Your Competitions
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 424 comments are related to the topic:
Last race bleedin favourites
Last race bleedin favourites
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 424
|
By:
I'm not sure about this no-post non-runner allowance, I currently make the effort to post every compulsory day, risking my pound, why should I bother on 5 days every month?
Does this 5 days include Sundays? |
|
By:
It wouldn`t ud.
I would be wary of some who maybe wouldn`t post towards the end of the month in a relegation battle. I could maybe see that more in the premier division. |
|
By:
Reg, bb & KC. Could you please post your two preferred options to vote on.
|
|
By:
As I posted 4 days ago I think we're getting ahead of ourselves and possibly even tying ourselves in knots unnecessarily. I still think we should first establish whether or not the majority actually want change. I note we have 124 napsters so unless 63 or more voted for change I would leave it stat. Therefore my preferred voting options would be:
Do you want to keep the existing LRF rule? 1). Yes 2). No |
|
By:
Of course I realise the multiple personalities we have could skew the vote but it would be difficult to do much about that
 |
|
By:
No to LRF for me
|
|
By:
Hi Shane - one last comment.
Whatever the vote ends up being between (LRF v 'grace' days?) I would suggest the ONLY people to vote on it are the four settlers as a) it doesn't appear that there is enough interest from most napsters to even bother to vote, so no proposal for change will ever get in if needing 67% yes vote from the 150+ people in the leagues. b) you four settlers are the guys that do all the very much appreciated work and the decision should be down to the settlersalone as a what has always been seen as the committee over the years. If we don't like it we can leave or volunteer to become a settler the next time a vacancy comes up! Thank you for taking the time to address this issue and for reading the endless essays I seem to have written on it! Good luck with all your horses, Mad. |
|
By:
YES to LRF for me. Its simple, it works, its easiest for the settlers. However, I also agree that only the settlers should have a vote on this. Its them who put in the real hard work.
|
|
By:
Of the 121 current competitors (usernames), 29 have expressed an opinion on this thread (again going by usernames); excluding the 4 settlers.
This suggests to me that there is insufficient interest in the LRF topic to warrant having a vote among the competitor pool and the decision should be left to the settlers. In which case my options would be Keep LRF in its current form OR No Post equals losing selection. |
|
By:
LRF kept - for me. Thank you.
|
|
By:
It is wrong to assume because people don't post that they agree with the LRF ruling.
|
|
By:
The assumption would be that if they cannot be bothered to spend 30 seconds voting then they cannot be that concerned about it.
|
|
By:
petemac - i do not like to assume, which is why i have quoted the numbers, although this does nothing to prove nor disprove competitors wants, it is at least indicative of the groundswell for (lack of?) change. In the absence of greater numbers I believe it is reasonable to decide that interest is limited. All of which gives no mandate as to what opinion is; and therefore the settlers are probably best placed to decide on any rule change.
|
|
By:
Please change this rule NOW..............................
|
|
By:
No to LRF for me
Haven't been able to post a few times due to poor/lost connection so a -1 is fair enough If someone can't post for hols etc they can ask a fellow poster to select for them But as a few have said already, entirely up to the settlers.  |
|
By:
Reduce the (10) down to 7 per month but INCLUDE Sundays this gives people days off or helps those having trouble logging in .
|
|
By:
shane, KC and bb ... you got mail
|
|
By:
Ludicrous that my picked winner is inferior to lots of people being attributed to a better priced winner they did not pick.
Days like this make this concept farcical and after spending time and effort picking a possible winner ,it does make you wonder what's the point ? |
|
By:
I would say that those that don't express an opinion are indifferent to any change rather than against it given the apathy we have seen over voting to change the system previously...
If we go to -1 for non-posting then I will eventually have to drop out as I have two UK holidays and a probable foreign business trip lined up this year and am not prepared to take time out to try to post in these periods. If allowed I would give prior instruction to use the RPR Nap as I always did and I find it ridiculous not being able to use someone from the RP Naps table yet you can ask a forumite to pick one for you which I personally won't do. I vote to do away with the 120 days free posts that allow you LRF in favour of 3 or 4 or preferably 5 grace days per month with a usage allowance of no more than 10 per month. You would obviously forfeit 5 grace days per month (if running with an allowance of 60 per year) depending on when during the year you join the competition. Non-posting on Sundays would require the use of a grace day. However, if the choice is just the LRF rule as it currently is or -1 for not posting irrespective of your circumstances then I vote to keep LRF as I would not then have to drop out in the summer due to my personal commitments/stance. I still firmly believe the final decision/format should be down to detailed discussion and agreement between the four settlers (outside of the public forum) and no-one else. Cheers, Mad. |
|
By:
No, today is the perfect example as to why. I napped a shortie that I was absolutely confident would win, Barton Rose which hosed up @ 4/5. Those that never bothered to make a selection got rewarded with Thane Of Cawdor a 9/2 winner. That just cannot be right.
