.com
In article <3288d80e...@news.mhv.net>, jpbe...@mhv.net (Jon Beever)
writes:
>Subject: Re: Throwing at bulls.
>From: jpbe...@mhv.net (Jon Beever)
>Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 20:13:57 GMT
Mike,
As a dart player for 37 years, I too wouldn't like to play the game of
Cricket, (or as it is known locally, Micky Mouse), as a league game.
Jon thinks that it levels players out, but I would like to bet that if he
played a "best of" format, the more accurate player would win 99% of the
time regardless of tactics.
I personally think that American's have adopted this game to try and level
out the difference in standards between themselves and the "proper" dart
world by playing a game that "real" players very rarely play.<<g>>
Two other examples also spring to mind -
Rugby & Amercan Footbal
Cricket & Rounders
LOL
Bob Knight
Bob Lanctot
(pata...@aol.com) writes:
> As a dart player for 37 years, I too wouldn't like to play the game of
> Cricket, (or as it is known locally, Micky Mouse), as a league game.
> Jon thinks that it levels players out, but I would like to bet that if he
> played a "best of" format, the more accurate player would win 99% of the
> time regardless of tactics.
> I personally think that American's have adopted this game to try and level
> out the difference in standards between themselves and the "proper" dart
> world by playing a game that "real" players very rarely play.<<g>>
> Two other examples also spring to mind -
> Rugby & Amercan Footbal
> Cricket & Rounders
> LOL
>
> Bob Knight
Well Bob, as a Canadian who not only plays Cricket in league play, but in
tournaments as well, I have to disagree with you. While I haven't been
playing darts quite as long as you (23 years), I am enjoying my evenings
out on the oche far more since the two leagues I play in incorporate
cricket as part of the playing format.
When you refer to the "proper" dart world, assuming you're English, I
guess you have darts in the UK in mind. When I think of the UK I think of
the dart pros and Dennis Priestley comes to mind. Now I'm sure you'll
agree that Dennis is probably the best there is at the present time.
Having the pleasure of knowing Dennis well enough to say that we're on a
first name basis, as they say, I also know that Dennis likes to play
cricket very much; in fact, he *loves* cricket. He's not the only pro
who will tell you that also. So, by your standards, does that make Dennis
an "improper" dart player?
Jon Beever
On 10 Nov 1996 02:39:11 GMT, dado...@aol.com wrote:
>In article <3283b347...@news.mhv.net>, jpbe...@mhv.net (Jon
Beever)
>writes:
>
>>In our league we don't seem to have this problem. All Stars are
>>earned with 101pts and up in x01. Cricket is 6 marks and above or 4
>>Bulls and above. It requires (except for the 4 Bulls) that at least
2
>>darts have to be in a triple or double, making it that much more
>>difficult to get an All Star. I believe the All Star distribution
>>through out the league is the same (percentage wise), even though
the
>>requirements are harder, there is just a smaller grand total of
them.
>>The fact that the all stars are more difficult to get discourages
>>"your good shooters" from racking up the points just for All Stars
or
>>QP's
>
>Jon,
> In our league here in Montgomery, we need two scoring triples to
get
>an All-Star, 3 scoring trips will get you 3. Even though the
requirements
>are tougher, it still won't prevent some people from trying to get
extra
>ASPs. Fortunately, we don't have this problem much here. I'm sure
if
>it started to become a problem, some people would move to make the
>rules even tougher...and more complicated.
>
>Lance Kent
>Montgomery, AL
>DaDo...@aol.com
>
Lance,
The observation I make is that, because the requirements are tougher
it's easy to get "caught" trying to pad the allstar total. Padding
for the sake of it is not tolerated, the ball busting is relentless.
We do have some guys that after they hit 1 trip 20 and a single 20 in
x01 they'll go down to the bull. They figure they have a better
chance at a single or double bull for the allstar. I have no problem
with that because it does not prolong the game or humiliate the
opponent.
