Jump to content

PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!


Glenn Hysén
 Share

PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!  

1 member has voted

  1. 1.

    • I want SM to reintroduce the rating schedule
      258
    • I think the new random rating changes are better
      37


Recommended Posts

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2465243']no we didnt. the top 5 were reviewed 3 times in 13 months since Dec 2011' date=' as SM 'supposedly' promised 3 times a 'year'. It was late in regard there wasnt a 'summer' review, but there isnt any league football in the summer.....We had a review in April so what can you re review over 4-5weeks of games...

i have top 5 reviewed in June 2011, December 2011, April 2012, December 2012/Jan 13..i predict the next one will be in the summer, and the thoery of 3 times a 'year' will continue.....June 2013, Dec 2013 is still '3 times' in a 'year/12-13months'....i think maybe people get confused by the notion of 'a year' and see it as 'a season' - but August/Sept - May is the football calender of 9 months

Also, this thread was started by Glen

Glenn Hysen (forumer) & myself have both logged every league review since about late 2009/2010 so can clearly see what was done when and how often and by looking at it it was a mess. Scheduled league by league reviews just dont work now the game has expanded. Leagues being neglected for years, that is just not fair.

You say the 'popular' players will be done more often? evidence on this?

the fact of the matter is these players arent 'popular' per se, but were way overdue a re-rating, hence appearing on SW already. Over time, the rest of the players due rises will follow suit.[/quote']

You are saying the big 5 will be done by June, it took them 3 months (Nov to Feb) to do them this time, it means they will have to start again in 2 weeks to get them completed by June!!!

At the rate they are now reviewing, if they are going to do them 3 times in a year, then 9 months of a year will be spent on the big 5!!! Do you seriously think this will happen? If not how are they going to do them 3 times a year. Please don't answer because they are more up to date now, because in a league by league review, surely all the players stats will have to be checked, so it is no quicker if they are up to date.

You mention Glenn Hysen, he started this thread calling for SM to go back to a league schedule!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2460706']finally' date=' someone else who sees it from my angle too

a schedule doesnt work... 5 years on and its been scrapped. there are simply too many teams/leagues to have a 'schedule' and considering when these leagues play through out the year, most have the Sept-May fixture list so a bulk would all need a review at the same time...Nov/Dec & April/May....logically it just cannot be done..

On page 1 is Glenns suggestion, its a nice idea but it impossible. At a count, he mentions 56 leagues to be reviewed (some twice), also he hasnt mentioned Championship, Ligue 2 etc and equvilant level leagues that have been reviewed...

Even at a rate of 20 teams a week (4 teams a day), every week of the year (totalling 1040 teams), its still not time to complete that whole 'review' structure. And with teams getting 'bigger' as the demand for youth players/reserve teams has driven up squad sizes, the daily player rate would have to constantly exceed 150 player edits....its just to much to have a schedule on rotation.[/quote']

Laughable and just not true. As has already been stated numerous times, with the database growing so should/must the resourses in place to look after it. There is no reason for a limit of 4 teams a day - SM handled that amount years ago and more at times - this is just a number of convenience that you cling to. This is just more misinformation from you in your efforts to try to fool others that SW is improving SM.

;2465184']getting bored now with the whole debate' date=' i have continuously given proof it is an improvement and how it will work and benefit SW. The only way you can negate its an improvement is if you from today keep a record of the amount of players reviewed, rising, dropping etc and compare it against the past....but this would be impossible now as this data cannot be obtained.

players are rising and dropping. but on a far more efficient scale across the globe. One month from now, on a league by league system, we would have had 3-4 leagues max. On a daily player upload from leagues around the world, in one month we could have twice the leagues looking far more accurate bar the minor +1/-1s...therefore making the database IMO far more accurate/up to date.[/quote']

I have yet to see anything resembling factual evidence from you or anyone else for that matter as to how SW has improved and sped up the review system OR that the database is more up to date than before. Just because there is no data for us to look back on the past at from years ago doesn't mean we can't remember that despite the old systems flaws the reviews were done quicker with league and team consistency and a fair balance between risers and droppers. Stop posting this propaganda nonsense under the guise of fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

You are saying the big 5 will be done by June' date=' it took them 3 months (Nov to Feb) to do them this time, it means they will have to start again in 2 weeks to get them completed by June!!!

At the rate they are now reviewing, if they are going to do them 3 times in a year, then 9 months of a year will be spent on the big 5!!! Do you seriously think this will happen? If not how are they going to do them 3 times a year. Please don't answer because they are more up to date now, because in a league by league review, surely all the players stats will have to be checked, so it is no quicker if they are up to date.

