You should know better not to swear. In future please don't abuse the chat filter by saying the 'P word'

im also thinking of going a golden cue award next season (no thread needed) so the player who has won most frames out of ALL clans will win this award.

true but what if 1 person has won and others played like 8 and lost one?

Hey guys,

i am a competitive guy as a lot of you know, but i cant attempt to even win the golden cue in the individuals league because this season you have decided to count the cup games as well.

my team was knocked out in the first round, so is it my fault that i cant go on to win the golden cue?

i am just saying its a bit unfair if we all don't get to play the same amount of clan games. if i played the same amount as destiny i think i would be comfortably in 2nd or third place,

i personally don't like the choice you guys have made and tbh it sort of makes me not want to do the clan game thing anymore,

edited after reading the above post

Alot of players still try to win the golden cue and its always been just league results, I think it should include cup results as its part of the FCL but this can give players a disadvantage as the cup is only 5 aside so less players get the chance to play, also as mentioned by perfect_play, players in clans getting knocked out in the early rounds can forget it, so maybe keep it to the league where all clans play the same amount of fixtures.

Edited at 10:45 Sat 18/09/10 (BST)

I agree with the concerns above

Then again, players getting different number of games will be a problem even if just counting league games - it's just how it is...

How about this:

We keep the player statistics as they are - as just that: Statistics.


In addition, we could add an official Golden Cue table which I\d suggest being calculated as this:

The table is sorted by Points Per Game, not total points. To avoid players winning from a single, lucky game, we would have to require a minimum of games played to take part in this table, say for example minimum 5 games.

Thoughts?

I've been tempted to sort the player stat table by points per game for a long time anyway - that's the real score of how well a player has done over time anyway, but somehow need to sort out the problem with a player sitting with a single, very good (or lucky) game played.

Also keep in mind that all such tables are not only a result of how well the player has done, but also who he has meat. Even for the best players, the result is a two-way thing, factoring in both your own effort as well as that of the opponent... Hence the need for at least a few games minimum to be eligible for the golden cue event...

I agree with the points per game, if you want a golden cue winner why not have the player with the best average as long as he has played for example 6 games.

Would stop a player who had one or two big wins winning it.

true im talking about this precise thing on snooker, someone suggested that win ratio could be better than total frames which i can agree upon but ive mentioned the fact and you guys have as well that what happens is 1 person wins and sits out rest of season to win this award it doesn't work out.

but the minimum games is a great idea, because my league is shorter than pools due to less clans i think 5 or 6 games is a reasonable amount to follow.

great points made and i hope this is changed next season but i wouldn't be proper fussed if it stayed the same.

I see the golden cue a bit like a top scorer in a football season, frames instead of goals tho, shouldn't matter who you play against or how many games you play, its about who wins the most frames in a season or goals scored, I just think if we keep it to the league results it gives players the opportunity to play the same amount of games.

Maybe consider running two events like James proposed then:

One for the best player in each league, and another for the top scorer equivalent.