Is this a harebrained idea?

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Ron

Ron

Well-Known Member
Forum Moderator
Jan 25, 2011
51,967
19,412
113
France
Don't know how or why but all of a sudden this just flashed into my brain (**** knows how it found it).

Haven't thought it through but basically it's based on cricket (<confused> don't even like cricket). Here goes with the broad concept:

2 teams, obviously.

The batsmen score runs by selecting horses and runs are scored according to the odds and placings.

The bowlers get wickets by selecting winners.

I've got my coat handy.
 
I can honestly say that I have never touched the stuff (any stuff). Don't need it. I'm just naturally crazy. Haven't even smoked a cigarette since I was 15.
 
I used to open the bowling for my school (wicked I was) but this is clearly not going to be a good strategy if this game ever materializes.
 
Ron said:
Don't know how or why but all of a sudden this just flashed into my brain (**** knows how it found it).

Haven't thought it through but basically it's based on cricket (<confused> don't even like cricket). Here goes with the broad concept:

2 teams, obviously.

The batsmen score runs by selecting horses and runs are scored according to the odds and placings.

The bowlers get wickets by selecting winners.

I've got my coat handy.
Click to expand...

Batsmen pick ten winners out of ten at an average price of say 3/1 and are all out for 30 runs- because the bowlers pick ten winners out of ten also.
Is it a good idea?
<yikes><yikes><yikes><yikes> = <laugh><laugh><laugh><laugh>
Who luvs ya, baby!
 
Why not -

Batsman gets first pick in one race. If they finish ahead of the bowlers horse, they get the amount of runs that they are places ahead (with a bonus for the winner). If they are behind they get no runs and are out if the bowlers horse wins.

All ten batsmen play per day (so ten races a day) until they are out.

Reverse after innings and carry on.
 
Ron....PS, I'm only joshing you- as if you didn't know!
It could be a system where you lose a wicket when a specified bowler/member picks a winner at better odds than a specified batsman/member. If he doesn't, then the batsman keeps on batting/selecting and accumulating runs/points. If the batter picks a loser, then he's 'out' if the bowler picks a winner. Otherwise he carries on batting.
Pick ten members for each team (too complex to pick eleven and change ends) , and you can decide whether you have one innings each or two.
You could have special bonus runs if the batsman picks winners at certain big odds; and when a batsman scores runs/picks winners, it's then his batting partner to pick next.
Great idea! :emoticon-0148-yes:
 
Could you have a system were it takes a bigger priced winner to eliminate the number 1 batsman, were as an odds on favourite could eliminate the guys at 8, 9 and 10 :biggrin:
 
Some good ideas coming forward. Could end up with a very good game here. Nightmare to administer probably (depends whether it has to be done ball by ball or can be determined overnight from the RP results). Let's continue to build up the idea and see what's involved administratively when the game has been fully defined..
 
This idea is so far out, somewhere near deep square leg, that it works...<laugh><laugh> Speaking as a number 3 or 4 batter in my time - (long time ago mind...) seems a logical thing to do and combine horse racing with cricket...<yikes>

I'll give it a go Ron as it seems a bit of a laugh...<cheers>


If you give the batter say 6 horses, which makes up a over, then work out the return from the odds then thats how he can score runs... The bowler gets to choose from one of the races that the batter has picked and if is horse beats the batters pick then that's his wicket...!!!

So batter one picks in the 2.00, 2.30, 2.45, 3.00, 4.00, 4.30... say all at 3/1... returns a £1 bet per race of £24 therefore 24 runs... But they have to win to score the runs...
The bowler takes him on in the 2.45 say beats his pick so therefore takes his wicket... Any selections after that wont count as he is out...

Jeez i really do have too much time on my hands today...<laugh><laugh>

Dunno if that helps but im sure some more brain wave ideas will pop up sooner or later... Good luck Ron organising this one pal...<ok>
 
cyclonic111 said:
When it comes to fair play, we Aussies are above reproach Swanny. But I'm putting my name down as an all rounder. A fair to middling, lower order, left hand batsman, who just happened to teach Warnie all he knows when it comes to leggies. <laugh>
Click to expand...

Does that mean when it's your turn to bowl you'll be having a leg over?
 
I've had a look at this (needless to say I'm glad to have something to do, stuck here with my leg up in plaster for 45 days).

I think we need to make a fundamental decision. If we were all sat glued to our screens all afternoon, this could be run in real time (ie someone bowls and the batsman scores, doesn't score, or is out and so on). However, I think that would be impractical (based on how long it took to do the Singles Cup draw in real time). I would probably have to acquire an easel and palette so that I could watch the paint dry while I'm waiting.

Therefore it would probably have to be a batch oriented system whereby I could take the selections of all batsmen and bowlers and retrospectively take the results from the RP Index and work out the scores/wickets each evening (ie automate the scoring). Doesn't quite have the same appeal as "Owzat" and "the next batsman is" though. The retrospective scoring would allow relative positions to be taken into account (as per Shergar's idea) but couldn't do this in real time (very labour intensive).

Any ideas on the practicalities?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back