Jon
rob...@aol.com
Bob,
Please, let me answer your points in order,
>As a Canadian
Why, your practically British, Bob!<g>
>While I haven't been playing darts quite as long as you (23 years)
important.
>I am enjoying my evenings out on the oche far more since the two leagues
I play in incorporate cricket
about, (unless we're talking money league!)
>When you refer to the "proper" dart world, assuming you're English
playing from Lancashire.
>snip...Now I'm sure you'll agree that Dennis is probably the best there
is at the present time.
Priestley is a good darts player, (any World Champion must be), but I
cannot agree with your assumption that he is "the best there is at the
present time". Unfortunately, IMO, Dennis has now joined the World Darts
Council. (W. D. C.), whereas the majority of English League players
belong to the B. D. O.! A bit like Mike Tyson claiming that he is a better
boxer than Evander Holyfield ! I seem to remember that fight recently. <G>
Bob,
Please, let me answer your points in order,
>As a Canadian
Why, your practically British, Bob!
>While I haven't been playing darts quite as long as you (23 years)
important.
>I am enjoying my evenings out on the oche far more since the two leagues
I play in incorporate cricket
about, (unless we are taking money league!)
>When you refer to the "proper" dart world, assuming you're English
playing from Lancashire.
>Now I'm sure you'll agree that Dennis is probably the best there is at
the present time.
Priestley is a good darts player, (any World Champion must be), but I
cannot agree with you re assumption that he is "the best there is at the
present time".
Unfortunately, IMO, Dennis has now joined the World Darts Council. (W. D.
C.), whereas the majority of English League players belong to the B. D.
O.! A bit like Mike Tyson claiming that he is a better boxer than Evander
Holyfield ! I seem to remember that fight recently. <G>
Bob,
Please, let me answer your points in order,
>As a Canadian
Why, your practically British, Bob!
>While I haven't been playing darts quite as long as you (23 years)
important.
>I am enjoying my evenings out on the oche far more since the two leagues
I play in incorporate cricket
about, (unless we are taking money league!)
>When you refer to the "proper" dart world, assuming you're English
playing from Lancashire.
>Now I'm sure you'll agree that Dennis is probably the best there is at
the present time.
Priestley is a good darts player, (any World Champion must be), but I
cannot agree with you re assumption that he is "the best there is at the
present time".
Unfortunately, IMO, Dennis has now joined the World Darts Council. (W. D.
C.), whereas the majority of English League players belong to the B. D.
O.! A bit like Mike Tyson claiming that he is a better boxer than Evander
Holyfield ! I seem to remember that fight recently. <G>
>Having the pleasure of knowing Dennis well enough to say that we're on a
As for first name associations, I used to play "Eric" as in Bristow and
his Dad for a frozen chicken on Sunday lunch time in Stoke Newington,
North London in the late 60 early 70. If you ever see him (Eric), ask
him about the Hop Poles in Enfield! Names mean nothing I m afraid Bob!
You write of Dennis "loving" a game of Cricket, I also LIKE a game on
Sunday lunch time with the rest of the lads, but my point in my previous
posting was that I would not like to play Mickey Mouse as a League format.
Ask Dennis, when you see him, how many leagues in this country he has
played in where the format has been Cricket! I ll have a cyber pint bet
with you that there have been NONE!
And finally Bob, did you miss my emoticon at the end of the line "
.playing a game that "real" players very rarely play.<<g>>"
IT WAS TONGUE IN CHEEK. So no flaming meant - honestly.
Can I now ask you as a new friend , if you have ever met an English
player called Ronnie Baxter? Ronnie and I play locally and if you have
ever met him I will pass on any messages between you and him. He was in
Canada visiting his brother about six or eight years ago. He also played
in the States in between - once or twice to become the highest money
winner, but as I tell him, it was his good fortune that I was not able to
be with him!
"Enjoy the crack" - Bob Knight