Closed Thread
Results 1 to 28 of 28

Thread: A New model for Ability (Is it time for variable PA part 2)

  1. #1
    Amateur
    Join Date
    9th November 2007
    Location
    lauttasaari, Finland. Nate, What\'s Heaven like? There\'s a shortage of chairs.
    Posts
    188

    Default

    Thanks to everyone who contributed to my previous thread, I noticed that it has recently attracted some attention so I wrote this, I could have posted this in the original thread but I felt it deserved a thread of its own.

    Ok I think I have a solution that will please all parties. It would be a model based on there been no P.A. Instead it would be a formulae which encompasses all the aspects below. You see the truth is that we could all become the greatest footballer in the world, if we had enough time. If I biologically froze at the physical age of 23 for the next 150 years then I could become the greatest footballer ever, in fact if I had 150 yeas to spare I could become the greatest anything! Golfer, Chess master, Poker player, anything, we all could, It’s just a shame life isn’t like that!

    In real life there are two main aspects, and some minor aspects which determine how good you will become at anything.

    1. Intelligence The rate at which you learn and can successfully implement new skills. (football wise)

    2. Ambition Broadly speaking this covers determination, work rate in training amongst others, basically how hard, and how much effort a player puts in.

    Now, players with high intelligence and high ambition make for world class football players, they have the ability to learn new skills fast, and they are always learning new skills because they train a lot, and work very hard. A player can still become world class with high intelligence and medium ambition, even in some cases low ambition, but not the other way round. For example my mum took her driving test 9 times, had 100’s of lessons and went through about 6 instructors, but never passed her test, she had all the ambition and determination in the world, but just never learned! I on the other hand took about half a dozen lessons and past second time. In football terms, if I had a choice, I’d rather be a lazy genius than a hard working ****** any day.

    Now for the minor factors; In the original post I said that “if at the age of 14 I’d have gone to a world class youth academy, I’d be a lot better player than I am now” which is probably true, but the youth academy would of given up on trying to make me a premiership standard player after about a week, as I am, footballing wise, a lazy ******! The worst combination! But if this youth academy new that my body was “physically froze” for the next 150 years then they would have kept me, and taught me everything, as I would EVENTUALLY have learned. So we have to consider;

    3. Environment Coaches and Training facilities. As well as first team experience.

    This aspect would have little effect on players with high intelligence, such as Pele and Ronaldo, as they mastered how to play football in the back streets of Sao Paulo. But it would affect players with high ambition and medium intelligence, players who need a good coach and facilities to help them learn.

    We also have to consider something that any player, even one with very low/non intelligence and ambition (as long as the money is good) can become. A brick s**t house! There are lots of players out there who possess either the ability to run very fast, or are incredibly strong, and athletic yet they don’t make the very best footballers. Spurs have two of these players, Aaron Lennon and Tom Huddlestone. Lennon is amazingly quick, yet by the time he’s learnt how to do everything else as good as C. Ronaldo, he’ll probably be about 45 years old, (I’m speaking as a Spurs fan, p.s. 5-1 yeah baby!!) don’t get me wrong I think Lennon is a good player, but unless he has high intelligence, and ambition there wont be enough time for him to become as good as C. Ronaldo (I suppose comparing him to the best player in the world is a bit unfair) Also there’s Tom Huddlestone, he’s an absolute man mountain, but he isn’t half the player Patrick Viera is, because he cant pass, position himself, run, play through balls, etc. etc. So again, unless Huddlestone has high intelligence, he’ll never be as good as Viera. So the physical side of a players game will have to be given a whole different formulae, since Intellegence and to a degree ambition have a significantley less effect.

    We also have to consider the negative effects of making a player have more muscle, every player in the world would benefit from been able to run quicker, jump higher, and last longer, but due to the added weight and change in body shape making a player a greater physical presence, i.e. making Fabregas as muscly as Huddlestone could have a detrimental effect on his game, plus making a big player lose lots of weight in order to become quicker and more agile could also be detrimental so I guess this part of the physical side would be linked to intelligence with regard to adaptability. for example, a player with high adaptability would not see his technical and skill based attributes decrease as much as a player with low adaptability if they both started hitting the gym to either become more muscly, or if he is already big, to lose weight and gain speed.

    As you may know (If you use miniScout or Genie) you can see some players peak at 23 i.e. they have CA 123 and PA 123, I had one such player, and as an experiment I placed him on a training regime with Strength and Aerobic set to intense, yet his strength stat only went from 12 to 13 in 4 years! I also put another 23 year old player whose CA was 115 and PA was 177 on the same training regime, and his strength stat increased from 13 to 18 in the same 4 years. This part definitely needs to be changed.

