Yes but the fairest method so far is from points per match win rather than points per frame/rack win.

That's why you need to resolve that issue first before moving on. Once you go down the points per frame win, which I think we are, then defaults will never give a fair outcome. Remember that the fair outcome does not only apply to the two clans directly involved, it applies to everyone else in the League which is where it always falls down in this system unfortunately.

I am not a fan of the 2 points for a win, but thats a different story.

Fair enough, on any given day Player A vs Player B could be any score from 15-0 to the reverse of that, but the whole point of asking a member from each team involved to predict the scoreline is so we can hopefully come to an agreement on what the scoreline will most hopefully be like.

I have already trialled this, on a small scale, and it worked reasonably well, asked to predict the score between me and johnny, the average was 9-6 to him, when we played it was 8-7 to him.
I really believe that this will help teams feeling that they have been shortchanged by the defaults, which could affect the league.

Killer Competition.

The biggest problem in Killer is from most clans interacting to try and arrange games, and also from clans clearly wanting to play when their best players are available. The arguments from all of this are tedious.

The idea is that each Captain has the first few days to contact their clan members, analyse their likely availability or not, and then give me 3 or 5 days and times from the second week of the fixture period when they believe it would be best to play. Should the two clans involved still want to work together before giving me these best times having agreed it between them first, then that would be OK too.

Once I receive that from each Captain I will then look for the best and closest match from those given. I will also match it up to my availability or another League runner.

The best matched date and time will then be announced and there would normally be anything between 5 and 14 days advanced notice.

At the given time the League runner oversees the setting up of the game with anything from 1 to 7 players each per team. If any or either clan has no players on at that time set in advance then they score zero.

The above is not set in stone and still allows the league Runner some flexibility based on things going on at the set time and in consultation with representatives of both clans (assuming anyone is online).

I am also looking at other possible formats rather than Clan v Clan - 3 clans at once with a maximum of 5 players from each clan or 5 clans at once with a maximum of 3 players from each clan. Much of that would depend on how many clans there are next season of course as to how viable these type of games are.

However the basic premise is to set the exact same playing conditions for all clans at all times for a Clan Killer competition, rather than clans going about things in different ways like happens now.

Edited at 11:24 Fri 02/05/14 (BST)

chapster_7 - Wolf Pack
pirate_steve - Uprising
thanatos - Phoenix Storm
cke1982 - Underdogs
_redherring_ - pros
punkpoet - PD's
mad_matt - Unbeatables
Need to find a new member - Ballbreakers
the__priest - Monkey Business

I have been informed that each member of the panel will be required to have a gmail account so default information will be able to shared amongst each other etc. If you would be so kind as to email chris with a gmail account address, then that would be great guys

Stuff the two players ability, IF a match isn't played then that's irrelevant. Default points awarded solely on effort and application.

Don't know why you think it should matter who the 2 original players were, whoopy-doo. Match has gone to default for simple reason, didn't get played.

FCL is fine how it is, the league which is treated more seriously than the others, the FBL extend the frames back to 8 or 9 scrap the 2 points and 1 point for an individual win and bring back the frames scored. 9 frames, in order to determine an actual winner, draws are boring Imo.
Keep the SL, I agree with Faust add some more bonus points to cater for both aspects of the game, attacking and defensive. 7 ball bonus would be good too, that's not achieved on a whim as the GBs are, if players were that awesome at them they'd be recording them as much as runouts

Having a separately run killer league has been called for for ages. Remove them from the SL fixtures as IMO they act more of a hindrance and sometimes take more effort arrange. Some are quite smooth sailing, a team can try get their players online and cooperative but cant necessarily control their oppositions.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and I respect your views.

At the moment the default scores are solely based on effort made, but Ash, as a man who normally pushed for change, why are you so opposed to try this?

What if later on in the season a match between you and your opponent comes down the last match, your player just needs to win to so your team claims third spot.

You both try hard, but the game goes to default, you both up with a 5-5, so you lose out on third spot.
Even though your player was a lot better than your opponents, and it costs you third place..

That's the whole point of Captaining a side, to try eradicate any obstacles and coordinate all matches getting played. IF a match fails to get played then that's down to the 2 teams Captains or Vices for not being alert or pro active enough to resolve within a 2 week time span. So with regards to your example, we forfeit 3rd place, and must try harder next season. The player who cost the team a default if has reputation or succession of them, then their position within the team should be reviewed.

Im not against a default panel, we need one but to second guess what a potential result could be in my eyes is totally wrong. For example I played Pete in Players Champ, won 7-6, admittedly he didn't play as well as he usually does but that aside I still needed take my chances, if that went default, your panel would not have given me a hope or a prayer, removing me from the competition on a score which maybe 95% would happen but the fact the other 5% is ignored.
The only person who could possibly give a clearer indication how a match could go would be the 2 captains of their teams who could submit what they possibly think the result would be and the Default Panel agree or disagree.