No post should be a -£1.00 in the balance in my opinion. |
|
By:
See post on prem
|
|
By:
At one point on thread someone said that a separate thread would be put up for voting purposes.....probably why so few posting to this thread!
LRF capped to EVENS is fine by me....You are then likely that a specific choice of earlier race favourites will be made.....more judgment being made.. |
|
By:
Sorry petemac.....just seen your post and read PRE thread....
Best wishes to you Shanelee...... |
|
By:
sixtwosix 03 Mar 14 19:02
Ludicrous that my picked winner is inferior to lots of people being attributed to a better priced winner they did not pick. Days like this make this concept farcical and after spending time and effort picking a possible winner ,it does make you wonder what's the point ? SlippyBlue 03 Mar 14 20:04 today is the perfect example as to why. I napped a shortie that I was absolutely confident would win, Barton Rose which hosed up @ 4/5. Those that never bothered to make a selection got rewarded with Thane Of Cawdor a 9/2 winner. That just cannot be right. These two posts just about sum it up for me, the bigger the price of a last race winning fav, the more devalued the comp becomes, in my humble opinion. |
|
By:
LRF bods won't vote - obviously
|
|
By:
LRF bods won't vote - obviously
|
|
By:
LRF bods won't vote - obviously
|
|
By:
Given a vote, I would be for getting rid of LRF
|
|
By:
LRF 9/2
This competition is becoming a f*cking joke! |
|
By:
I think using LRF is just as good a method as anything else to cover holidays, but holidays is the key word.
As I've previously said, the key is people need to say in advance they are not posting, else they get docked a £. Yes there will be days where someone has no internet connection or another reason that crops up for not posting, but that's just tough. |
|
By:
So what is wrong with my suggestion of doing away with LRF and having x number of days per year where you score zero for non-posting?
This allows for holidays and personal issues and then, when you have used up your number of allocated days then every day after that you get -1 for not posting. If x = 60 and no more than 10 free days allowed per month (covers a fortnights holiday) then surely this must work for everyone:- a) no-one gets a free 9/2 winner like today b) someone than can't/doesn't post suffers no penalty except that they have one less free day left to take during the year. As long as the number of free days is divisible by 12 so that there is a monthly allocation and therefore an easily assignable amount given to someone that joins partway through the year then everything else should be ok for people? |
|
By:
hi madhatter - the problem with your idea, as i see it, is that as competitors move divisions and as time passes (when does their individual 12 month period start?) , then keeping track of such movements will be a nightmare for the settlers (me included), especially when many months later players argue the toss.
sorry but for me this is a no go. |
|
By:
The idea of being penalised for going on holiday really bugs me.....so DCFCIronmans suggestion of a capped LRF is better than a straight -1 for taking time out to treat your family to a holiday!
 |
|
By:
madhatter - there is no "one size fits all" answer, whatever is done will please some as much as it displeases others. What we can do is try to do the right thing.
|
|
By:
Madhatter just to be pedantic. You would need at least 13 days to cover a fortnights holiday
|
|
By:
gee - i thought i wa
 s the major pedant on here |
|
By:
LRF --suggest -- Half the odds -- with a 2/1 max cap...
|
|
By:
"I believe it is reasonable to decide that interest is limited"
A bit baffled by your statement Bettysboy this thread has only been up 5 minutes and already has had a couple of thousand views. I am for a full vote rather than just the settlers, what happens if it is 2 for and 2 against? Plus if a full vote is not allowed after this debate and a decision is made by just 4 of the players this will not make the moaning vanish. |
|
By:
bb - the allowance is per calendar year.....
If you decided on say 4 grace (free non-posting) days per month then those players starting for Jan 1 get 48, those joining for Feb get 44, thos joing in July get 24 etc. All competitors are reset to 48 for the next calendar year. As I said earlier - if you had them listed in the field with your name (or in the cell next to it in the spreadsheet and coupled to it (Reged is good enough with spreadsheets to be able to do this!)) then when you go up or down a division your new settler would receive you as below: madhatter (21/48) wherein it would show that I had used 21 of my 48 allocation at the end of that month. There should be no issue with this at all as far as I can see. So, if it was October and it said madhatter (48/48) then I would have no days left and get -1 for every day I failed to post for the rest of the year. Then, in January, I would be reset to 48 for the new yearly competition as would all other cntestants. Hope that makes it a bit clearer, mad. |
|
By:
But I agree that penalising people for having a holiday, that have no mates to post for them, is a real no no.
Basically it would mean that if you go on a 2 week holiday you are pretty much relegated. To the argument that you can post from pretty much anywhere nowadays. I've tried posting on my phone before now and it's no fun. That's presuming I can get wifi, can see a racecard and can be arsed whilst I'm slipping on my speedos  |