    I think I’ve covered all the bases, so here it is. My model/formulae for Mental, Technique and Skill based attributes would look like:

    A=B*(1/C)*(1/D)*(1/F)*e^(-G)


    A= The time taken for that player to increase his rating for a specific attribute by +1
    B= Current ability of a specific attribute (range 1-20), It’s obviously easier, and would happen quicker for someone to increase from 1 to 2, then it would to increase from 19 to 20, so the higher the current attribute, the harder it is to improve it.
    C= Ambition, it’s calculated as 1/C so that the high the number, the quicker the player improves.
    D= A clubs training facilities and Coaches setup, this number would not vary too dramatically form club to club, a free agent would have D= 1.00 where as a player at Man Utd would have D= 1.17, or something like that.
    F= Intensity of training, again only a small variation, a player not training in a specific area could have F= 0.92 (so the attribute decreases over time) and a player on intense training could have F= 1.15 for example.
    G= Intelligence, calculated as e^, as it is exponential because I think it is the most important factor regarding the time taken for a player to develop, and (-) negative so the higher the number, the quicker the time.

    Note that age isn’t factored into the above equation as the attributes are not physical ones. Which makes sense if you think about it, for example at the age of 32 If someone with high Intelligence started to practise free-kicks or corners, they would get pretty good at them because free-kicks and corners don’t take into consideration a players physicality.

    My model/formulae for Physical based Attributes.

    A= B*(1/logC)*(1/2*D)*e^(2*-F)*e^H



    A= The time taken for that player to increase his rating for a specific attribute by +1
    B= Current ability of a specific attribute (range 1-20).
    C= Ambition, it’s calculated as 1/C so that the high the number, the quicker the time, it’s a log function so that Ambition has less of an effect on physical training than it does on mental.
    D= A clubs training facilities and Coaches setup, this number would not vary too dramatically, but it would still be greater than for mental attributes, that’s why it is doubled, a free agent would have D= 1.00 where as a player at Man Utd would have D= 1.17, or something like that.
    F= Intensity of training, in physical training, this would be the most important aspect, that’s why it’s doubled, then an exponential function, someone not training would still have F= 0.92 for example, but it would have more of an affect, and the same is true for someone on intensive training.
    H= Age, the second most important factor in physical training, as it is an exponential function, it means that increasing your physical attributes when you hit 28 and 29 would be very difficult. Just as a note, a 19 year old wouldn’t have H= 19, but instead a number, allocated for the age of 19.

    Both these models are very crude, and would no doubt need major tweaking and even changing completely, but the basic outline for a new system of calculating a players ability is there.

    In an ideal world each specific attribute would have its own “difficulty” ratio, and in a perfect world each attribute would have it’s own formula, as some attributes are harder to learn that others, but this would probably slow the game down dramatically, so for now I think it is good enough to at least split the Attributes into physical and mental.

    In Summary these new models bring a welcome change to the “roof” on players ability we currently have, but it doesn’t allow Joe averages to become superstar’s just because they are at Man Utd. They also make a players training far more important, an aspect of the game that is currently lacking. I could make a young Joe average very good at free-kick’s, but I would have to allocate a lot of training for this which would see all his other attributes suffer.

  2. #2
    Amateur
    Join Date
    9th November 2007
    Location
    lauttasaari, Finland. Nate, What\'s Heaven like? There\'s a shortage of chairs.
    Posts
    188

    Default

    Thanks to everyone who contributed to my previous thread, I noticed that it has recently attracted some attention so I wrote this, I could have posted this in the original thread but I felt it deserved a thread of its own.

    Ok I think I have a solution that will please all parties. It would be a model based on there been no P.A. Instead it would be a formulae which encompasses all the aspects below. You see the truth is that we could all become the greatest footballer in the world, if we had enough time. If I biologically froze at the physical age of 23 for the next 150 years then I could become the greatest footballer ever, in fact if I had 150 yeas to spare I could become the greatest anything! Golfer, Chess master, Poker player, anything, we all could, It’s just a shame life isn’t like that!

    In real life there are two main aspects, and some minor aspects which determine how good you will become at anything.

    1. Intelligence The rate at which you learn and can successfully implement new skills. (football wise)

    2. Ambition Broadly speaking this covers determination, work rate in training amongst others, basically how hard, and how much effort a player puts in.

    Now, players with high intelligence and high ambition make for world class football players, they have the ability to learn new skills fast, and they are always learning new skills because they train a lot, and work very hard. A player can still become world class with high intelligence and medium ambition, even in some cases low ambition, but not the other way round. For example my mum took her driving test 9 times, had 100’s of lessons and went through about 6 instructors, but never passed her test, she had all the ambition and determination in the world, but just never learned! I on the other hand took about half a dozen lessons and past second time. In football terms, if I had a choice, I’d rather be a lazy genius than a hard working ****** any day.

