User Tag List

Page 6 of 20 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 LastLast
Results 86 to 102 of 340
  1. #86
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Cebu, Philippines
    Posts
    375
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer
    don't see the logic there.. Why not change to bigger racket, bouncing balls and bigger court.. and also change the name to Tennis, just to get more money and TV-air time

    The whole reason for IBF to mess with these rules is to make games shorter. (which they THINK would be better for Television).. If they had half the brain they would understand that this is NOT the root problem, and that indeed tennis matches for example many times are much longer!!

    To popularize badminton, one has to analyze WHAT makes a game popular.. What makes Tennis popular? Is it the simple to understand scoring? Is it the size of the court? is it the line-markings?

    If you think deep enough you'll probably reach the conslusion that the poplarity and Telvision covery of the sport will not change dramatically by moving from service scoring to rally scoring.. redrawing court lines, rule changes etc etc..

    These are just "diversions" from the real issue, and by wasting energy on this energy that could be put into greater use for the sport is lost

    /twobeer
    I'll have to agree with Coops on this one. Although I find the new system horrible and a nuisance, we should still give time to adjust and try it out. So far, I still think the new system sucks.

  2. #87
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,992
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by keith_aquino
    I'll have to agree with Coops on this one. Although I find the new system horrible and a nuisance, we should still give time to adjust and try it out. So far, I still think the new system sucks.
    But what would be the point? Why not try 5x15 rally scoring? 5x9 std. 1x40 rally paus ever 10 point etc etc..

    You can come up with all sorts of wacky scoring systems to try..

    But if it aint broken why try to fix it????

    If 3x21 rally-scoring isn't a success what should we try next year????

    If the only thing IBF does for the sports is suggestion new rules to try out.. I don't think they are doing a great job of promoting the sport!!

    /Twobeer

  3. #88
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lymm, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,287
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer
    But what would be the point? Why not try 5x15 rally scoring? 5x9 std. 1x40 rally paus ever 10 point etc etc..

    You can come up with all sorts of wacky scoring systems to try..

    But if it aint broken why try to fix it????

    If 3x21 rally-scoring isn't a success what should we try next year????

    If the only thing IBF does for the sports is suggestion new rules to try out.. I don't think they are doing a great job of promoting the sport!!

    /Twobeer
    from what i remember the reason to move to rally scoring was that the general public found the scoring system complicated. The move to rally scoring should simplify it so that more people can understand what's going on..

    personally i think we should increase the points to 25 and tie breaks up to 40... this would ensure a similar length game..

    Coops

  4. #89
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,992
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coops241180
    from what i remember the reason to move to rally scoring was that the general public found the scoring system complicated. The move to rally scoring should simplify it so that more people can understand what's going on..
    Have never met anyone I couldn't explain the scoring of "first to 15, point only when serving" to in less than a minute.. If they think that's hard to grasp... How would you explain an illegal serve to them

    It's a silly argument.. And we all know that most other popular games have more complex rules....

    Why doesn't Tennis change from 15,30,40 game to 1,2,3,4 points... O those ATP managers must be sooo stuuuupid ..think how much more popular tennis would be with simpler scoring

    /Twobeer
    Last edited by twobeer; 12-12-2005 at 09:34 AM.

  5. #90
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lymm, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,287
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer
    Have never met anyone I couldn't explain the scoring of "first to 15, point only when serving" to in less than a minute.. If they think that's hard to grasp... How would you explain an illegal serve to them

    It's a silly argument.. And we all know that most other popular games have more complex rules....

    Why doesn't Tennis change from 15,30,40 game to 1,2,3,4 points... O those ATP managers must be sooo stuuuupid ..think how much more popular tennis would be with simpler scoring

    /Twobeer
    i think it was the not scoring unless your serving bit that people didn't understand.. ie.. you win a rally, but it doesn't get you anything but the serve.. and the serve isn't exactly an advantage.

    don't get me wrong - i'm happy with how the scoring is at the moment, but i have faith in the IBF to do the right thing. tennis and table tennis have both tweaked rules to make them more tv, spectator and player friendly.

    it's cheaper to change rules than it is to try to market a sport, especially when the sport's image is so 'back-garden'. it would require a vast spend to get the sport anywhere near where it wants to be. And for a lot of people that's either not justified, or simply can't be afforded.

