Page 3 of 57 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 849
Like Tree19Likes

Thread: CW Top 50 Cricketers of All Time - 2nd Edition

  1. #31
    Hall of Fame Member Hurricane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Don't be jealous of the Georgie Pie super smash
    Posts
    15,199
    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    I know what your saying, but like I say it doesn't work for players who get lots of votes in the 20s.

    Why should a player who gets ranked 23, 25, 25, 24 = 7 x 4 = 28 get so much more points than someone who gets ranked 22, 23 = 7 x 2 = 14

    Also, I don't really understand why anyone would have a purpose like that. Just pick the best 25 in order and see where your favourites finish.
    The point I have been sarcastically making in my posts is that I agree with Ankit that there should be a 5 vote minimum to make it in. I was annoyed when Jardine made it in on the basis of one vote especially since I despise the fellow (RIP)

    I am not in favour of weldone's system because it seems like over cooking it. But I will answer your problem with it - I actually think the player who got 28 points deserves it more than the person who got 14 - it is pretty arbitrary if someone gets ranked 22nd instead of 25th - and 4 people voted for the person with 28 points vs only 2 for the person with 14 points.
    1) Ross is Boss.
    2) See point 1.

    Leading the charge against nuances being used in posts.

    Overrated XI M Bracewell, Burns, Rahane, Don Voges, Bairstow, Alecz Day, Donovan Grobelaar, Luke Ronchi, Faulkner, Dan Christian, Permaul

  2. #32
    The Tiger King smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    27,574
    Quote Originally Posted by 8ankitj View Post
    How about setting a qualification of receiving a vote from at least 5 voters to eradicate joke picks like Jardine and Flintoff last time around?
    is a good idea...might actually go with this

    Quote Originally Posted by weldone View Post
    Thinking along this line, I think that (total points * total votes received by that player) might make an interesting final list...In that case, we won't need the cut-off criteria, too...

    For example, if Bradman receives 435 points, and 18 out of 20 memebers have voted for him, his total point would be (435*18)=7830 and so on...
    A more sophisticated version of what Ankit says I suppose but GF below has a point

    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Nah, **** off.

    A guy who places highly on 2 people's lists is more deserving of a place than a guy who gets 5 25th places.
    Quote Originally Posted by 8ankitj View Post
    We should all just agree to be honest with our votes irrespective of the methodology used. Are we allowed to discuss our list before all votes are in?
    I would hope this is true of all members and that they will vote for the top 25 that they honestly believe deserve those spots.
    And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW

    Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta

  3. #33
    The Tiger King smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    27,574
    interestingly though I just received a list that does not have Bradman among the top 25 cricketers of all time

  4. #34
    Hall of Fame Member Hurricane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Don't be jealous of the Georgie Pie super smash
    Posts
    15,199
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    is a good idea...might actually go with this



    A more sophisticated version of what Ankit says I suppose but GF below has a point





    I would hope this is true of all members and that they will vote for the top 25 that they honestly believe deserve those spots.
    So what is your decision.


  5. #35
    The Tiger King smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    27,574
    thinking over it

    Have to trudge off for juma so will take some more opinions when I return and go ahead with that

    What do you guys think of Ankit's suggestion though?

  6. #36
    Hall of Fame Member morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    63*
    Posts
    15,777
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    interestingly though I just received a list that does not have Bradman among the top 25 cricketers of all time
    Who sent it....

    and who were his other names on there?
    5-0

    Want to be the online Don Bradman or Ian Salisbury?
    Then join CW Cricket today. It's what all the cool kids desire.

    RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012
    RIP Hughesy 1988-2014

  7. #37
    International Coach weldone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Kolkata->Mumbai->London
    Posts
    11,462
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    A more sophisticated version of what Ankit says I suppose but GF below has a point
    I don't think GF has a point TBH. If 2 people rate a player v highly, and the player is good enough for that, at least some of the other voters would keep him low in their pecking.

    In other words, if only 2 members rate a player at no. 1 and that player doesn't receive any more votes (in the top 25) from any other members then that player must be Virat Kohli or Jeetan Patel
    "Cricket is an art. Like all arts it has a technical foundation. To enjoy it does not require technical knowledge, but analysis that is not technically based is mere impressionism."
    - C.L.R. James

  8. #38
    Hall of Fame Member morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    63*
    Posts
    15,777
    Most likely if 2 people rate a player highly but no-one else does it's usually someone that's crap but gets love on this forum, IMO.