    Now for the minor factors; In the original post I said that “if at the age of 14 I’d have gone to a world class youth academy, I’d be a lot better player than I am now” which is probably true, but the youth academy would of given up on trying to make me a premiership standard player after about a week, as I am, footballing wise, a lazy ******! The worst combination! But if this youth academy new that my body was “physically froze” for the next 150 years then they would have kept me, and taught me everything, as I would EVENTUALLY have learned. So we have to consider;

    3. Environment Coaches and Training facilities. As well as first team experience.

    This aspect would have little effect on players with high intelligence, such as Pele and Ronaldo, as they mastered how to play football in the back streets of Sao Paulo. But it would affect players with high ambition and medium intelligence, players who need a good coach and facilities to help them learn.

    We also have to consider something that any player, even one with very low/non intelligence and ambition (as long as the money is good) can become. A brick s**t house! There are lots of players out there who possess either the ability to run very fast, or are incredibly strong, and athletic yet they don’t make the very best footballers. Spurs have two of these players, Aaron Lennon and Tom Huddlestone. Lennon is amazingly quick, yet by the time he’s learnt how to do everything else as good as C. Ronaldo, he’ll probably be about 45 years old, (I’m speaking as a Spurs fan, p.s. 5-1 yeah baby!!) don’t get me wrong I think Lennon is a good player, but unless he has high intelligence, and ambition there wont be enough time for him to become as good as C. Ronaldo (I suppose comparing him to the best player in the world is a bit unfair) Also there’s Tom Huddlestone, he’s an absolute man mountain, but he isn’t half the player Patrick Viera is, because he cant pass, position himself, run, play through balls, etc. etc. So again, unless Huddlestone has high intelligence, he’ll never be as good as Viera. So the physical side of a players game will have to be given a whole different formulae, since Intellegence and to a degree ambition have a significantley less effect.

    We also have to consider the negative effects of making a player have more muscle, every player in the world would benefit from been able to run quicker, jump higher, and last longer, but due to the added weight and change in body shape making a player a greater physical presence, i.e. making Fabregas as muscly as Huddlestone could have a detrimental effect on his game, plus making a big player lose lots of weight in order to become quicker and more agile could also be detrimental so I guess this part of the physical side would be linked to intelligence with regard to adaptability. for example, a player with high adaptability would not see his technical and skill based attributes decrease as much as a player with low adaptability if they both started hitting the gym to either become more muscly, or if he is already big, to lose weight and gain speed.

    As you may know (If you use miniScout or Genie) you can see some players peak at 23 i.e. they have CA 123 and PA 123, I had one such player, and as an experiment I placed him on a training regime with Strength and Aerobic set to intense, yet his strength stat only went from 12 to 13 in 4 years! I also put another 23 year old player whose CA was 115 and PA was 177 on the same training regime, and his strength stat increased from 13 to 18 in the same 4 years. This part definitely needs to be changed.

    I think I’ve covered all the bases, so here it is. My model/formulae for Mental, Technique and Skill based attributes would look like:

    A=B*(1/C)*(1/D)*(1/F)*e^(-G)


    A= The time taken for that player to increase his rating for a specific attribute by +1
    B= Current ability of a specific attribute (range 1-20), It’s obviously easier, and would happen quicker for someone to increase from 1 to 2, then it would to increase from 19 to 20, so the higher the current attribute, the harder it is to improve it.
    C= Ambition, it’s calculated as 1/C so that the high the number, the quicker the player improves.
    D= A clubs training facilities and Coaches setup, this number would not vary too dramatically form club to club, a free agent would have D= 1.00 where as a player at Man Utd would have D= 1.17, or something like that.
    F= Intensity of training, again only a small variation, a player not training in a specific area could have F= 0.92 (so the attribute decreases over time) and a player on intense training could have F= 1.15 for example.
    G= Intelligence, calculated as e^, as it is exponential because I think it is the most important factor regarding the time taken for a player to develop, and (-) negative so the higher the number, the quicker the time.

    Note that age isn’t factored into the above equation as the attributes are not physical ones. Which makes sense if you think about it, for example at the age of 32 If someone with high Intelligence started to practise free-kicks or corners, they would get pretty good at them because free-kicks and corners don’t take into consideration a players physicality.

    My model/formulae for Physical based Attributes.

    A= B*(1/logC)*(1/2*D)*e^(2*-F)*e^H



    A= The time taken for that player to increase his rating for a specific attribute by +1
    B= Current ability of a specific attribute (range 1-20).
    C= Ambition, it’s calculated as 1/C so that the high the number, the quicker the time, it’s a log function so that Ambition has less of an effect on physical training than it does on mental.
    D= A clubs training facilities and Coaches setup, this number would not vary too dramatically, but it would still be greater than for mental attributes, that’s why it is doubled, a free agent would have D= 1.00 where as a player at Man Utd would have D= 1.17, or something like that.
    F= Intensity of training, in physical training, this would be the most important aspect, that’s why it’s doubled, then an exponential function, someone not training would still have F= 0.92 for example, but it would have more of an affect, and the same is true for someone on intensive training.
    H= Age, the second most important factor in physical training, as it is an exponential function, it means that increasing your physical attributes when you hit 28 and 29 would be very difficult. Just as a note, a 19 year old wouldn’t have H= 19, but instead a number, allocated for the age of 19.