You mention Glenn Hysen, he started this thread calling for SM to go back to a league schedule![/quote']

i mentioned Glenn for his league schedule review he put together a long time back, before this whole Soccerwiki debate... it was in his signature...not referencing him for his views on the changes that are about now...just to avoid confusion.

your quick to forget reasons why it was so slow....they had the whole position overhaul, the height, weight, full name, preferred foot....all this is new data that had to be collated.....plus the winter break & transfer window!......

mark my words i guarantee the next review wont take '3' months...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

Laughable and just not true. As has already been stated numerous times' date=' with the database growing so should/must the resourses in place to look after it. There is no reason for a limit of 4 teams a day - SM handled that amount years ago and more at times - this is just a number of convenience that you cling to. This is just more misinformation from you in your efforts to try to fool others that SW is improving SM.

[b']how is it laughable and not true? what do you find so amusing? SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE!!!i take my time to put facts together why cant you instead of ludicrous statements...

on last count there were roughly 65 leagues that have been reviewed in SM (including some multiple reviews), so even at 1 league a week, you going way over a yearly schdeule! how can you not see that and find that not true and laughable?

you have to look past 'teams' and focus on amounts of individuals players! read back, i put some 'facts' down for you! Some teams now have almost 50 players!!! how do you expect 4-6 teams a day, thats roughly 250-300 players in some cases...

SW is free, no advertising, where is the revenue for resources then?[/b]

I have yet to see anything resembling factual evidence from you or anyone else for that matter as to how SW has improved and sped up the review system OR that the database is more up to date than before. Just because there is no data for us to look back on the past at from years ago doesn't mean we can't remember that despite the old systems flaws the reviews were done quicker with league and team consistency and a fair balance between risers and droppers. Stop posting this propaganda nonsense under the guise of fact.

In my opinion > doesnt mean fact...i have posted plenty of 'facts' over this whole topic, heck i even spent time counting every single edit transferred over a a daily basis a ciuplke of times and it exceeded 200+.....please dont tell me you are still going to deny this isnt more than what used to be updated daily! once again i have said and il say again,,another fact is Sunday & Monday now seem to be part of the daily changes schedule! Meaning more data! Dont deny this is not an improvement either!

a fair balance between risers and droppers? what on earth is this? is there some sort of quota you know about we dont? as i showed yesterday, 33% were droppers. And in every single league review i have seen over the past 3 years, i have never seen a review consisting of such a high proportion of players dropping to rising....always the majority are risers..

your clinging on to the past...move forward... the database has exploded in size, how can you expect them to put more resources into something that is essentially free to join? SW has no advertising as far as i can see either so where is its revenue stream????

Part of me is now thinking your just so negative to it as it will cause your custom gameworld to lose managers because they have no clue who to buy now and ratings are far to 'random' for you...its not random....its getting rid of the unbalance and inequality of the database!

relentlessly you are bashing my views now, its getting tedious and boring. Unless you can come up with alternatives or some constructive ideas, we'd all like to hear them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2465478']In my opinion > doesnt mean fact...i have posted plenty of 'facts' over this whole topic' date=' heck i even spent time counting every single edit transferred over a a daily basis a ciuplke of times and it exceeded 200+.....please dont tell me you are still going to deny this isnt more than what used to be updated daily! once again i have said and il say again,,another fact is Sunday & Monday now seem to be part of the daily changes schedule! Meaning more data! Dont deny this is not an improvement either![/quote']

I know IMO doesnt mean fact - your point was that you had given facts as to why things are better now which you haven't. Like you I have no idea if thats more or less edits than before as ive never had that information. I would guess more but as far as ratings I know its less as Ive always been able to follow that side of the game. I like many won't care if theres a couple of hundred edits transfered over a day because the rating reviews are so slow. The Sunday/Monday change is good in theory, BUT when the rating changes are transfering at a trickle its neither here nor there as the overall speed is still below what it used to be. With the use of Sunday/Monday you would expect it to have risen rapidly yet it hasn't and appears merely a cosmetic change.

;2465478']a fair balance between risers and droppers? what on earth is this? is there some sort of quota you know about we dont? as i showed yesterday' date=' 33% were droppers. And in every single league review i have seen over the past 3 years, i have never seen a review consisting of such a high proportion of players dropping to rising....always the majority are risers..[/quote']

Not true. Iv'e seen minor leagues were most of the changes have been droppers with only a few risers before. If you haven't you need to stop making up stats and look at whats going on in game more. For the game to work the database must have balance. So for nearly every player point that goes up there needs to be its balance in decline. If the vast majority always risers the database is going to end up massivley skewed and worthless. It appears to be heading that way at the moment - the amount of 90 rated players has shot up since I first started playing the game 4 and a half years ago.

;2465478']your clinging on to the past...move forward... the database has exploded in size' date=' [i']how can you expect them to put more resources into something that is essentially free to join? SW has no advertising as far as i can see either so where is its revenue stream????[/i]

Another one of your selective arguments:rolleyes: I'm not playing SW am I. I've pointed out before SM has numerous revenue streams - more than they have ever had in all the time I have played and whether we pay directly or by way of site hits for advertising we are all contributing to them making money.

;2465478']Part of me is now thinking your just so negative to it as it will cause your custom gameworld to lose managers because they have no clue who to buy now and ratings are far to 'random' for you...its not random....its getting rid of the unbalance and inequality of the database!

