Star Fever 274 Posted June 12, 2014 There seems to be a misunderstanding between what is an advantage and what is fair as for as the off topic discussion is concerned. Mathematically the old tactical could give a bigger advantage than the new one, not difficult to understand. If you don't want the losing team to have a bigger advantage while losing then I can live with that but saying it's 'not fair' is a bit like saying it wasn't fair when Muller had the GM for his world final. Massive advantage, yes, unfair, NO. For me the issue is about credibility. Substitutes are common in team sport, fact. Each sport uses substitutes in a different way but the principle of changing one competitor for another is commonplace. That is NOT a comparison by the way, lol! Some sports include some form of handicap to either make it more difficult for the winning team or easier for the losing team or player. The old tactical was just putting the two principles together to give the losing team an advantage which can be a bigger advantage than the new rule but is far more credible. The new tactical is just an off the wall barnpot load of bollox, it's not based even vaguely on any generally accepted rule and actually goes against one huge principle of fairness which is equal return for equal achievement. The TR might be a load of bollox but its a better load of bollox than the old TS rule simply because of the limitations of use. If the TS was re-introduced but with TR limitations then maybe people would be happier? i.e. only usable twice, when the losing side is 10 then 12pts down, and same limitations of heats that it can be used in. That way it'd still achieve what it's meant to (make matches closer with a small chance that the losers might actually win) but without the double-scoring which seems to irritate everyone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Had Enough 233 Posted June 13, 2014 <snip> The old tactical was just putting the two principles together to give the losing team an advantage which can be a bigger advantage than the new rule but is far more credible. The new tactical is just an off the wall barnpot load of bollox, it's not based even vaguely on any generally accepted rule and actually goes against one huge principle of fairness which is equal return for equal achievement. Excellent arguments and very similar to those I put forward when the Artificial Points Joker was first introduced. The new race format actually lends itself to the reintroduction of Tactical Subs, because you could introduce regs to make any changes on a roughly like-for-like basis. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