    Both these models are very crude, and would no doubt need major tweaking and even changing completely, but the basic outline for a new system of calculating a players ability is there.

    In an ideal world each specific attribute would have its own “difficulty” ratio, and in a perfect world each attribute would have it’s own formula, as some attributes are harder to learn that others, but this would probably slow the game down dramatically, so for now I think it is good enough to at least split the Attributes into physical and mental.

    In Summary these new models bring a welcome change to the “roof” on players ability we currently have, but it doesn’t allow Joe averages to become superstar’s just because they are at Man Utd. They also make a players training far more important, an aspect of the game that is currently lacking. I could make a young Joe average very good at free-kick’s, but I would have to allocate a lot of training for this which would see all his other attributes suffer.

  3. #3
    Amateur
    Join Date
    15th October 2007
    Location
    Struggling in EPL with Merthyr Tydfil 8.0.2
    Posts
    536

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James.Clench:
    Thanks to everyone who contributed to my previous thread, I noticed that it has recently attracted some attention so I wrote this, I could have posted this in the original thread but I felt it deserved a thread of its own.

    Ok I think I have a solution that will please all parties. It would be a model based on there been no P.A. Instead it would be a formulae which encompasses all the aspects below. You see the truth is that we could all become the greatest footballer in the world, if we had enough time. If I biologically froze at the physical age of 23 for the next 150 years then I could become the greatest footballer ever, in fact if I had 150 yeas to spare I could become the greatest anything! Golfer, Chess master, Poker player, anything, we all could, It’s just a shame life isn’t like that!

    In real life there are two main aspects, and some minor aspects which determine how good you will become at anything.

    1. Intelligence The rate at which you learn and can successfully implement new skills. (football wise)

    2. Ambition Broadly speaking this covers determination, work rate in training amongst others, basically how hard, and how much effort a player puts in.

    Now, players with high intelligence and high ambition make for world class football players, they have the ability to learn new skills fast, and they are always learning new skills because they train a lot, and work very hard. A player can still become world class with high intelligence and medium ambition, even in some cases low ambition, but not the other way round. For example my mum took her driving test 9 times, had 100’s of lessons and went through about 6 instructors, but never passed her test, she had all the ambition and determination in the world, but just never learned! I on the other hand took about half a dozen lessons and past second time. In football terms, if I had a choice, I’d rather be a lazy genius than a hard working ****** any day.

    Now for the minor factors; In the original post I said that “if at the age of 14 I’d have gone to a world class youth academy, I’d be a lot better player than I am now” which is probably true, but the youth academy would of given up on trying to make me a premiership standard player after about a week, as I am, footballing wise, a lazy ******! The worst combination! But if this youth academy new that my body was “physically froze” for the next 150 years then they would have kept me, and taught me everything, as I would EVENTUALLY have learned. So we have to consider;

    3. Environment Coaches and Training facilities. As well as first team experience.

    This aspect would have little effect on players with high intelligence, such as Pele and Ronaldo, as they mastered how to play football in the back streets of Sao Paulo. But it would affect players with high ambition and medium intelligence, players who need a good coach and facilities to help them learn.

    We also have to consider something that any player, even one with very low/non intelligence and ambition (as long as the money is good) can become. A brick s**t house! There are lots of players out there who possess either the ability to run very fast, or are incredibly strong, and athletic yet they don’t make the very best footballers. Spurs have two of these players, Aaron Lennon and Tom Huddlestone. Lennon is amazingly quick, yet by the time he’s learnt how to do everything else as good as C. Ronaldo, he’ll probably be about 45 years old, (I’m speaking as a Spurs fan, p.s. 5-1 yeah baby!!) don’t get me wrong I think Lennon is a good player, but unless he has high intelligence, and ambition there wont be enough time for him to become as good as C. Ronaldo (I suppose comparing him to the best player in the world is a bit unfair) Also there’s Tom Huddlestone, he’s an absolute man mountain, but he isn’t half the player Patrick Viera is, because he cant pass, position himself, run, play through balls, etc. etc. So again, unless Huddlestone has high intelligence, he’ll never be as good as Viera. So the physical side of a players game will have to be given a whole different formulae, since Intellegence and to a degree ambition have a significantley less effect.

    We also have to consider the negative effects of making a player have more muscle, every player in the world would benefit from been able to run quicker, jump higher, and last longer, but due to the added weight and change in body shape making a player a greater physical presence, i.e. making Fabregas as muscly as Huddlestone could have a detrimental effect on his game, plus making a big player lose lots of weight in order to become quicker and more agile could also be detrimental so I guess this part of the physical side would be linked to intelligence with regard to adaptability. for example, a player with high adaptability would not see his technical and skill based attributes decrease as much as a player with low adaptability if they both started hitting the gym to either become more muscly, or if he is already big, to lose weight and gain speed.