Are you serious:rolleyes: Why the hell would I want people in my GW who arn't capable of going off and doing their own research for risers. That is one of the few good things to come from SW that it helps weed out those who just arn't capable of competing in the GW. Your right "it's not random" because theres nothing random about someone going on to SW to edit a player to try and get their rating reviewed before the league gets looked at. It has however increased the imbalance and inequality of the database.

;2465478']relentlessly you are bashing my views now' date=' its getting tedious and boring. Unless you can come up with alternatives or some constructive ideas, we'd all like to hear them[/quote']

Ive already posted what I feel should be done. It's all there on the forum for you to read and comment back on. Funny though when I counter your arguments I rarely hear a peep from you in defence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2465184']No is wasnt ' date='at all. if you think waiting 18 months for a league to be review shows it was 'working, then your severely mistaken....even before Soccerwiki, Peru, Bolivia, Venezuela, Malta, Slovenia, Slovakia....these reviews just hardly existed.. [/quote']

The following quote is what YOU were saying on November 23rd, when there was still a schedule (Uruguay and Slovakia were being reviewed then). "Any faster and they would run out of leagues to review"!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yes, this is what you were saying back then, only days before SM abandonded the schedule!!

This is about everyone's CREDIBILITY, who comes and writes in the forum.

Monkeyshuffl in his above post described perfectly what you are doing constantly in a daily basis, it's "propaganda". You are just trying to defend and justify SM/SW in everything, even in issues where they are obviously wrong. You were passionately defending the schedule when existed ("Any faster and they would run out of leagues to review"!!!), but when SM change it, suddenly the schedule is bad and this randomness is much better, because "SM is always right" for you!

Everybody enjoy the credibility of this guy: Here's what you were saying about the schedule, on November 23rd:

;2315714']im just fed up of the moaning' date=' complaining, whinging over the review system. to me it is just fine. any faster and they would run out of leagues to review. [/color']
;2465184']no you didnt though! 50 - 100 players is about 3-4 teams max. I proved it to you personally by taking the time to carefully count every single player data transferred by soccerwiki with this new method and it shows far MORE players are reviewed this way!!

It's laughable that you are creating things on your own and then try to bring it here as.... "facts"!

"far MORE players are reviewed this way"? My god!

Just 41 players were reviewed yesterday' date=' 18th February.

Only 52 players today, 19th February.

I had also counted the players reviewed on Friday (15th) and Saturday (16th). 59 players on Friday and 55 on Saturday.

Do you really consider these reviews far MORE than before??? With the schedule there were more than 100-120 players reviewed per day! (=4-5 teams average)!

;2465184']How will it? you have no evidence or proof it will. For example over the next month Portugal, Russia, Holland, Romania, Turkey, Bulgaria etc... could have all there squads gradually reviewed on a daily basis but over a longer time frame, therefore rejecting your imbalance theory...as you have seen many players who were very underrated in said leagues have all been reviewed over the last few weeks, therefore making the database far more up to date now, rather than systematically waiting for a whole league review...

All those leagues you mention COULD have their squads done over the next month????? Are you serious??? With an average of... 50 players per day??!!

And because you are just speculating (as usual, in favor of SM/SW) this means that there is no imbalance in the DB? Let me tell you what COULD had happen: If they were following the schedule as before, the big 5 leagues would be done in December, AS ALWAYS, and in the next one and a half month we would have most of those leagues (Portugal, Netherlands, Russia, Greece, Turkey, Belgium, Ukraine etc) done by now, and done AS A WHOLE, not just random players here and there! That would happen if they followed a schedule. Now, we only have random reviews here and there and a big imbalance in almost every league.

;2465184']And your getting a more accurate database' date=' much quicker in fact.

It is almost twice as fast. Far more amounts of data daily[/quote']

"twice as fast"?? LOL!

You call the 50 players reviewed daily, "twice as fast"? So you are telling us that when there was a schedule, they were reviewing only 25 players (= 1 team) a day? It's exactly the opposite, they were reviewing an average of 4-5 teams per day when there was a schedule, which means more than 100-120 players average!

"twice as fast", LOL, how ridiculous and how over-exaggerated are you going to be, in order to defend a BAD and INEFFICIENT review policy from SM/SW? And you are trying to present all these as... facts?!

The procedure now is TWICE AS SLOW, not fast!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

I know IMO doesnt mean fact - your point was that you had given facts as to why things are better now which you haven't. Like you I have no idea if thats more or less edits than before as ive never had that information. I would guess more but as far as ratings I know its less as Ive always been able to follow that side of the game. I like many won't care if theres a couple of hundred edits transfered over a day because the rating reviews are so slow. The Sunday/Monday change is good in theory' date=' BUT when the rating changes are transfering at a trickle its neither here nor there as the overall speed is still below what it used to be. With the use of Sunday/Monday you would expect it to have risen rapidly yet it hasn't and appears merely a cosmetic change.

