Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Secondaries v Primaries

  1. #1
    Hall of Fame Member chaminda_00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Murali CG
    Posts
    16,305

    Secondaries v Primaries

    Having look at how unbalanced when it comes to secondaries and primaries i was wonder what others on CW looked in that department. Basically what i want to know is how many players teams have with either superb plus primaries or superb plus secondaries. Just want to know where my boys are compared with the rest of you guys.

    Here is mine (including keeping as its meant to be important soon):
    10 Superb plus primaries (1 Wonderful, 7 Quality, 2 Superb)
    1 Superb plus secondary (2 above strong, 6 above respectable)

    Also what are your thoughts on how important secondaries are looking at your team's performances. Personally I think they make a significant difference.
    The man, the mountain, the Mathews. The greatest all rounder since Keith Miller. (Y)

    Jaffna Jets CC (Battrick & FTP)

    RIP WCC and CW Cricket

    Member of the MSC, JMAS and CVAAS

  2. #2
    International Regular Bobisback's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,655
    Quote Originally Posted by chaminda_00 View Post
    Having look at how unbalanced when it comes to secondaries and primaries i was wonder what others on CW looked in that department. Basically what i want to know is how many players teams have with either superb plus primaries or superb plus secondaries. Just want to know where my boys are compared with the rest of you guys.

    Here is mine (including keeping as its meant to be important soon):
    10 Superb plus primaries (1 Wonderful, 7 Quality, 2 Superb)
    1 Superb plus secondary (2 above strong, 6 above respectable)

    Also what are your thoughts on how important secondaries are looking at your team's performances. Personally I think they make a significant difference.
    I have 3 Quality's and a Remarkable in the way of primaries, and their seconds are either superb or quality. My other two trainees are strong-strong and strong-comp, i will eventually put a fielding net on the strong-comp, as, in my opinion, the higher the secondary the better the performance.

    I have a Strong-feeble bowler, and just sold a strong-med batter, they both fail(ed) miserably.

    Im currently having a look around for a decent player, and there is a few players in my price range with higher primaries but lower seconds, and im a bit wary of buying one.


    EDIT:

    2. Angus Howson £2,499,000 (opening price)
    Plays for: Saint Barth Blondes Stamina: respectable W/Keeping: worthless
    Age: 27 years old Batting: mediocre Concentration: woeful
    BT Rating: 13,491 Bowling: superb Consistency: feeble
    Deadline: 30/07/2007 10:27 Fielding: mediocre

    This is the guy i was looking at, was almost going to bid on him, but the consistency threw me. Didnt even care about the age.
    Last edited by Bobisback; 30-07-2007 at 01:36 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Partyush
    I didn't call you a fat bitch. So pipe down.

  3. #3
    Cricketer Of The Year Adamc's Avatar
    Chicken Champion! Battle Pong Champion!
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    in the wind, so to speak
    Posts
    9,129
    10 superb+ primaries (2 masterful, 1 exquisite, 4 wonderful, 1 remarkable, 1 quality, 1 superb)
    7 superb+ secondaries (1 phenomenal, 2 miraculous, 1 exceptional, 1 remarkable, 1 quality, 1 superb)

    Included allrounders as having two primaries/secondaries where applicable. I think secondaries are useful to a point, but it doesn't seem to make a huge difference on my high secondary players (though i've only got two). I guess it just makes them a bit more economical and in Watkins' case very difficult to dismiss. I think they're useful to have, but beyond a certain minimum (say proficient) I don't really pay much attention to them or bother training them if I can use the net better elsewhere. Allegedly more important in FC, but that remains to be seen. I don't mind buying players with low secondaries relative to their primary (see Downer) but I'd stay well clear of the guy posted above unless he were much, much cheaper.
    Last edited by Adamc; 30-07-2007 at 02:03 AM.

  4. #4
    I think higher secondaries make your players perform more like they would in real life, if that makes sense. So if you have a tailender with like woeful batting but really high concentration he'll hang around more and can score at a reasonable rate, as in real life. Give that tailender no concentration and he'll average 2-3. Similarly if you give an average primary guy high secondaries he can do more of a job you set him to, plus they'll actually nick wickets at a respectable average, but might still go at 4-5 an over. As opposed to taking wickets at 50+ with an ER of 5+, or only being able to really take wickets at the death.

    So if you have a batting order with high concentration it's very difficult to dismiss in OD, because it's more like real life - players hang around but might take a while to 'get in' and attack the bowling much.
    National Scrabble Champion 2009, 8th, 11th and 5th in 2009/2011/2013 World Championships, gold medal (team) at Causeway, 2011 Masters Champion
    Australia’s Darren Lehmann is a ‘blatant loser’ insists Stuart Broad
    Countdown Series 57 Champion
    King of the Arcade
    Reply from mods to my prank bans in public:
    Reply from mods to my prank bans in private:


    MSN - evil_budgie @ hotmail.co.uk




Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Secondaries
    By marc71178 in forum Battrick
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 24-07-2006, 06:54 PM

Posting Permissions

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