    As you may know (If you use miniScout or Genie) you can see some players peak at 23 i.e. they have CA 123 and PA 123, I had one such player, and as an experiment I placed him on a training regime with Strength and Aerobic set to intense, yet his strength stat only went from 12 to 13 in 4 years! I also put another 23 year old player whose CA was 115 and PA was 177 on the same training regime, and his strength stat increased from 13 to 18 in the same 4 years. This part definitely needs to be changed.

    I think I’ve covered all the bases, so here it is. My model/formulae for Mental, Technique and Skill based attributes would look like:

    A=B*(1/C)*(1/D)*(1/F)*e^(-G)


    A= The time taken for that player to increase his rating for a specific attribute by +1
    B= Current ability of a specific attribute (range 1-20), It’s obviously easier, and would happen quicker for someone to increase from 1 to 2, then it would to increase from 19 to 20, so the higher the current attribute, the harder it is to improve it.
    C= Ambition, it’s calculated as 1/C so that the high the number, the quicker the player improves.
    D= A clubs training facilities and Coaches setup, this number would not vary too dramatically form club to club, a free agent would have D= 1.00 where as a player at Man Utd would have D= 1.17, or something like that.
    F= Intensity of training, again only a small variation, a player not training in a specific area could have F= 0.92 (so the attribute decreases over time) and a player on intense training could have F= 1.15 for example.
    G= Intelligence, calculated as e^, as it is exponential because I think it is the most important factor regarding the time taken for a player to develop, and (-) negative so the higher the number, the quicker the time.

    Note that age isn’t factored into the above equation as the attributes are not physical ones. Which makes sense if you think about it, for example at the age of 32 If someone with high Intelligence started to practise free-kicks or corners, they would get pretty good at them because free-kicks and corners don’t take into consideration a players physicality.

    My model/formulae for Physical based Attributes.

    A= B*(1/logC)*(1/2*D)*e^(2*-F)*e^H



    A= The time taken for that player to increase his rating for a specific attribute by +1
    B= Current ability of a specific attribute (range 1-20).
    C= Ambition, it’s calculated as 1/C so that the high the number, the quicker the time, it’s a log function so that Ambition has less of an effect on physical training than it does on mental.
    D= A clubs training facilities and Coaches setup, this number would not vary too dramatically, but it would still be greater than for mental attributes, that’s why it is doubled, a free agent would have D= 1.00 where as a player at Man Utd would have D= 1.17, or something like that.
    F= Intensity of training, in physical training, this would be the most important aspect, that’s why it’s doubled, then an exponential function, someone not training would still have F= 0.92 for example, but it would have more of an affect, and the same is true for someone on intensive training.
    H= Age, the second most important factor in physical training, as it is an exponential function, it means that increasing your physical attributes when you hit 28 and 29 would be very difficult. Just as a note, a 19 year old wouldn’t have H= 19, but instead a number, allocated for the age of 19.

    Both these models are very crude, and would no doubt need major tweaking and even changing completely, but the basic outline for a new system of calculating a players ability is there.

    In an ideal world each specific attribute would have its own “difficulty” ratio, and in a perfect world each attribute would have it’s own formula, as some attributes are harder to learn that others, but this would probably slow the game down dramatically, so for now I think it is good enough to at least split the Attributes into physical and mental.

    In Summary these new models bring a welcome change to the “roof” on players ability we currently have, but it doesn’t allow Joe averages to become superstar’s just because they are at Man Utd. They also make a players training far more important, an aspect of the game that is currently lacking. I could make a young Joe average very good at free-kick’s, but I would have to allocate a lot of training for this which would see all his other attributes suffer. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I like your idea, but I think that improvements in the 3 main areas should be taken apart. I think that technical skills can be improved more or less as your formula works, but mental and physical attributes work different.

    Physical attributes have a limit. Even if you could frozen 150 years at the physical body of 23, you couldn't have 20 in pace, acceleration or balance. You can get close to your maximum, but everybody's body has a limit. Here you have a PA.

    Mental attributes don't have a limit, but they don't improve on pure training at all. Surely in 150 years you have chances to mature and you can improve a lot mental attributes, pero there are people aged 25 with better mental attributes that people aged 60, so years don't give maturity, altough of course they help a lot. No PA, and the possibility of improving forever is true, but VERY unusual.



    People who thinks that they can't ever have 20 in dribbling, finishing, marking... just make an idea what they are. A technical ability does nothing for itself, even long throws is useless alone without strengh. crosses is nothing if you don't have technique, you can't dribble defender or find space and if you lack creativity or decissions your cross will be nothing. Finishing without composure, technique, find space, strength to fight defenders (or pace-acceleration-dribbling to evade them), balance lots of times... is also nothing. But you can have the best finishing in the world if you train it hard 100 years, altough it would be nothing if you don't have more skills.