    Complaining about it doesn't achieve anything. As my maths teacher once said - don't come to me with problems, come to me with solutions..

    saying ' we need to market the sport better' is not a solution. unless of course your willing to pay billions to get 'Play badminton' emblazoned on every billboard, bus, taxi, tv advert, sports superstar etc etc so that the sport get's into the public eye.

    i respect the IBF for not giving up and doing everything they can to make the sport more popular..

    Coops

  6. #91
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,992
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coops241180
    saying ' we need to market the sport better' is not a solution. unless of course your willing to pay billions to get 'Play badminton' emblazoned on every billboard, bus, taxi, tv advert, sports superstar etc etc so that the sport get's into the public eye.

    i respect the IBF for not giving up and doing everything they can to make the sport more popular..

    Coops
    My problem is that i don't think they by doing rule changes is doing "everything they can".. I think they are looking for "quick fixes" that they can put down in a document in an anual meeting without requiring any "real" work from their part...

    I am not even sure marketing today neccessarilly need to be that extremely expensive... given New channels like internet etc. It will however require lots of work!

    You can say, that I do not have the right to have an opintion on their work, as I do not walk in their shoes..
    Or that it's easier to sit at the sidelines and shout than to actually produce yourself

    Of course it is..

    I can even sit and critizise some of the pro players and find misstakes in their game, techinque and tactics, knowing I will never in my life be even close to their abilities!!

    It's not like Gades coach would be able to do a better job against Lin Dan, but I am sure Gade listens to his advices .

    If I where the IBF president.. Maybe I would also be looking for "the holy grail".. finding that one rule change that would instantly make the public start watching all games and sponsors running to get a piece of the action...
    But I ain't, and however objective I try to be about it, I strongly feel they are barking up the wrong tree here!!

    Lets just face it.. Lots of hard work, and lobbying and activities, actions to involve all players and fans, and the manufacturers of equipment clothing etc etc.. is needed for IBF.. But do the IBF board members want to put in that time and effort? Who would pay them?? What would be the incentives??

    My proposal would be for IBF to do the following:

    a) Try to form a Mens Single Tour (kind of ATP) and if possbile a mens double tour. try to negotiate with manufacturers and Sport-channels right from the beginning.

    b) When supplying video footage etc to media.. make sure the way to the finals are covered.. not only the finals... The way up to the finals is probably more important than the final just by it self.. if you want some excitment..

    c) Use the Internet as a marketing channel.. the IBFs web-site isn't that impressive from a marketing perespective
    little money could go a long where here.. and commercial thinking would make it possible to fund things as well I beleive (sponsorship, ad's. etc etc.)

    The Key is to think business... It's like when F1 started.. You have the product.. what IBF needs is sales-guys girls and a good sales process.. then sell sell sell..

    /twobeer

  7. #92
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lymm, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,287
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer
    My problem is that i don't think they by doing rule changes is doing "everything they can".. I think they are looking for "quick fixes" that they can put down in a document in an anual meeting without requiring any "real" work from their part...
    i don't believe this - there are people on the IBF who are ex-players - simply this cannot be, they are looking for a fix that they can afford and can budget, we don't want an NHL situation where they missed an entire season because they couldn't pay

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer
    a) Try to form a Mens Single Tour (kind of ATP) and if possbile a mens double tour. try to negotiate with manufacturers and Sport-channels right from the beginning.
    but if the image of badminton is back-garden why would people watch this on telly, or even go to the events? and if some people go / watch - do enough people go / watch for advertisers to make enough return on the serises?

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer
    b) When supplying video footage etc to media.. make sure the way to the finals are covered.. not only the finals... The way up to the finals is probably more important than the final just by it self.. if you want some excitment..
    more footage means more money to show it on the channels....

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer
    c) Use the Internet as a marketing channel.. the IBFs web-site isn't that impressive from a marketing perespective
    little money could go a long where here.. and commercial thinking would make it possible to fund things as well I beleive (sponsorship, ad's. etc etc.)

    The Key is to think business... It's like when F1 started.. You have the product.. what IBF needs is sales-guys girls and a good sales process.. then sell sell sell..