  9. #39
    Hall of Fame Member Hurricane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Don't be jealous of the Georgie Pie super smash
    Posts
    15,199
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    thinking over it

    Have to trudge off for juma so will take some more opinions when I return and go ahead with that

    What do you guys think of Ankit's suggestion though?
    I am for the suggestion however I would make the cut off 3 votes as that is ample to stop shannanigans. Also last time I think the bottom 3 places only got 3 or 4 votes each and not 5.

    btw - I have voted

  10. #40
    The Tiger King smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    27,574
    ok, so the cut off is 4 votes.....we'll go ahead with 4 votes as the cut off for the shenanigans

  11. #41
    International 12th Man weeman27bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,737
    Sent.

  12. #42
    International Coach G.I.Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    13,003
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    interestingly though I just received a list that does not have Bradman among the top 25 cricketers of all time
    Not even at #8? That's harsh.

    I see smalishah_84 has signed up to the forum.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    If GI 'Best Poster On The Forum' Joe says it then it must be true.
    Athlai doesn't lie. And he doesn't do sarcasm either, so you know it's true!


    'You will look very silly said Mr Salteena with a dry laugh.
    Well so will you said Ethel in a snappy tone and she ran out of the room with a very superier run throwing out her legs behind and her arms swinging in rithum.
    Well said the owner of the house she has a most idiotick run.'


  13. #43
    Evil Scotsman Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    467
    Posts
    27,191
    Quote Originally Posted by 8ankitj View Post
    Problem GF is that we would have barely 30-40 voters at the end, this makes it possible for an individual to manipulate the outcome. If there were hundreds of voters, this problem wouldn't occur.

    Anyways, I sent my list (and picked a list I honestly believe in). Why do you guys still use hotmail, btw?
    I still don't see an issue. Provided people are being honest with their selections, if a couple of people make the list that you don't agree with, then you just have to accept that it's a representative list of everyone who's voted.

    Quote Originally Posted by weldone View Post
    Otherwise, isn't it too easy to manipulate this list?

    For example, I know Bradman will do well but I also want Kapil ahead of Botham in the list. I can simply place Kapil at no. 1 and throw Botham out of the 25. I personally don't think Kapil to be the best test cricketer ever, and I know that in spite of me rating him no. 1, he won't come out no. 1 in the final list - but it serves my purpose..
    Look, if Kapil is important enough to you that he merits a number 1 vote, then vote that way. All this talk of manipulating lists just means people are likely to be put off voting for this because people attempting to manipulate lists make exercises like this a complete waste of time for everyone else. I've already been put off voting in this because I reckon one or two people in this thread are completely at it, which is a shame because stuff like this is fun and can generate good discussion.
    ​63*

    Quote Originally Posted by Howe_zat View Post
    Come on Lancashire!

  14. #44
    Global Moderator vic_orthdox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    27,634
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    I still don't see an issue. Provided people are being honest with their selections, if a couple of people make the list that you don't agree with, then you just have to accept that it's a representative list of everyone who's voted.



    Look, if Kapil is important enough to you that he merits a number 1 vote, then vote that way. All this talk of manipulating lists just means people are likely to be put off voting for this because people attempting to manipulate lists make exercises like this a complete waste of time for everyone else. I've already been put off voting in this because I reckon one or two people in this thread are completely at it, which is a shame because stuff like this is fun and can generate good discussion.
    This.

  15. #45
    International Coach weldone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Kolkata->Mumbai->London
    Posts
    11,462
    FTR it's just a quick fix that I suggested.

    In fact, I think the best way to do these rankings is to conduct voting for no. 1, then conduct voting for no. 2 among the rest, and so on...there doesn't remain any scope for manipulation...

Page 3 of 57 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. 5 cricketers of the century and a bit?
    By hang on in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 149
    Last Post: 27-03-2012, 08:08 AM
  2. Replies: 353
    Last Post: 23-01-2011, 09:38 AM
  3. Mahmood and Panesar power England to series glory
    By symonds_94 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-08-2006, 11:11 AM

Posting Permissions

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