  4. #4
    Part-Timer
    Join Date
    27th April 2003
    Location
    Droitwich Spa, England.
    Posts
    1,899

    Default

    I dont care if people can live for 150 years... There is no way Wayne Rooney could get a degree in Nuclear Physics....

    That is my only slight quibble... Some people just are not that bright and that is not going to change much unless they work really really hard at what ever it is.

    Although at the same time we are talking about footballing intelligence, part of which would come through experience and instinct.

    Apart from just confusing myself, I think your idea is a good one.

    For a while I think a players PA has been a bit too vague.

    A small idea I thought of (may have already been mentioned somewhere, I have not read through all of the other thread) is that maybe having just one PA to encompass everything is not enough.
    What if for example, a player were to have a Mental PA, technical PA and Physical PA?

    Many players can end up built up like brick sh*t houses (strength 20 etc) but can be rather rubbish at football.

    Wacky idea I know but worth throwing into the pan...

  5. #5
    Part-Timer
    Join Date
    27th April 2003
    Location
    Droitwich Spa, England.
    Posts
    1,899

    Default

    and my grammar in that post was appalling....

  6. #6
    Amateur
    Join Date
    11th December 2006
    Location
    Exeter, England
    Posts
    329

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James.Clench:
    You see the truth is that we could all become the greatest footballer in the world, if we had enough time. If I biologically froze at the physical age of 23 for the next 150 years then I could become the greatest footballer ever, in fact if I had 150 yeas to spare I could become the greatest anything! Golfer, Chess master, Poker player, anything, we all could, It’s just a shame life isn’t like that!
    </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    No you couldn't! There are so many things which come naturally to people which you couldn't train. How do you retrain peoples balance? To become a master chess player you need a high IQ which is a natural thing. How would you alter their determination? When will people get over the fact that not everyone can be the best at anything they want? And if you could the best would just end up as average anyway!

  7. #7
    Amateur
    Join Date
    2nd August 2007
    Posts
    133

    Default

    Totally agree with Stumostro

  8. #8
    Amateur
    Join Date
    21st January 2008
    Location
    Upper West Side
    Posts
    125

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James.Clench:
    Thanks to everyone who contributed to my previous thread, I noticed that it has... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Uh uh, other important factors determine if one becomes a professional football player or not.

    Discipline and talent are just two.

    You can be smart, ambition as hell, having a clean environment but if you have a low discipline you’ll probably not make it.

    Discipline should be divided in minimal two pieces:
    • The discipline to do what’s right for your sport like going to training, eat healthy food, go to bed early, etc…
    • The discipline to stay away about what’s wrong for your sport like using drugs or alcohol, entering regularly the nightlife.

    About intelligence…

    It’s true that till a certain level everyone can learn how to dribble perfectly just by repeating again, again, again and again.

    But dribbling perfectly doesn’t make you a professional football player.

    The difference between ‘normal’ people and professional athletes is partly located in their kinaesthetic intelligence. While you and me need N time to learn a specific move, pass or shot, people with a high kinaesthetic intelligence need maybe N time divided by 10.

    Or explained differently, in one year, they learn much more than you and me.

    If ‘normal’ people and ‘super’ people start learning football at the age of 6 and play an equal time in similar circumstances those super people will know more moves, will have a better pass and shooting like normal people do after 10 years.

    Some of the ‘normal’ people are maybe not that bad into football, but not at a professional level

    Most professional football players (or any other professional athlete) will learn another sport much faster than the lesser gods like us.

    For a football player, other types of intelligence are involved as well, like spatial intelligence.
    People with a high spatial intelligence will put themselves always in the best position.

    However your posting is very interesting.

  9. #9
    Amateur
    Join Date
    21st January 2008
    Location
    Upper West Side
    Posts
    125

    Default

    In Brazil countless youngster are doing what Ronaldo and Pele are doing. But not all of them become a football star.

    Environment IS really influencing the whole thing.

    The Brazilian wonderboys often learned to football on the streets, on bare feet with a buggy football (sometimes nothing more than an empty can of coca cola) this is influencing their technical attributes a lot. If they were raised in Europe and received excellent shoes, a nice football terrain and real footballs their technical skills would be probably...lower.

    So what is looking as a bad environment could be the perfect environment to learn the technical basics.

    Environment is more than only material and terrains. Environment is also parents, brothers and friends.

    If your parents don’t push a little, never help you with bringing you to training, do not stimulate and motivate you, then odds are high that you’ll drop out…

    And what if one match all the basic requirements for becoming a football star but is never introduced to the game?

    I can talk for myself about this one… The first time I entered a kart was at my 30ties. I did it together with some friends (it was their virgin tour as well) after a few hours of racing I performed much better than my pals.