    /twobeer
    totally agree with your last point

    i'm sure the IBF does think business and this is probably the reason that we don't see badminton televised as much as we'd like - big mainstream TV channels in Europe and America simply won't pay for badminton to be aired when they can put something on that more people will watch.

    while rule changes do appear like quick fixed, they are really the only 'free' thing the ibf can do, and if they can make badminton appeal to more people without spending a fortune then this can only be a good thing.

    have faith my fellow badmintonite - they will come through for us

    Coops

  8. #93
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    63
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coops241180
    i don't believe this - there are people on the IBF who are ex-players - simply this cannot be, they are looking for a fix that they can afford and can budget, we don't want an NHL situation where they missed an entire season because they couldn't pay

    have faith my fellow badmintonite - they will come through for us

    Coops
    I think there is a fallacy here. The IBF folks keep saying "oh, make the game shorter, make the rules simpler, and it will go on TV, and it will become popular!" I think that is silly, and not borne out by facts. For, why? Can they give us one good reason? People stay up past midnight to watch Agassi play a four hour match. Look at cricket and baseball. It is difficult to invent games with more complicated rules, and yet they are on TV all the time. Cricket Test matches go on for FIVE DAYS at a time, and nobody, but nobody, complains about them. Instead, they _cherish_ the eccentricities of their game. Admittedly, they have come up with shorter versions of the game, but the long version remains paramount. Nobody says the IBF shouldn't experiment. But they are the custodians of the game, and they should be doing everything in their power to maintain the integrity and spirit of the game, not selling out to TV executives in hopes of making a fast buck.

    These rule changes they are imposing from top down make drastic changes in how Badminton is played. And the changes, as far as I have been able to tell, have all been to the bad. This is not the price I want to pay for potential increase on American TV.

    And please, don't tell me about simplified scoring. I defy anyone to explain in plain English how this new scoring system will work in doubles.

  9. #94
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lymm, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,287
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    okay - so if you don't want rule changes, then come up with something that is affordable....

    i pity the ibf, nothing they do is ever going to please everybody, they are at least trying.

    if next season the ibf launched a men's singles and doubles series, which had stages in all 5 continents and was coverd by Sky sports and ESPN and had the finals in the albert hall or something and then the next season they couldn't afford to give prize money for any events or even get any badminton on tv at all we'd complain then too..

    if they launched an all singing all dancing website that had live results and video feeds, player profiles, ticket sales etc. etc we'd complain that it wasn't enough or that the site couldn't cope with the traffic it was generating.

    so when they make what i think is a little change to the scoring system, (and playing to 21 doesn't count because we've done that for a long time in some places) all hell breaks loose.. this change in scoring in my opinion doesn't represent a wholesale changing of the way we play the sport. Give it time, see if it works.. the IBF have experimented before, and wouldn't unleash a rule change, unless they were sure that they needed too - especially given the mess other rule changes have caused..

    Coops

  10. #95
    Regular Member ctjcad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    u.s.a.
    Posts
    19,157
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Overall it's going to be interesting..but not bad..

    Quote Originally Posted by terry
    KUALA LUMPUR:
    In an effort to popularise the sport and be television-friendly, the council decided that the new 21-point best-of-three games will be experimented with from Feb 1 in all IBF tournaments that offers world ranking points.
    i believe they will start testing the new scoring system in the Thomas and Uber Cups Continental preliminary stages.....and during that time frame, let's see what other significant or higher star tournaments will be affected:
    -Philippine Open, Feb 01-09
    -Thomas and Uber Cups Continental stages, Feb 08-22
    -Aviva Cofco China Masters, Feb 8-12
    -Commonwealth Games, March 16-25
    -Asian Badminton Championships, March 28 to April 02
    -European Championships , April 11-16
    -Thomas and Uber Cups, April 28-May 07
    http://www.worldbadminton.net/Portal....aspx?tabid=18
    boy, that'll be an interesting turn of events...

    After the Thomas-Uber Cup Finals in Japan from April 28-May 7, the council will decide if the scoring format is successful and should be adopted for all their tournaments, including the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing.
    phew, thank goodness they will only have to wait til after the Thomas and Uber Cups to make their decision....my hunch is, they will bail out from the new idea and go back to the previous scoring system..but who knows..
    Last edited by ctjcad; 12-12-2005 at 11:47 AM.

  11. #96
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    63
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coops241180
    okay - so if you don't want rule changes, then come up with something that is affordable....

    i pity the ibf, nothing they do is ever going to please everybody, they are at least trying.

    if next season the ibf launched a men's singles and doubles series, which had stages in all 5 continents and was coverd by Sky sports and ESPN and had the finals in the albert hall or something and then the next season they couldn't afford to give prize money for any events or even get any badminton on tv at all we'd complain then too..

    if they launched an all singing all dancing website that had live results and video feeds, player profiles, ticket sales etc. etc we'd complain that it wasn't enough or that the site couldn't cope with the traffic it was generating.

    so when they make what i think is a little change to the scoring system, (and playing to 21 doesn't count because we've done that for a long time in some places) all hell breaks loose.. this change in scoring in my opinion doesn't represent a wholesale changing of the way we play the sport. Give it time, see if it works.. the IBF have experimented before, and wouldn't unleash a rule change, unless they were sure that they needed too - especially given the mess other rule changes have caused..

