| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/06/2007 02:15:34 AM · #1 |
Would it maybe be a good idea in the future to split the WPL into a couple divisions. Maybe one could be called pro and it would be open to people with scores above 6.5 in their history and then another division where the participants have scores under 6.5's as an example. I think it might really increase intrest because it would get much more competative in each division.
Just a thought. Have a nice night! |
|
|
|
02/19/2007 10:09:48 AM · #2 |
I know it's outdated but let me bring up.
What about waiting for WPL to reform (as per today it may be divisions) and then form a new team not for winning but for fun and motivation? |
|
|
|
02/19/2007 11:32:31 AM · #3 |
| I don't like it. I'd rather have a smattering of experts amongst each team. |
|
|
|
02/19/2007 12:18:06 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by nards656:
I don't like it. I'd rather have a smattering of experts amongst each team. |
Yah. I actually suggested way back during WPL1 that we should create teams by "ranking" DPCers into groups based on their average scoring, and have each team consist of a certain number of people from each scoring group, for representative teams, rather than have them composed of people who sought each other out, thus avoiding teams stacked with high-scoring individuals, but this was not a popular idea. The majority of people wanted "affinity groups", like Icelanders vs Nikon users, whatever.
R.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2007 12:24:53 PM · #5 |
It could be like a major league/minor league thing. I think that's a great idea.
ADDED: Maybe this could grow and develop and teams could get "SPONSORS" and free equipment!
Message edited by author 2007-02-19 12:25:51.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2007 12:29:47 PM · #6 |
| Scott and I were going to make several different divisions once we had our own site for the WPL...now I'm not sure what they are talking about. It would even out the playing field a bit though so the same few teams were not winning all the time. |
|
|
|
02/19/2007 12:57:55 PM · #7 |
| I like the idea. I mean even the most competitive person can lose the drive if they continue to lose against stacked teams. A team of people that shoot in the high 5s against a tema that can all produce 7s or 8s can turn people off. |
|
|
|
02/19/2007 01:06:13 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by gazdi:
I know it's outdated but let me bring up.
What about waiting for WPL to reform (as per today it may be divisions) and then form a new team not for winning but for fun and motivation? |
Sounds like Team Suck, gazdi ;-) |
|
|
|
02/19/2007 01:11:50 PM · #9 |
To a certain extent, the proposal floated in the "Future of WPL" thread accomplishes what we're after here. Quoting my latest post there:
"It's called "divisional play". Teams are formed as currently, but there's no cap on how many teams can compete. Divisions are ranked A, B, C, D, etc, and consist of 8 teams per division. For the initial season, teams are "seeded" into divisions based on past WPL performance, team averages, or some other criterion.
"From that point on, a "season" consists of 7 weeks, and each team plays each other team in their division once per season. At the end of each season, teams are ranked in their division based on won/lost records, and the top 2 teams in each division move UP to the next higher division for the next season, while the bottom 2 teams move DOWN a division, and the middle 4 teams stay put. In division A, the top division or "champions" division, the top 6 teams stay put and the bottom 2 move down.
"End result is that new teams enter in the bottom divisions and work their way up the divisions over a number of seasons until, if they perform strongly enough, they make it into the top division and compete head-to-head against the "best teams".
"In practical terms, every team will eventually stabilize in a division that reflects its skill level, and will be competing only against teams of comparable skill levels. It's very workable IF you accept the idea that it takes time and effort to claw your way to the top."
R.
|
|
|
|
02/20/2007 03:29:38 AM · #10 |
edit: sorry about my English in advance..
Yes, I read that post of yours and that gave me the idea to propose  boomtap something constructive instead of dividing the League. Having an upper and a lower house of WPL would only cause problems in organisation and arguments on moving between houses, while "divisional play" solves this.
So what I meant is WPL should not break to two parts just because this way we can have two winners at the end. Furthermore, merging WPL and DPC will (IMO of course) share features of the two, namely DPC will have medium-term winners and WPL will have motivated youngsters (like me).
Message edited by author 2007-02-20 03:30:30. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 04:45:26 AM EDT.