Not true. Iv'e seen minor leagues were most of the changes have been droppers with only a few risers before. If you haven't you need to stop making up stats and look at whats going on in game more. For the game to work the database must have balance. So for nearly every player point that goes up there needs to be its balance in decline. If the vast majority always risers the database is going to end up massivley skewed and worthless. It appears to be heading that way at the moment - the amount of 90 rated players has shot up since I first started playing the game 4 and a half years ago.

[b']youve seen this, you seen that. But what leagues? when? Tell us! Im not making up anything, i have a record of every review since August 2010 so tell me what minor leagues had more droppers than risers? So your saying if a player goes up in rating, some one has to come down to 'balance' that? why cant they just remain on the same rating then?

I have discussed this other point regarding 90s elsewhere with another forumer, the database is going through a transistion period. Back in 2009 there were far more higher rated players who have since retired or slow declined in rating. I found some old threads which back this up, the leagues of mexico, argentina, brazil all contained players a substantial amount of 89/90 which is not the case today...it was reflecting through the whole database. Since then 2009/2010 the 'average' has fallen and only now we are starting to see it creep back up. The is too much of a gulf between Messi's 99 & CR 98 with a scattering of 97,96,95 down to 90s and IMO the gap will narrow even more as there are alot of young players out there playing at the top level. We have seen the Bundesliga get a much more realistic rating over the last couple of reviews as it was very underrated, teams like Dortmund & Bayern contatining very low rated players who are now starting to be recognized with higher levels of rating ie Gotze 93 at such a young age.[/b]

Another one of your selective arguments:rolleyes: I'm not playing SW am I. I've pointed out before SM has numerous revenue streams - more than they have ever had in all the time I have played and whether we pay directly or by way of site hits for advertising we are all contributing to them making money.

SM (Soccer manager) & SW (Soccerwiki) for the record. You pay, if you choose to, for SM. How many people actually pay?

SW is free. No adverts. And according to the Devs, they are seperate entities. So why would SM fund SW? unless you can show me how and were the two brands are linked in anyway, i cant see how they are effectively the same bunch of people running it..

Are you serious:rolleyes: Why the hell would I want people in my GW who arn't capable of going off and doing their own research for risers. That is one of the few good things to come from SW that it helps weed out those who just arn't capable of competing in the GW. Your right "it's not random" because theres nothing random about someone going on to SW to edit a player to try and get their rating reviewed before the league gets looked at. It has however increased the imbalance and inequality of the database.

of course it isnt. SM still has to approve a new rating, random would be every edit gets an increase with no justification. currently, about 60% of the edits i have done have increased. So still under half either drop or dont move at all.

Ive already posted what I feel should be done. It's all there on the forum for you to read and comment back on. Funny though when I counter your arguments I rarely hear a peep from you in defence.

Your joking right?.....all you have said is they should put more non existent resources into magically being able to churn out more players every day..

anyway, not to jinx it, but unless a whole bunch admins are trying to review Portgual, there are alot of Porto & Benfica players up for voting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

The following quote is what YOU were saying on November 23rd' date=' when there was still a schedule (Uruguay and Slovakia were being reviewed then). [i']"Any faster and they would run out of leagues to review"[/i]!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yes, this is what you were saying back then, only days before SM abandonded the schedule!!

This is about everyone's CREDIBILITY, who comes and writes in the forum.

Monkeyshuffl in his above post described perfectly what you are doing constantly in a daily basis, it's "propaganda". You are just trying to defend and justify SM/SW in everything, even in issues where they are obviously wrong. You were passionately defending the schedule when existed ("Any faster and they would run out of leagues to review"!!!), but when SM change it, suddenly the schedule is bad and this randomness is much better, because "SM is always right" for you!

Everybody enjoy the credibility of this guy: Here's what you were saying about the schedule, on November 23rd:

It's laughable that you are creating things on your own and then try to bring it here as.... "facts"!

"far MORE players are reviewed this way"? My god!

Just 41 players were reviewed yesterday, 18th February.

Only 52 players today, 19th February.

I had also counted the players reviewed on Friday (15th) and Saturday (16th). 59 players on Friday and 55 on Saturday.

Do you really consider these reviews far MORE than before??? With the schedule there were more than 100-120 players reviewed per day! (=4-5 teams average)!

All those leagues you mention COULD have their squads done over the next month????? Are you serious??? With an average of... 50 players per day??!!

And because you are just speculating (as usual, in favor of SM/SW) this means that there is no imbalance in the DB? Let me tell you what COULD had happen: If they were following the schedule as before, the big 5 leagues would be done in December, AS ALWAYS, and in the next one and a half month we would have most of those leagues (Portugal, Netherlands, Russia, Greece, Turkey, Belgium, Ukraine etc) done by now, and done AS A WHOLE, not just random players here and there! That would happen if they followed a schedule. Now, we only have random reviews here and there and a big imbalance in almost every league.

"twice as fast"?? LOL!