    Coops
    Well, asking me to come up with an alternative is useless. If they put me in charge, sure I will.

    Actually, they have had a history of trying to mess with the scoring system. Didn't they come up with the 5x7 with barely any experimentation? My main problem with the IBF is that they are not holding to the paramount rule that they ought to be holding up: "First, do no harm!"

    I think this kind of wholesale messing around is harmful. What they should have done was suggest the 3x21rally as an option and let it exist for a few years and if people thought it worked, then consider including it in some tournaments, and if it proved wildly successful, then switch over completely. It should have been a multi-year process, maybe even a decade-long one, not just a dictat handed down from on above.

  12. #97
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lymm, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,287
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kanive
    Well, asking me to come up with an alternative is useless. If they put me in charge, sure I will.

    Actually, they have had a history of trying to mess with the scoring system. Didn't they come up with the 5x7 with barely any experimentation? My main problem with the IBF is that they are not holding to the paramount rule that they ought to be holding up: "First, do no harm!"

    I think this kind of wholesale messing around is harmful. What they should have done was suggest the 3x21rally as an option and let it exist for a few years and if people thought it worked, then consider including it in some tournaments, and if it proved wildly successful, then switch over completely. It should have been a multi-year process, maybe even a decade-long one, not just a dictat handed down from on above.

    i'm sure the IBF appreciate suggestions from everybody..

    some people would say by not making changes they are doing the sport harm already.

    Your right, they screwed up changing the scoring last time.. and personally i think they have learnt their lesson and investigated this new change more thoroughly.

    but having alternative scoring systems for different competitions is messy, and could lead to the sport becoming divided into different camps. This would also harm the sport.
    The IBF haven't just said - this is the scoring system like it or lump it. they are trialling it till after the TC and UC. so they're not trialling it for long, but they are trialling it over a number of different tournaments at different levels. Let us see how it pan's out i say.. if it doesn't work, then we'll just return to the original - experiment over, no harm done..

    Coops

  13. #98
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    63
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coops241180
    okay - so if you don't want rule changes, then come up with something that is affordable....

    Coops
    Well since you asked

    Here is a simple way to increase ad revenues by an order of magnitude. Bear with me, please, while I explain.

    An average 15-point game lasts a bit less than 15 minutes in real time. If however you were to use a stop watch and measure the time that the shuttle is actually in play, it is only about 4 minutes. Seriously. Check it for yourself if you don't believe me. Let's give it some slack and say 6 minutes. This means, in every game, there is 7-8 minutes available for ads! That is, there is time for about 15 30-second spots!! The only problem is that these times do not come in well-regulated chunks, so it is not possible to simply interrupt the telecast at the end of a point and show an ad.

    Unless: you adopt a TiVo-like technology to do the telecast. Suppose you have the ability to pause the telecast at will. Then, consider the following sequence --
    1. start the telecast when the referee says "love-all, play"
    2. show the first two points in entirety
    3. pause the telecast -- continue recording the game, but show a couple of ads instead.
    4. resume the telecast, but now only show recorded snippets that go from about 5 seconds before serve to 5 seconds after rally ends, until the recorded session has caught up to real time -- this will happen about 5 minutes into the game, about a third of the way in.
    5. pause again and show ads
    6. resume telecast as above, and when the recording does catch up with real time again, this time around the 10 minute mark, don't stop, but continue with uninterrupted real time telecast till the end. A win-win-win situation, where the ads get shown, the game doesn't get interrupted, and the end of the game, which is usually the most tense, doesn't get interrupted either.

    I have no idea if that will work. But it seems to me that technologically speaking, it is possible. And maybe the extra revenue will make it worth somebody's while to test this.

  14. #99
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lymm, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,287
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kanive
    Well since you asked

    Here is a simple way to increase ad revenues by an order of magnitude. Bear with me, please, while I explain.