    I started to practise more just because I liked kart racing. A few months later some semi-professional driver said to me: “if you started this sport at a young age, you could have reached nice achievements, but now it’s too late”.

    It’s sad, but my parents aren’t rich and nor my family nor my friends were connected with kart racing when I was 5 or something. While I had (maybe) some talent, I never discovered it at the right time.

    Now a little more about kinaesthetic intelligence.

    A high level in this issue will help you to learn passing, dribbling and shooting faster and better than the lesser gods.
    But your speed and acceleration is another issue. While a good run technique can improve your overall speed, if you don’t have the right genes then forget it. Sure you can train at being ‘explosive’, but all till a certain degree. These things will improve by training but are limited by your genes aka talent.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    10th July 2007
    Location
    Pireas Greece
    Posts
    1,397

    Default

    I tried to make it maths but i suck on maths

    PA could rise if we set minimum games / season,
    minimum performance per season and use a competition level variable for each league .

    NOTE this should only apply to players with maxed out PA

    performance * level of competition * games can give us a percentage of PA rise each year :

    Lets say that anything under 1.000 points gives negative PA (and CA since it is maxed) and everything above 4.000 points rises PA

    performance 7 * competition 20 = 140pts
    140pts * 30 games = 4200pts
    4200 points are 5% over our limit of 4000 so hes PA will rise by 5%

    performance 9 * competition 20 = 180pts
    180pts* 5 games = 900 points so 10% reduction of PA

    The numbers are totally random , if i run more examples i would be able to adjust but i am not in the mood

  11. #11
    Amateur
    Join Date
    15th October 2007
    Location
    Struggling in EPL with Merthyr Tydfil 8.0.2
    Posts
    536

    Default

    Rooney could have a nuclear degree in 150 years with a young brain, but of course he needs to have determination and ambition for it. In first years he could improve his current maths. Then he can start and don only 1 subject at a year instead of 8. Even Rooney can pass an exam if he has studied all the year for it if he really wants to.

    And not all chess masters with an ELO &gt; 2100 are genius at all. Some have just trained hard in tactics and have a very solid game. Of course best chess players are also quite intelligent and that is what makes them better. But there are less inteligent chess players that win others players, because intelligence it's not all.

    balance can be trained, but few people do it and of course it's not easy to improve. But there are some gymnastics exercices that could help you in improve it, or martial arts. Of course that training has a limit.

    And I agree about kinaesthetic intelligence teory, and spacial intelligence. In fact I read that there are 7 kinds of intelligence, and some are applied to football. But people with these gifts have not better PA, just they will increase their CA more and easier

  12. #12
    Amateur
    Join Date
    31st October 2005
    Posts
    610

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:
    How do you retrain peoples balance? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    You can actually train balance, thought I'd say.

  13. #13
    Third Team
    Join Date
    2nd June 2003
    Location
    Probably the only Chinese guy goes to Leeds' away game. Occasionally accompany by the missus
    Posts
    6,928

    Default

    Anyone who believe they can play like Rooney or ronaldo if they spend enough time and effort into training are dreaming, or on drugs, or both

  14. #14
    Amateur
    Join Date
    31st October 2005
    Posts
    610

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by andyinuk:
    Anyone who believe they can play like Rooney or ronaldo if they spend enough time and effort into training are dreaming, or on drugs, or both </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    They may well be dreaming or on drugs but it is theoretically possible.

    I agree that most people will not get there but this is due due to mental factors and not just due to the amount of raw ability. I believe that a world-class player can be manufactured but it would take a hell of a lot more then just training.

    The difference between the great players in the world and the ones that don't make it is not just about how hard they train or how much effort they put in, it's about mental factors.

  15. #15
    Amateur
    Join Date
    21st January 2008
    Location
    Upper West Side
    Posts
    125

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by andyinuk:
    Anyone who believe they can play like Rooney or ronaldo if they spend enough time and effort into training are dreaming, or on drugs, or both </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I don't believe that.

    But I believe that I can learn to dribble or to pass like any superstar player. But then it probably ends for me.

    Their level is so high, that I can't close the gap on all issues and this due my age, talent, personality, motivation and other stuff.

  16. #16
    Amateur
    Join Date
    15th October 2007
    Location
    Struggling in EPL with Merthyr Tydfil 8.0.2
    Posts
    536

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by andyinuk:
    Anyone who believe they can play like Rooney or ronaldo if they spend enough time and effort into training are dreaming, or on drugs, or both </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


    I'm 26, so now I can't have any technical attribute close to rooney's. Well, maybe long throws, marking or some that he has too low. I can't finish, dribble or pass close to him.

    But imagine me 10 years before, when I still was playing football. If I had been training finishing for these 10 years, I would have as finishing as him. But then I wouldn't have time to train dribbling, passes, one-twos, headings... becaue my kinaestetic intelligence is lower than his.

