Ha. Amateur.I have been informed my list is OK but my date was wrong
My list has just been deemed correct
Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Ghaznavid, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators

Ours was marked as correct, but we spotted an error and told them it was in fact wrong.dave_r wrote:Ha. Amateur.I have been informed my list is OK but my date was wrong
My list has just been deemed correct
Quite a few of us are booked in at the 3 Queens http://www.3queenshotel.co.ukrbodleyscott wrote:I need to organise accommodation. Where are people staying this year?

For those so inclined this is opposite a very fine micro brewery - The Burton BridgeQuite a few of us are booked in at the 3 Queens http://www.3queenshotel.co.uk



Well not with a 25-0 scoring system anyway.nikgaukroger wrote:I liked my result from the last game last year - I don't think anyone else has ever scored 33 points from a single FoG game

Dave is grumpy because the published results from last year's Badcon have Nik scoring 33 points in the last round. This means Dave finished 10th rather than the 9th he should have been had Nik scored a more traditional score. While one place in one competition might not seem a lot in practice it makes the difference between Dave finishing 10th in the end of year rankings and 9th. For some reason Dave seems to think that 9th is better than 10thtimmy1 wrote:Dave
And your point is?
The advantage of doing the rankings is that one can delay publishing the effect of one's poor results, and speed up publishing your successes. What's the point of having power unless you can abuse it?
At least the rankings don't come with a table showing how many 6s each player rolled to get the ranking...