Subject: [DEV] International Cup

HeaMHepBu, I have tracked. Two times. 16+25 weeks.
I agree to every point you write.

(However it is futile to make some people understand. I had such discussion very often with Borkos. He and me, we live in 2 completely different universes... He is always right and me, I am always wrong.)

Well if we disagree, then you also always think that you are right and I am wrong.

Or do you disagree and think that I am right and you are wrong? :))

You have tracked *what* exactly for 16 and 25 weeks?

HeaMHepBu wrote " if there is any correlation in the number of injuries is to track them over a year."
Immediately next post is mine - so, guess what I tracked? You are right, I tracked injuries. :P
During these 2 periods I did something different and I compared my data of these 2 periods to the data of the other seasons.

But what exactly did you track? How many teams? How many players? Your team only, your league only, or all teams in the game? With what info - number of minutes / week? Match activity?

Just saying "I tracked injuries" means literally nothing.
(edited)

Some of the guys with databases could easily solve the debate - collect all the injuries from the wednesday matches and check in how many games the injured players have played during the week & season and compare with non-injured players. If there is any correlation it will be clearly visible.

I am 99.99% sure there is not. Not only in injuries - past matches have no influence in any way on what happens in the next match. I think this is confirmed from owners or at least no one has ever shown data for anything different.

People, I don't know what and why but....... last season I was knocked out of the cup in the first round, I didn't have any injured players for the season or maybe just one. Today I played the semifinal, so far I have 5 injuries and the season is only halfway through.
Rarely, in all these years, have I had injured players - on average two per season, mostly minor ones lasting a week or two, at the moment it's ......
Say what you want - many matches lead to injuries.

Last season you had 4 injuries

This season you had 3 injuries

slighlty higher average number is normal due to "normal" games on Friday instead of "safe tactic" games in friendlies

still, I got eliminated in 2nd round of cup this season and most games I played were "safe tactic". So far: 3 games with normal tactics, 12 games with "safe" tactics.

so far this season I already had 5 injuries, so already more than what you had whole last season.
last season in total I had 6 injuries whole season, with same tactics, number of games per week etc. most of them in first part of season, in 2nd part of season I only got 1.

it's mostly random, there's no point in creating big theories around it. one season you're lucky and you get only 3 slight injuries, another you're unlucky and you get 10 injuries, most for many days.
(edited)

See? For some, being right is more important than updating their beliefs. I've told you before—it’s futile. That’s why I usually prefer to say nothing.
-----
Regarding your Cup run: I assume your players were playing three official matches a week.
So, I looked for a statement by Raul. When the mid-week league match was first introduced, he warned 4-5 times that participating in more than two matches per week increases the risk of injuries.
I couldn't find that specific statement, but I did find something else:

GUESS WHAT I JUST STUMBLED UPON!!!!


Again:
" It is just small help, that you can use that player in one official game less, and he will still get almost 100% (so the injury risk is the same, NT game + one official, vs friendly + one offcial. "

In other words:
IF in one official game less, THEN the injury risk is the same,
IF not one official game less, BUT THREE GAMES, THEN the injury risk is NOT the same,

--
HeaMHepBu, and now read the posts of prior page. I promise you, it will be fun! :)

You're reading things that aren't there...

He just meant the minutes/training ratio and getting ~100% training for 2 games played (NT + club official / friendly + club official)

and in both those cases exactly one official game is needed

Yes you are right.
For me it is what I wrote. Good night!

PS: "so the injury risk is the same"

LOLLLLLL

You can imagine all you want...

https://sokker.org/forum_topic/ID_forum/63355/ID_topic/3438693/pg/661

the whole discussion from that screen is above

it was a discussion after deleting injuries/training from NT friendlies + increasing the training for official NT games (so that NT game + league game = friendly + league game, before NT games gave less training than friendly club games)

all that Raul meant was that thanks to the change of increasing NT training you don't have to use your trainees in NT + league + additional third (over 180 total minutes) game anymore to give them ~100%, it had nothing to do with "more official games being less safe"

"Injuries at NT games

We also decided, to remove injuries from FRIENDLY NT games. It will work as an arcade game - players can get injured while playing, but it will not last after the game.
It means, that we will also remove the training bonus from it - if there is a potential loss, there should be also no gains from it.
For official NT games, we decided to extend the reward - players will get so much training as from club-friendly games (so around 86% of possible training efficiency)."
(edited)

yes, "the injury risk is the same" (after the change) because in both scenarios players play for 180 minutes and receive the exact same % of training...

before the change if you played 90 NT + 90 league you received less training than if you played 90 friendly + 90 league

so before the change the risk was the same but the training with NT scenario was lesser = you had to add more minutes from third game to reach 99% = player played for more than 180 minutes = had higher risk to receive the same training

in other words before changes the injury risk was higher when you trained "using" NT minutes, after the change the risk became the same (180minutes=99% in both scenarios)
(edited)

I don’t know what you’re on, but you’re taking things way out of the context they were intended. Granted, I’m guessing English isn’t your first/native language but what borkos is saying here is actually right given the context.

Please, if you’re going to try and use snippets to justify your view points, at least use ones that actually support the points you’re trying to make rather than completely misinterpret something and then reimagining what you’d like the context to have been.

Or we could all of us discuss on topic, about this newly formed International Cup.
Thanks.

Could someone explain me, please? It was told that just forth team will be relegated.