The question is this, were you shocked by your result?

I see your point Ash, and it would be exactly the same for me, as long as you do everything you can to get the game played tho then result should always be in your favour.

The reason I ask, is because you have said that he didn't play well, so I am guessing that you would have presumed you would lose most days, or maybe nick a win if he has an off day.

No one can guess when someones off days are, just like someone has wrote in their bio (thanks davey_1985) ,A higher rank increases the odds of a win, it does not guarantee one.

So yes, maybe someone would guess that you might have beat pete, but the majority of the time, he would most likely win, and that is what the panel is trying to achieve, a result that was probably going to happen.

But the main thing we are here to do, is try and prevent defaults.

And with regards to the clan captains having input on a default that concerns them, is not going to happen, they will be too involved in the result, so I think its best if they are kept away from a default that concerns their own team.

What does it matter if I were shocked, I could predict my own result far better than having a panel do it for me - I were surprised I won, yes of course but I never once during the match thought I'm gonna get trashed here. So why should I have other people decide that for me?

No they ain't, what you going do get them sit there with a microfisch database from all the times a players played each other. NO I don't think so

Their decision will be based solely on who the 2 players are, do they stand a cat in hell's chance and anyone put up vs Pros, Uprising even UB's wont be give any hope.

It's Wrong.

Surely that's an argument against your predictive default? If Ash tries his absolute hardest to get the game played but is thwarted why is he limited to 5 points? He ought to have the ability to achieve what he might (regardless of likelihood) have achieved by playing?

Lets turn that round to a situation where Clan A and Clan B are in the last game of the season and there is one last match to be played. The two players involved are evenly matched. Clan A lead Clan B by 12 points.

On a predictive score basis the default will be 8-7 or 7-8 because the players are evenly matched. Clan A could then decide that they do not want to play that last game as, worse case scenario, they win the league by 4 points assuming the default score ends up 8-0 or 7-0.

That clearly cannot be allowed to happen and that's why the circumstances of every single default have to be considered fully. If its clear that that is Clan A's tactic, not to play the game, then punish them accordingly with the appropriate default, not the predictive default.

There is a lot of talk about accurate outcomes. I have to say that if the FBL changes to a scoring system of 2 points per individual win and 1 point per individual draw and these points carry through to the League table, the FBL next season will be the most accurately scored League of them all. The team that wins and draws the most individual games across the whole season will win the League.

you could use http://www.freeforums.org instead of google mail. works well on snooker as me or seb can change permissions etc, i know google is the same but on free forums you dont need a gmail account just an email address

Personally, I will be checking how that player has played recently, as form is a good guide. I am not as naive as you think with regards to this.

Yes, every player is capable of a shock, like yourself against pete, but 9/10 times, you would most likely lose that game.

I think basing a default purely on effort involved really kills the default to begin with and skews the scoring more if my system were implemented.

I do not see the harm in trying something different, I am trying to make the scoreline as close to the real thing as possible. Which surely is a good thing??

my idea would be:

4 frames of each where if you win a type you gain 2 points, if you draw you get 1 and 0 for a loss.

i would have said 2 of each but i like the FCL marathon trying to find a comeback from 4-1 down or trying safties to try and stay in front.

problem with defaults is more points available to use then the harder the prediction becomes. thats why 6 frame based leagues are easier than FCL which is 15.

chris, the main thing i was meaning, was that it was going to be draw, which still wouldnt have enabled PS to win.

But anyways, I think it is worth a go, if enough people say no, fair enough.

You keep on saying that, I still disagree.
With either method, defaults are still an equal problem. They don't have any less weight on one method than the other.
Yes, 2 points for an indiv win makes decisions easier, less choices, but it still can award 100% of the points on offer for that indiv match. That's no different than awarding a 15-0. Also, under a predicted score system, a frame scoring method would probably never award more than 13 of 15 (less than 100%), I imagine most default scores would stay between 5 and 10. So I could even argue that they'd have less of an impact in a frame scoring system than in the 2 points system.
In either method, the default decision could affect league standings.
In either method, it "applies to everyone else in the league".

Can you really not see the difference between a 2-0 and anything between a 13 and 15-0. The first was always going to happen regardless either way, the second? Who has a clue in reality?

Do you refuse to see that both are the same?,ruffly 1/8th of the points the team could've gained from that indiv match?

Again, it would more commonly be only 60 or 70 percent of that 1/8th going to one team in a frame based method. (one that starts with a probable score)
This also, is what would've most likely happened anyway, just like in the other method.

Edited at 13:12 Fri 02/05/14 (BST)