|
|
Post by IronHorse4 on Jun 2, 2010 10:54:14 GMT -5
Stat corrections from the suspended game:
Justin 0
JW +2
Pops +12 (edited)
Nettles +2
Evan +6
Jose +9
Here are the actual Session 4 standings, based on, you know, when the games were actually played.
Solons 600 (edited)
The Bureau 587.33
The Swingin' Dicks 584
Hoboken Nine 581
The Abortions 548.34
Brooklyn Bad Boys 529.33
Just Too Easy 505
NJ Barflies of LI 481.66
High Hard Ones 468
Forest Hills Incalls 464.67
Mile High Burritos 7 400
smash-fuckin-mouth 364.34
And here are the ACTUAL Session 5 standings, if we didn't do things half-assed around here (simple subtraction of the corrected points):
As of morning of 6/2:
Grover--203
Justin--166
Tom--161
John--143
Pops--140
Laura--126
Nettles--119
Knoblauch--117
Jose--109
Larry--106
Milton--100
Evan--96
Elapsed time: 12 minutes
|
|
|
|
Post by grover on Jun 2, 2010 11:06:02 GMT -5
>Elapsed time: 9 minutes Essentially the argument is that it's just too impractical to go back and try to figure out which players are effected and which teams are effected.
|
|
|
|
Post by IronHorse4 on Jun 2, 2010 11:15:25 GMT -5
The problem is that Balls has a spreadsheet that he can just enter in (or cut/paste) the overall total numbers. God forbid he creats another cell that subtracts the session numbers properly.
Again....less than 10 minutes. I didn't even use a calculator, and I only had to take off one shoe and sock.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator 
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Jun 2, 2010 13:21:16 GMT -5
The problem is, according to manually double checking just Pops, those numbers aren't right.
Pops scored 73 points on Sunday, 34 points on Monday, and 33 points yesterday. That's 140 points. According to Yahoo, Pops has 152 points this session. In his case, there were no fractional points involved.
Pops' only change was the 12 points by Burnett. You dealt with 6 people, I checked one, and the numbers don't match. You do it manually, mistakes happen.
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Jun 2, 2010 13:27:14 GMT -5
Way to go!
|
|
|
|
Post by grover on Jun 2, 2010 13:41:54 GMT -5
Wait, you did it when people kicked up Shit but not on your own for the benefit of the league?
God, this season can't end faster.
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Jun 2, 2010 13:49:40 GMT -5
Actually Balls was proving a good point, that if we need to start manually doing all kinds of number changes for different players / teams / managers, its a shitshow. Instance one has just been displayed.
Again, problem solved, whoever scores the most points this session will win this session unless they fall behind someone with artficial points (unlikely) and choose not to protest.
|
|
|
|
Post by grover on Jun 2, 2010 14:14:44 GMT -5
Can you guys show me how this happens often enough for it to be a Shit show, considering that a ruling on it was just handed down, which also tells me this is the first time its happened.
Or am I wrong to assume one time out of eight years is not a big deal?
Here's an idea: don't make mistakes. You're paid to do a job. Do it right.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Jun 2, 2010 14:19:05 GMT -5
For all we know, it has happened before, and this is the first time anyone noticed.
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Jun 2, 2010 14:36:06 GMT -5
You're paid to do a job.
Im not paid to deal with these matters.
The shitshow is in the figuring out all the number changes if they dont mean anything. I addressed the best way to do this, if it becomes an obvious issue, we fix it. I agree that whoever scores the most points for this session should win this session.
No one made mistakes here. Yahoo did this.
|
|
|
|
Post by grover on Jun 2, 2010 14:53:13 GMT -5
Wrong, Yahoo! Has no sessions.
We do, manually.
First you guys can't be bothered now its a mistake can be made.
Balls knows how to do peoples taxes but not this?
Talk about grasping for straws.
|
|
|
|
Post by IronHorse4 on Jun 2, 2010 17:05:21 GMT -5
No, I made the mistake there. I didn't do the extra 3 minutes of research to find out who was on the bench and who was active that day.
Problem fixed.
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Jun 2, 2010 17:13:07 GMT -5
Yeah, you're right, Grover. I guess we should get rid of sessions then, that will take care of this problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by grover on Jun 2, 2010 17:18:31 GMT -5
How about Balls pay attention and add the proper totals to the proper session?
How is it that this went unnoticed for eight years?
|
|
|
|
Post by IronHorse4 on Jun 2, 2010 17:43:25 GMT -5
I think it only happened mid-session in the past. It doesn't happen often to begin with. I don't think there have been that many suspended games in the last 8 years in the first place. And some may have been resumed well after the fact, not the next day in the same session.
But if it happened in the past, it likely happened mid-session, between weeks 1 and 2.
|
|