You call the 50 players reviewed daily, "twice as fast"? So you are telling us that when there was a schedule, they were reviewing only 25 players (= 1 team) a day? It's exactly the opposite, they were reviewing an average of 4-5 teams per day when there was a schedule, which means more than 100-120 players average!

"twice as fast", LOL, how ridiculous and how over-exaggerated are you going to be, in order to defend a BAD and INEFFICIENT review policy from SM/SW? And you are trying to present all these as... facts?!

The procedure now is TWICE AS SLOW, not fast!

germlad. i dont even bother with you anymore. your posts are gobble & make little sense or point.

opinions are not proganda. people can make there own mind up, i just present facts i have collected.

trying too hard to make what kind of point? something i said in November doesnt correlate with something 3 months later?

back in November this didnt exist....now it does, can someone not have a new opinion/viewpoint on it?

give it a rest and go and find some 'new players' to write up on, havent seen any for a few days now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2465734']opinions are not proganda. people can make there own mind up' date=' i just present facts i have collected.

[/quote']

Propaganda is when someone tries to present false statements as "facts", in favor of someone/something. Exactly what you are constantly doing in the forum, trying to defend SM/SW. You are trying to convince us and bring up as a "fact" that the reviews now are "much faster", when in reality they are much slower! Just look at the numbers, it's very easy for everyone to understand that we have now far less players reviewed per day.

You were defending the schedule as "perfect" when existed,

;2315714']im just fed up of the moaning' date=' complaining, whinging over the review system. to me it is just fine. any faster and they would run out of leagues to review.[/b']
and when SM changed their policy, suddenly the schedule was rubbish and the new policy is working fine!

What you are doing in the forum (in most cases, but especially about the review policy) is to defend SM/SW, whatever they do, even if that means you use false statements.

Just have a look at the poll, it perfectly shows how people feel about this new review policy. (Maybe that's why you are so desperate in defending it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

And something about reviewing on weekends:

This is SM admitting that the new review system is not working as good as it should be:

There is no company in the world that have their employees working on Saturday/Sunday (and have to pay them extra!), unless they are in urgent need and/or they are far behind their plans about the work that should be done. IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

Since the introduction of the new system, SM are constantly working on weekends. This is nothing more than an admittance (in a roundabout way, but still very clear) that the new system in NOT working as efficiently as they would like or expected, that the reviews are not being done in the rate they would like, so they have to work on weekends in order to do some catch-up.

SM itself admit that the new system is not working as they expected. I think it's time to reconsider it and change it back, or else the DB is going to be unbalanced big time, if they continue at this rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

Propaganda is when someone tries to present false statements as "facts"' date=' in favor of someone/something. Exactly what you are constantly doing in the forum, trying to defend SM/SW. You are trying to convince us and bring up as a "fact" that the reviews now are "much faster", when in reality they are much slower! Just look at the numbers, it's very easy for everyone to understand that we have now far less players reviewed per day.

You were defending the schedule as "perfect" when existed,

and when SM changed their policy, suddenly the schedule was rubbish and the new policy is working fine!

What you are doing in the forum (in most cases, but especially about the review policy) is to defend SM/SW, whatever they do, even if that means you use false statements.

Just have a look at the poll, it perfectly shows how people feel about this new review policy. (Maybe that's why you are so desperate in defending it).[/quote']

false statements? It is a FACT reviews are happening Sunday/ Monday? how is that propaganda? how is that even false!

i know what propaganda is thank you for your explanation, but i think you are using it in the wrong context.

the system has changed, therefore opinions change. is this wrong in your eyes? because i had one opinion on one method, now there is a new method i am not allowed to change opinion!?! ludicrous.

If anything, you are making false statements! i can see one in your post quoting me!

"You were defending the schedule as "perfect" when existed....follow by my quote saying " the reviews are fine." Perfect & fine are not the same! Perfect is flawless, fine is acceptable at best.........

I will let this slide but if your trying to instigate im a 'liar' then i will start to take that up to the Devs/Mods/ whoever will deal with attempts to create slander...

yeah the poll...a very very minor representation, in fact if you have kept an eye on over the last few weeks has actually narrowed in deficit, how ever minor, it still has narrowed.

And something about reviewing on weekends:

This is SM admitting that the new review system is not working as good as it should be:

There is no company in the world that have their employees working on Saturday/Sunday (and have to pay them extra!)' date=' unless they are in urgent need and/or they are far behind their plans about the work that should be done. IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

Since the introduction of the new system, SM are constantly working on weekends. This is nothing more than an admittance (in a roundabout way, but still very clear) that the new system in NOT working as efficiently as they would like or expected, that the reviews are not being done in the rate they would like, so they have to work on weekends in order to do some catch-up.