    An average 15-point game lasts a bit less than 15 minutes in real time. If however you were to use a stop watch and measure the time that the shuttle is actually in play, it is only about 4 minutes. Seriously. Check it for yourself if you don't believe me. Let's give it some slack and say 6 minutes. This means, in every game, there is 7-8 minutes available for ads! That is, there is time for about 15 30-second spots!! The only problem is that these times do not come in well-regulated chunks, so it is not possible to simply interrupt the telecast at the end of a point and show an ad.

    Unless: you adopt a TiVo-like technology to do the telecast. Suppose you have the ability to pause the telecast at will. Then, consider the following sequence --
    1. start the telecast when the referee says "love-all, play"
    2. show the first two points in entirety
    3. pause the telecast -- continue recording the game, but show a couple of ads instead.
    4. resume the telecast, but now only show recorded snippets that go from about 5 seconds before serve to 5 seconds after rally ends, until the recorded session has caught up to real time -- this will happen about 5 minutes into the game, about a third of the way in.
    5. pause again and show ads
    6. resume telecast as above, and when the recording does catch up with real time again, this time around the 10 minute mark, don't stop, but continue with uninterrupted real time telecast till the end. A win-win-win situation, where the ads get shown, the game doesn't get interrupted, and the end of the game, which is usually the most tense, doesn't get interrupted either.

    I have no idea if that will work. But it seems to me that technologically speaking, it is possible. And maybe the extra revenue will make it worth somebody's while to test this.
    IBF.. listen to this man!!!!!!
    a thoroughly creative and well thought out solution your a genius..

    altho i wonder what would happen when you get to the latter stages of a tournament and the games last closer to half an hour than 15 minutes..

    i mean - you could even just shove in a mandatory ad break every 15 minutes of play, and like you said, cut the time that the shuttle isn't in play out..

    great thinking man - i like it

    Coops

  15. #100
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,992
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kanive
    I have no idea if that will work. But it seems to me that technologically speaking, it is possible. And maybe the extra revenue will make it worth somebody's while to test this.
    Dealyed transmission is very common in the TV insudtry, so to "time-slip" sports-events in order to get comercial in, is a real possibility with current techonology..

    I think these kind of "createive" thinking is what is neede by IBF.. isntead of just looking for the holy rule change that will sway the media over

    /Twobeer

  16. #101
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Kingston, ON
    Posts
    415
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    since we have all these discussions revolving around IBF, new scoring system, popularity, etc etc. Does BF/BC has any influence in IBF? Any of the members work for IBF/have "a say" in the decision making?

    IF we sign a petition/online petition to IBF to keep badminton just as it is right now, will it work? will they even consider it? I'm pretty sure some one could organize an online petition or even a real one to keep badminton as it is.

  17. #102
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    131
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coops241180
    okay - so if you don't want rule changes, then come up with something that is affordable....

    i pity the ibf, nothing they do is ever going to please everybody, they are at least trying.

    if next season the ibf launched a men's singles and doubles series, which had stages in all 5 continents and was coverd by Sky sports and ESPN and had the finals in the albert hall or something and then the next season they couldn't afford to give prize money for any events or even get any badminton on tv at all we'd complain then too..

    if they launched an all singing all dancing website that had live results and video feeds, player profiles, ticket sales etc. etc we'd complain that it wasn't enough or that the site couldn't cope with the traffic it was generating.

    so when they make what i think is a little change to the scoring system, (and playing to 21 doesn't count because we've done that for a long time in some places) all hell breaks loose.. this change in scoring in my opinion doesn't represent a wholesale changing of the way we play the sport. Give it time, see if it works.. the IBF have experimented before, and wouldn't unleash a rule change, unless they were sure that they needed too - especially given the mess other rule changes have caused..

    Coops
    You seriously think the rule change will work? It may be cheap, but surely no advantage there. All I know is that if you pay peanuts you will going to get monkeys!

Page 6 of 20 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. New scoring format for Thomas Cup
    By ants in forum Thomas Cup / Uber Cup 2006
    Replies: 40
    : 02-16-2006, 07:28 PM
  2. New Scoring Format for Doubles
    By Kamen in forum General Forum
    Replies: 45
    : 12-29-2005, 03:11 AM
  3. 5*7 scoring format
    By komodo dragon in forum Thomas Laybourn Forum
    Replies: 2
    : 10-04-2003, 11:33 AM
  4. Scoring format to be reverted back to traditional format
    By Winex West Can in forum General Forum
    Replies: 1
    : 03-23-2003, 04:45 PM
  5. New Scoring Format
    By CJ in forum General Forum
    Replies: 22
    : 02-28-2001, 09:00 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •