Front Office Football Central - View Single Post

daahdeedaa · 04-02-2016, 04:57 PM

So longtime lurker, previously had an FOFC account which I posted like twice and forgot the e-mail associated with it.

Anyway, I started playing rocking rackets because of the Sri Lanka dynasty

.

This is in reference to Law90026's pure trainer > practice idea.It's like Brian and other have been saying, practice > training. I ran a study on 3 of my players. I basically followed how much experience they got per point of fatigue and compared it to this same ratio when training with a 5.1 trainer. Note I took a sample size of around 50 practice matches over an 8 week period per player.

Player A 4.4 Endurance (I did not not distinguish between singles and doubles practice of this player)

0.84 xp/fatigue from trainer
1.07 xp/fatigue from practice matches

11% of total practice matches were noticeably less efficient than trainer (that is they had <0.79 ratio)
17% were about just as efficient (~0.79-0.90 range)
72% were noticeably more efficient (>0.90)

Player B 3.8 Endurance

0.63 xp/fatigue from trainer
0.83 xp/fatigue from practice matches

0.86 Singles xp/fatigue
0.75 doubles xp/fatigue

6% matches less efficient than trainer in singles
12% matches less efficient than trainer in doubles

Player C 2.0 Endurance

0.37 xp/fatigue from trainer
0.38 xp/fatigue from practice matches

0.32 Singles xp/fatigue
0.50 doubles xp/fatigue

69%!! less efficient in singles
7% less efficient in doubles

-----------------------------------------

So I think you can see from the data, that on practicing beats out training even though some of your practices end up poorly. The only real outlier is player C singles and I think have an adequate explanation (curiously enough player C's crappy singles practices is what lead me to do this study in the first place).

Player C is currently the #3 ranked doubles player in the world. He is also an unranked singles player. That means in singles practice he is matched up with other unranked singles player. This is usually 19 year olds or super washed up players (either way players with low service/skill). While player C is 34 years old he still has relatively solid 4.4 skill rating and 3.6 service rating. So he is being matched up with pure scrubs even though basically still has the skills/service game of a top 100 singles player. The only time he has decent matches is when similar high ranked doubles player with really low single player ranking is in a practice match with him. As a result, I've basically stopped entering him into singles practices and just spam training him as a supplement to doubles practice matches.

For Player B, I suspect a similar scenario as to why the doubles practice lags noticeably behind single (though still more efficient than using a trainer). Player B is the #23 singles player in the world and ranked #192 in doubles. His doubles rank is a bit lower than it should be because I started omitting him from doubles tournaments when he hit the top 50 in singles. So while the disparity is not as great as player C, his doubles ranking is lower than it should be resulting in him being placed in "lower level" doubles practices then he should be playing in. Still, he still gets more xp practice from doubles practice than if I would use that fatigue through my 5.1 trainer.

Basically the conclusion is only use you trainer for extra fatigue not used in practice/knocked out early in a tournament (what Brian suggested), or if you somehow know you're gonna get super shitty practice matches (like Player C in every singles practice week).

Unfortunately this doubles/singles thing for high-ranked doubles player is the only repeatable scenario I've found for predicting potential poor practice. If you can more reliably predict a poor practice week than you might have something.

04-02-2016, 04:57 PM	#131
daahdeedaa n00b Join Date: Apr 2016	So longtime lurker, previously had an FOFC account which I posted like twice and forgot the e-mail associated with it. Anyway, I started playing rocking rackets because of the Sri Lanka dynasty . This is in reference to Law90026's pure trainer > practice idea.It's like Brian and other have been saying, practice > training. I ran a study on 3 of my players. I basically followed how much experience they got per point of fatigue and compared it to this same ratio when training with a 5.1 trainer. Note I took a sample size of around 50 practice matches over an 8 week period per player. Player A 4.4 Endurance (I did not not distinguish between singles and doubles practice of this player) 0.84 xp/fatigue from trainer 1.07 xp/fatigue from practice matches 11% of total practice matches were noticeably less efficient than trainer (that is they had <0.79 ratio) 17% were about just as efficient (~0.79-0.90 range) 72% were noticeably more efficient (>0.90) Player B 3.8 Endurance 0.63 xp/fatigue from trainer 0.83 xp/fatigue from practice matches 0.86 Singles xp/fatigue 0.75 doubles xp/fatigue 6% matches less efficient than trainer in singles 12% matches less efficient than trainer in doubles Player C 2.0 Endurance 0.37 xp/fatigue from trainer 0.38 xp/fatigue from practice matches 0.32 Singles xp/fatigue 0.50 doubles xp/fatigue 69%!! less efficient in singles 7% less efficient in doubles ----------------------------------------- So I think you can see from the data, that on practicing beats out training even though some of your practices end up poorly. The only real outlier is player C singles and I think have an adequate explanation (curiously enough player C's crappy singles practices is what lead me to do this study in the first place). Player C is currently the #3 ranked doubles player in the world. He is also an unranked singles player. That means in singles practice he is matched up with other unranked singles player. This is usually 19 year olds or super washed up players (either way players with low service/skill). While player C is 34 years old he still has relatively solid 4.4 skill rating and 3.6 service rating. So he is being matched up with pure scrubs even though basically still has the skills/service game of a top 100 singles player. The only time he has decent matches is when similar high ranked doubles player with really low single player ranking is in a practice match with him. As a result, I've basically stopped entering him into singles practices and just spam training him as a supplement to doubles practice matches. For Player B, I suspect a similar scenario as to why the doubles practice lags noticeably behind single (though still more efficient than using a trainer). Player B is the #23 singles player in the world and ranked #192 in doubles. His doubles rank is a bit lower than it should be because I started omitting him from doubles tournaments when he hit the top 50 in singles. So while the disparity is not as great as player C, his doubles ranking is lower than it should be resulting in him being placed in "lower level" doubles practices then he should be playing in. Still, he still gets more xp practice from doubles practice than if I would use that fatigue through my 5.1 trainer. Basically the conclusion is only use you trainer for extra fatigue not used in practice/knocked out early in a tournament (what Brian suggested), or if you somehow know you're gonna get super shitty practice matches (like Player C in every singles practice week). Unfortunately this doubles/singles thing for high-ranked doubles player is the only repeatable scenario I've found for predicting potential poor practice. If you can more reliably predict a poor practice week than you might have something. Last edited by daahdeedaa : 04-02-2016 at 05:18 PM.