SM itself admit that the new system is not working as they expected. I think it's time to reconsider it and change it back, or else the DB is going to be unbalanced big time, if they continue at this rate.[/quote']

^ LOL

or how about its an automated system or remotely activated after the inputting done in the week? :rolleyes:

plenty of companies work weekends and dont have to pay extra. Sunday working time directive abolished in the UK years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2465726']youve seen this' date=' you seen that. But what leagues? when? Tell us! Im not making up anything, i have a record of every review since August 2010 so tell me what minor leagues had more droppers than risers? So your saying if a player goes up in rating, some one has to come down to 'balance' that? why cant they just remain on the same rating then?

I have discussed this other point regarding 90s elsewhere with another forumer, the database is going through a transistion period. Back in 2009 there were far more higher rated players who have since retired or slow declined in rating. I found some old threads which back this up, the leagues of mexico, argentina, brazil all contained players a substantial amount of 89/90 which is not the case today...it was reflecting through the whole database. Since then 2009/2010 the 'average' has fallen and only now we are starting to see it creep back up. The is too much of a gulf between Messi's 99 & CR 98 with a scattering of 97,96,95 down to 90s and IMO the gap will narrow even more as there are alot of young players out there playing at the top level. We have seen the Bundesliga get a much more realistic rating over the last couple of reviews as it was very underrated, teams like Dortmund & Bayern contatining very low rated players who are now starting to be recognized with higher levels of rating ie Gotze 93 at such a young age.[/quote']

You make up plenty and are selective with the truth - I'm not the only one to see it. Of course its not as simple as when one goes up another has to drop straight away. Trying to twist my logic to that interpretation is funny but lame all the same. More players are rising than are dropping. More 90 rated players are available than in the past (yes less based in south america but overall more than when I first started) I agree their was a slight drop at one point though nothing compared to the recent swell which has coincided with the introduction of SW. Are their really that many players all rated that highly compared to the past? No.

;2465726']

SM (Soccer manager) & SW (Soccerwiki) for the record. You pay' date=' if you choose to, for SM. How many people actually pay?

SW is free. No adverts. And according to the Devs, they are seperate entities. So why would SM fund SW? unless you can show me how and were the two brands are linked in anyway, i cant see how they are effectively the same bunch of people running it..[/quote']

"SW is free" lol

So what. Do you expect people to pay to go on there to help edit stuff that they might then be paying for again in SM? What purpose does SW serve apart from SM? Would SW have been created without SM? doubt it.

At the very least they are linked by way of SM using SW to maintain its database, which is a pretty big connection I would say. Whether they are the same people running it or not is largely irrelevant as regardless of what the devs say what happens in SM is down to SM at the end of the day. They might outsource some of the work but its SM who take peoples money and are therefore accountable for their product.

;2465726']

Your joking right?.....all you have said is they should put more non existent resources into magically being able to churn out more players every day..

These arn't non existant resources. They have more revenue streams than ever before which if even partially invested in to this area on top of the resources they already had should give them the man power to do 6+ teams a day on a regular basis considering they did 4-6 years ago.

;2465726']anyway' date=' not to jinx it, but unless a whole bunch admins are trying to review Portgual, there are alot of Porto & Benfica players up for voting...[/quote']

And?

two teams big deal :rolleyes: and probably not even all their players. Do you think we are going to get all excited or something. What's been the hold up the last couple of days since the EPL got finished? No transfer window excuse to hide behind now but I'm sure you can think of another - maybe with a statistical "fact" in it to make it sound more important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2465823']

yeah the poll...a very very minor representation' date=' in fact if you have kept an eye on over the last few weeks has actually narrowed in deficit, how ever minor, it still has narrowed.

[/quote']

I don't understand why you keep mentioning the poll as minor?

A poll is supposed to be minor and give a reflection of peoples opininon. It's not showing an exact result but surely you must agree that a poll usually generates a pretty good reflection?

If you want an absolute result we would need to have an election where all forumers had one vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2465823']false statements? It is a FACT reviews are happening Sunday/ Monday? how is that propaganda? how is that even false!

i know what propaganda is thank you for your explanation' date=' but i think you are using it in the wrong context.[/quote']

The false statement that you are trying to present as fact is that the reviews now are faster than before! This is a false statement. You came to the point to claim that the reviews now are.... "twice as fast"!! That's not only false, it's ridiculous.

The FACT is that when there was a schedule, the reviews were done FASTER. The numbers are there, everybody can see it and you can't do anything to alter this reality, even if you keep writing all these nonsense here for ever, desperately trying to defend something obviously wrong.

;2465823']^ LOL

or how about its an automated system or remotely activated after the inputting done in the week? :rolleyes:

"Automated system"? I thought that the rating reviews were still done by SM, not SW, and SM still have to approve anything before it is introduced in the game. :rolleyes:

There are some people working on weekends to do those rating reviews, the rating changes are not done by themselves or automated. The person(s) who does the reviews all the week, works at the same way in weekends to change those ratings (check the stats, decide new rating etc). The only reason that they are working on weekends NOW and not BEFORE, is because SM THEMSELVES AKNOWLEDGE THAT THEIR NEW SYSTEM IS NOT WORKING AS EFFICIENTLY AS THEY WOULD LIKE. Get over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

You make up plenty and are selective with the truth - I'm not the only one to see it.

