IPL SuperSelector Substitution Points - Sub points = -10/change

[ludhianvi]

someone added the last option 'limit x or something' and has weakened/rigged the poll. Therefore, the poll has been rigged, and is deemed to be void. :D

[ViruRulez]

if(match->type == "50-over") {
  parStrikeRate = 0.83;   containmentWeight = 1;   
  fifty = 5;  century = 10;   four = 0.5;  six = 1;  
  maiden = 5;  wicket = 20;  wide = -1;  noball = -2;  
  catch = 8;  runout = 8;  
  stumping = 10;  keeperCatch = 5;  keeperRunout = 5;
}
else if(match->type == "5-day") {
  parStrikeRate = 0.4;  containmentWeight = 0.3;  
  fifty = 5;  century = 10;  four = 0.2;  six = 0.5;
  maiden = 1;  wicket = 30;  wide = -0.5;  noball = -0.5;  
  catch = 10;  runout = 10;  
  stumping = 15;  keeperCatch = 7;  keeperRunout = 7;
}
else if(match->type == "4-day" || "3-day") {
  parStrikeRate = 0.5;  containmentWeight = 0.4;  
  fifty = 5;  century = 10;  four = 0.2;  six = 0.5;
  maiden = 1;  wicket = 30;  wide = -0.5;  noball = -0.5;  
  catch = 10;  runout = 10;  
  stumping = 15;  keeperCatch = 7;  keeperRunout = 7;
}
else if(match->type == "20-over") {
  parStrikeRate = 1.2;  containmentWeight = 2.0;  
  fifty = 8;  century = 15;  four = 0.7;  six = 1.2; 
  maiden = 7;  wicket = 20;  wide = -1;  noball = -3;  
  catch = 8;  runout = 8;  
  stumping = 10;  keeperCatch = 5;  keeperRunout = 5;
}


Batting Points:
runs_scored + containmentWeight*(runs_scored- balls_faced*parStrikeRate) + fours_hit*four + sixes_hit*six 
+ (runs_scored > 100 ? century : (runs_scored > 50 ? fifty : 0));

Bowling Points:
(balls_bowled > 0 ? containmentWeight*(parStrikeRate-runs_given/balls_bowled)*balls_bowled : 0) 
+ maidens_bowled*maiden + wickets_taken*wicket 
+ wides_bowled*wide + noballs_bowled*noball;

Fielding Points:
(special_role == 'keeper' ? keeperCatch : catch)*catches 
+ (special_role == 'keeper' ? keeperRunout : runout)*runouts 
+ stumping*stumpings";

Total Points = Batting Score + Bowling Score + Fielding Score

There was some discussion on tweaking some weights around, but I don't think we ever arrived at a consensus and implementation. Probably after the IPL, we can tweak it around a bit. For example, perhaps a maiden and a fielder catch should be worth more than the current T20 assignment.

http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?p=223598 Points system for SS. I don't know if it changes for different format, would need someone else need clarify that edit: The Outsider :wall:

Thanks for the explanation Outsider and Sach. Never knew it previously.

i also voted 10' date=' i also want a gift hehehehe :D[/quote'] All I promised is tips to do well in IPL SS. And the main trick is to make regular subs and good subs. Also try to include all rounders because it will add both batting and bowling points. Slogger and hard hitters are also good as that is more beneficial in the code mentioned above to calculate the points.

someone added the last option 'limit x or something' and has weakened/rigged the poll. Therefore, the poll has been rigged, and is deemed to be void. :D

:finger: BTW you are a regular subber .. so why supporting the higher sub points :hmmm:

[The Outsider]

I am for my vote to be transferred to any option 20 or higher. 10 is ridiculous.

[bobbydhillon]

whats up ladies still arguing bout sub points?:giggle:

[Sachinism]

If you guys lose to bobby again you all suck

[flamy]

Democracy is overrated

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: bahahahhahaa, the lowest denominator (all puns intended :yay:) is winning :aha:

[thevortex]

if(match->type == "50-over") {
  parStrikeRate = 0.83;   containmentWeight = 1;   
  fifty = 5;  century = 10;   four = 0.5;  six = 1;  
  maiden = 5;  wicket = 20;  wide = -1;  noball = -2;  
  catch = 8;  runout = 8;  
  stumping = 10;  keeperCatch = 5;  keeperRunout = 5;
}
else if(match->type == "5-day") {
  parStrikeRate = 0.4;  containmentWeight = 0.3;  
  fifty = 5;  century = 10;  four = 0.2;  six = 0.5;
  maiden = 1;  wicket = 30;  wide = -0.5;  noball = -0.5;  
  catch = 10;  runout = 10;  
  stumping = 15;  keeperCatch = 7;  keeperRunout = 7;
}
else if(match->type == "4-day" || "3-day") {
  parStrikeRate = 0.5;  containmentWeight = 0.4;  
  fifty = 5;  century = 10;  four = 0.2;  six = 0.5;
  maiden = 1;  wicket = 30;  wide = -0.5;  noball = -0.5;  
  catch = 10;  runout = 10;  
  stumping = 15;  keeperCatch = 7;  keeperRunout = 7;
}
else if(match->type == "20-over") {
  parStrikeRate = 1.2;  containmentWeight = 2.0;  
  fifty = 8;  century = 15;  four = 0.7;  six = 1.2; 
  maiden = 7;  wicket = 20;  wide = -1;  noball = -3;  
  catch = 8;  runout = 8;  
  stumping = 10;  keeperCatch = 5;  keeperRunout = 5;
}


Batting Points:
runs_scored + containmentWeight*(runs_scored- balls_faced*parStrikeRate) + fours_hit*four + sixes_hit*six 
+ (runs_scored > 100 ? century : (runs_scored > 50 ? fifty : 0));

Bowling Points:
(balls_bowled > 0 ? containmentWeight*(parStrikeRate-runs_given/balls_bowled)*balls_bowled : 0) 
+ maidens_bowled*maiden + wickets_taken*wicket 
+ wides_bowled*wide + noballs_bowled*noball;

Fielding Points:
(special_role == 'keeper' ? keeperCatch : catch)*catches 
+ (special_role == 'keeper' ? keeperRunout : runout)*runouts 
+ stumping*stumpings";

Total Points = Batting Score + Bowling Score + Fielding Score

There was some discussion on tweaking some weights around, but I don't think we ever arrived at a consensus and implementation. Probably after the IPL, we can tweak it around a bit. For example, perhaps a maiden and a fielder catch should be worth more than the current T20 assignment.

Thank you, Outisder. I wonder though whether a wicket in T20 is not worth more than in say ODIs. Maybe we ought to give more points for a wicket in T20 considering that it is a rare occurence? And as you say - economical spells are worth their weight in gold.

[ViruRulez]

:aha::aha::aha:

[The Outsider]

Thank you' date=' Outisder. I wonder though whether a wicket in T20 is not worth more than in say ODIs. Maybe we ought to give more points for a wicket in T20 considering that it is a rare occurence? And as you say - economical spells are worth their weight in gold.[/quote'] Yeah, I agree T20 rules need some modifications. They were cobbled together in a bit of a rush and without any prior experience to go by before the 2007 WC. We should probably modify them a bit before this years' WC.

[Lord]

so wats it finally?

[Tapioca]

Hope this is not "pure" democracy. If 16 people vote for 10, 10 for 20, 8 people for 30, we should do 16x10 + 10x20+ 8x30, divide it by total number of people and choose the number (multiple of 5) closest to it :--D

[The Outsider]

^ I like the idea of a weighted average - 20 would be a nice compromise number.

[Guest Hiten.]

So going by tapioca's suggestion 20 seems reasonable and fair, which makes me a very fair mod... Woohooo

[Holysmoke]

it should be 25

[Sachinism]

bob you're job is not to be a fair mod, its to abooz the pavar assigned to you :fail:

[Guest Gunner]

^ I like the idea of a weighted average - 20 would be a nice compromise number.

Now you sound like the EU Parliament. :giggle::giggle:

[Guest Gunner]

So going by tapioca's suggestion 20 seems reasonable and fair' date=' which makes me a very fair mod... Woohooo[/quote']

bob you're job is not to be a fair mod, its to abooz the pavar assigned to you :fail:

Yes I agree, bobby you haz :fail:z

[flamy]

Democracy!!!!!! :protest:

[Dinx - the Jinx]

so.. what is it finally? 10 or 20 or 25?

[ViruRulez]

Democracy!!!!!! :protest:

so.. what is it finally? 10 or 20 or 25?

its 10 by public voting :yay: