Saturday, 23 May 2015


Just a quick note to give an update on the Division so far. It's been a long two weeks, and a lot of games have been played on the hallowed turf of Tuesday evenings. With the scores totted up and entered onto the spreadsheet, we find that Ian still holds onto first but, just like a turtle neck sweater, it's tight at the top.

But during one of the conversations that broke out on Friday, if I understood correctly, Martin was poo-poohing our method of dividing by the length of time. Because he likes short games, he felt his efforts weren't being rewarded. Well, it was easy to see what the Division would look like if we treated all games the same.

Now Sam is top, thus showing his prowess in games lasting under an hour.


  1. Now I'm even more confused. Does the fact that Sam has more points from 20 games including 4 wins than I do from 20 games including 9 wins mean that he plays games with more players than I do?

    Anyway, I think what I was saying is that you should still work out the points using the time factor, but then to get the ratio you should divide by total time played, not total number of games played.

    Not that any of this really matters of course :)

  2. I never understand the systems, but I do like the one where I'm top x