You bet you are not the only one to see it' date=' mate! ;)

I don't understand why you keep mentioning the poll as minor?

It's very simple, it's because he doesn't like the result of the poll. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

You make up plenty and are selective with the truth - I'm not the only one to see it. Of course its not as simple as when one goes up another has to drop straight away. Trying to twist my logic to that interpretation is funny but lame all the same. More players are rising than are dropping. More 90 rated players are available than in the past (yes less based in south america but overall more than when I first started) I agree their was a slight drop at one point though nothing compared to the recent swell which has coincided with the introduction of SW. Are their really that many players all rated that highly compared to the past? No.

this is why i possibly sometimes fail to reply to you' date=' you again fail to provide any proof. What facts have i made up? where are the answers to questions i have asked of you? you skit around it once again. I didnt try to twist anything, i was merely following up on what you stated. You have said its lame as you know i have a point. Of course more 90 players are available than the past - bigger database, more equally rated leagues, emergence of the Bundesliga & Ligue 1 in European football, Ukraine, Russia pumping millions into clubs and developing players look at Zenit, Shaktar case examples....there are plenty of other reasons why there are more 90 players..[/b']

"SW is free" lol

So what. Do you expect people to pay to go on there to help edit stuff that they might then be paying for again in SM? What purpose does SW serve apart from SM? Would SW have been created without SM? doubt it.

It is free! you clearly dont use it do you! If SM/SW whoever do have any business acumen, they will eventually make it subscription based! Once it is a stable and developed system, i cannot see why they wouldnt charge. You get to see who will rise etc before everyone else and just look that the forum they have a eager market out there already, those who would love to see how the upcoming risers are! Id hate to see that day though...I was with SM from day dot, but i bet that was completely free to start with.....gold management came later i bet...but im not sure unless someone can let us know what happened in the beginning..

At the very least they are linked by way of SM using SW to maintain its database, which is a pretty big connection I would say. Whether they are the same people running it or not is largely irrelevant as regardless of what the devs say what happens in SM is down to SM at the end of the day. They might outsource some of the work but its SM who take peoples money and are therefore accountable for their product.

Just because they work in tandem has no link they are the same. I use a Kenwood toaster to make toast with Hovis bread but if the bread is bad thats not a fault with Kenwoods toaster is it? Or i put Duracell batteries in my Stanley torch, it the batts are faulty, thats not Stanleys problem is it? mad comparisons i know but its a comaprison to try and put across what im saying..

These arn't non existant resources. They have more revenue streams than ever before which if even partially invested in to this area on top of the resources they already had should give them the man power to do 6+ teams a day on a regular basis considering they did 4-6 years ago.

How do you know this? have you seen there accounts? balance sheets? employee numbers? your guessing....

And?

two teams big deal :rolleyes: and probably not even all their players. Do you think we are going to get all excited or something. What's been the hold up the last couple of days since the EPL got finished? No transfer window excuse to hide behind now but I'm sure you can think of another - maybe with a statistical "fact" in it to make it sound more important.

oh i have a stat for you....68 players from Porto and Benfica - so you cry out for a review, now it looks like we are getting one...still no pleasing some folk though..... plus quite a few more from Russia, Belgium, Brazil, Romania...and before you come on tomorrow and say why nothing changed, well if you familiarised yourself with SW, the edits can take a week to move across fully, as we all saw with the EPL changes.

delays over the last days.....prehaps the epic backlog of edits? i just had some cleared from December 8th. For those of us using SW - your clearly not - we have seen a delay in edits being processed as there has been so many, but credit the have finally caught up....look at the daily edit, there are still players been done from the transfer window!

Sorry no 'stats' for you on that though, but ask any of the other admins and they will say the same thing!

10 characters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

I don't understand why you keep mentioning the poll as minor?

A poll is supposed to be minor and give a reflection of peoples opininon. It's not showing an exact result but surely you must agree that a poll usually generates a pretty good reflection?

If you want an absolute result we would need to have an election where all forumers had one vote.

because someone mentioned it first? can i not reference it????

i only stated the percentages have closed, however minor (something like 3%)..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2465823']

I will let this slide but if your trying to instigate im a 'liar' then i will start to take that up to the Devs/Mods/ whoever will deal with attempts to create slander...

So your not willing to let people make up their own minds on this one then? I think its more self delusion than lies to be fair. For the record anyone can feel free to have a pop at anything I say on a forum. If I put it out there its fair game and won't ever use censorship to fight my battles.

;2465823']yeah the poll...a very very minor representation' date=' in fact if you have kept an eye on over the last few weeks has actually narrowed in deficit, how ever minor, it still has narrowed.

[/quote']

128 -22 and yet your still trying to put a positive spin on it. So funny, so very funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2465886']oh i have a stat for you....68 players from Porto and Benfica - so you cry out for a review' date=' now it looks like we are getting one...still no pleasing some folk though..... plus quite a few more from Russia, Belgium, Brazil, Romania...and before you come on tomorrow and say why nothing changed, well if you familiarised yourself with SW, the edits can take a week to move across fully, as we all saw with the EPL changes.[/quote']

"68 players... plus quite a few more... the edits can take a week to move across fully"

Exactly what the problem is! When there was a schedule, these numbers PLUS MORE, were reviewed PER DAY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

The false statement that you are trying to present as fact is that the reviews now are faster than before! This is a false statement. You came to the point to claim that the reviews now are.... "twice as fast"!! That's not only false' date=' it's ridiculous.

[b']So that makes me a propaganda spreading 'liar'? team by team is not faster as you put it but i have explained countless times why....new positions feature, height, weight data, transfer windows!!!!!!!!! but it is faster in essence that player way overdue rating are getting them faster!!!!![/b]

The FACT is that when there was a schedule, the reviews were done FASTER. The numbers are there, everybody can see it and you can't do anything to alter this reality, even if you keep writing all these nonsense here for ever, desperately trying to defend something obviously wrong.

But your completely ignoring the fact that leagues such as Romania Bulgaria, Hungary were not fast at all, in the 'schedule' they were last reviewed in April 2011!!!!! that is desperately wrong!!! now they dont wait 18months-24months for key players to rise!!! how can you yet still have a issue with that!!!!!

"Automated system"? I thought that the rating reviews were still done by SM, not SW, and SM still have to approve anything before it is introduced in the game. :rolleyes:

yeah, in the week then do changes, and slowly released them over the weekend by an automated system / or remote activated system prehaps? its that impossible to believe in your mind?

There are some people working on weekends to do those rating reviews, the rating changes are not done by themselves or automated. The person(s) who does the reviews all the week, works at the same way in weekends to change those ratings (check the stats, decide new rating etc). The only reason that they are working on weekends NOW and not BEFORE, is because SM THEMSELVES AKNOWLEDGE THAT THEIR NEW SYSTEM IS NOT WORKING AS EFFICIENTLY AS THEY WOULD LIKE. Get over it.

how do you know that? they might only work weekends and not in the week? anyway what on earth does that matter!!! ridiculous statement

You bet you are not the only one to see it' date=' mate! ;)

It's very simple, it's because he doesn't like the result of the poll. :rolleyes:[/quote']

oh the two of you....

yes because its not representative today as it would of been say last week, as we can all see the data is changing daily. As Glenn said, you need everyone, one vote. And to do it again and again in time to see trends and a true feeling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

"68 players... plus quite a few more... the edits can take a week to move across fully"

Exactly what the problem is! When there was a schedule' date=' these numbers PLUS MORE, were reviewed PER DAY![/quote']

this is getting tedious............

read my posts properly...

68 porto and benfica players...

plus quite a few more.... so around 200.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2465892']because someone mentioned it first? can i not reference it????

i only stated the percentages have closed' date=' however minor (something like 3%)..[/quote']

Of course you can refer to someone that mentioned the poll.

But what I don't understand is why you refer to it as minor?

A poll is supposed to be minor and give a hint about peoples opinion in general.

Don't you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

So your not willing to let people make up their own minds on this one then? I think its more self delusion than lies to be fair. For the record anyone can feel free to have a pop at anything I say on a forum. If I put it out there its fair game and won't ever use censorship to fight my battles.

128 -22 and yet your still trying to put a positive spin on it. So funny' date=' so very funny.[/quote']

just wow. the power of debate. the weak choose to ignore the main points and try to belittle the minor points. theres 'having a pop' and then there is using slander to try and create a negative view of someone, and in a public forum, just so big.

from now on il just refrain from replying to your posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

Of course you can refer to someone that mentioned the poll.

But what I don't understand is why you refer to it as minor?

A poll is supposed to be minor and give a hint about peoples opinion in general.

Don't you agree?

of course, but its just a hint, it is minor, its a snapshot of the forums opinions when you did the poll 19 days ago, and as people cant change there original opinion in may not be accurate of there feeling now.. we could ask 10 or 1000 people now, and see what there opinion is and do it again in a week, month, year...it will always be different. And now the SW system is changing a bit more, perceptions will be different in all those time frames.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: PLEASE SM - Reintroduce the rating schedule!!

;2465468']i mentioned Glenn for his league schedule review he put together a long time back' date=' before this whole Soccerwiki debate... it was in his signature...not referencing him for his views on the changes that are about now...just to avoid confusion.

your quick to forget reasons why it was so slow....they had the whole position overhaul, the height, weight, full name, preferred foot....all this is new data that had to be collated.....plus the winter break & transfer window!......

mark my words i guarantee the next review wont take '3' months...[/quote']

Your words are marked. So how long will it take for the big 5 to be reviewed next time? To get them up to date by June, when will they have to start? What about my point about the players who have been raised 'randomly' still having to be checked in a league review, and that it slows the rate at which 'teams' are done? That they can only do so many players in a day?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...