    I couldn't have his physical traits, because my body has a limit, maybe lower than his.

    And surely I couldn't have his determination, agression, off the ball... but with a great tutor, best facilities, full time training I could have some attributes better than him. I would be overall very far from him. I fact, even if had been trained by a great club since 16 I won't be good enough for BSP. If I had started training when I was 6, then I would be far better, but don't know how many 20 years later.

    The point I want people to see is that limits are often not clear. Maybe you never would be capable of running 100 meters in less than 10.8s, but if you spend 1000 hours shooting to one fixed point from a distance of 30 meters, after 3000 hours you will be the person in the world who shoots better to a fixed point from 30 meters, unless few more people do the same

    Approaching more to football, if you spend 8 hours everyday taking penalties against differnt keepers, in the future you will be one of the best penalty takers of the world (if you are not physically injured). But maybe there is someone who spends half time than you and does it better.

  17. #17
    Amateur
    Join Date
    21st January 2007
    Posts
    3

    Default

    James; I've been thinking of something similar to your system for a long while, so needless to say, I really like your idea. I think such a sysem would make a far better game mechanic then the current system.

    My only concern is that you overemphasize the importance of intelligence. If intelligence is too big of a factor, then you will end up with basicly the same system as you have today. The way I see it, your modell implies that you need an intelligence of x to reach an abillity of y, even if all your other factors are optimale. This is because you don't have 150 years to train, and eventually the difficulty of increasing an attribute by 1 would mean they couldn't practicly increase anymore. It would take too much training. In other words, in your modell, players would still have a roughly defined PA. Basicly, you are renaming the old system. Your system would be somewhat more flexible, that's true, but it would not fundamentaly change the gameplay.

    However, if you tune down the importance of intelligence, or remove it all together, you get a far more flexible system. Who ever becomes good would to a greater degree depend upon what James calls ambition and enviroment, as well as chance, rather then merly intelligence. However this could create the problem that big clubs would produce an overt amount of good players.

    One solution might be to induce a greater difference in a players starting abillity then today. For instance, a few players would be regenerated with a (relative) high CA. I.e, they would allready be decent by their leauges standard. These would be players that would be practicly guaranteed to become good players / leading stars of their leauge. These guyes would be randomly spread across teams in the leauge. However, most players would be regenerated below the leauges standard, as with the current system. Wich players out of all of these would become good players / leading stars would be a combination of intelligence, enviroment, ambition and chance, with players at big teams being liklier to become good then those at small teams.

    James, like I said, I really like your idea, but I agree with you that it does need a lot of work. My idea might be a good supplyment, or another solution might be better. But I do think that a modell roughly like my/your idea would provide superior gameplay too the current system.


    From now on, could we please keep the rest of this thread about wich ideas / modelles would provide the best gameplay? Because you are simply not going to agree on the nature - nuture debate. It's far too controversial for that. Let's rather spend time doing something constructive; what kind of gameplay would you like to see?

  18. #18
    Third Team
    Join Date
    2nd June 2003
    Location
    Probably the only Chinese guy goes to Leeds' away game. Occasionally accompany by the missus
    Posts
    6,928

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by chaddy101:
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by andyinuk:
    Anyone who believe they can play like Rooney or ronaldo if they spend enough time and effort into training are dreaming, or on drugs, or both </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    They may well be dreaming or on drugs but it is theoretically possible.

    I agree that most people will not get there but this is due due to mental factors and not just due to the amount of raw ability. I believe that a world-class player can be manufactured but it would take a hell of a lot more then just training.

    The difference between the great players in the world and the ones that don't make it is not just about how hard they train or how much effort they put in, it's about mental factors. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    no it's not. training help discover and realise player's potential. however if one never had the potential, you will never make it.

  19. #19
    Third Team
    Join Date
    2nd June 2003
    Location
    Probably the only Chinese guy goes to Leeds' away game. Occasionally accompany by the missus
    Posts
    6,928

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by andyinuk:
    Anyone who believe they can play like Rooney or ronaldo if they spend enough time and effort into training are dreaming, or on drugs, or both </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


    I'm 26, so now I can't have any technical attribute close to rooney's. Well, maybe long throws, marking or some that he has too low. I can't finish, dribble or pass close to him.

    But imagine me 10 years before, when I still was playing football. If I had been training finishing for these 10 years, I would have as finishing as him. But then I wouldn't have time to train dribbling, passes, one-twos, headings... becaue my kinaestetic intelligence is lower than his.

    I couldn't have his physical traits, because my body has a limit, maybe lower than his.

    And surely I couldn't have his determination, agression, off the ball... but with a great tutor, best facilities, full time training I could have some attributes better than him. I would be overall very far from him. I fact, even if had been trained by a great club since 16 I won't be good enough for BSP. If I had started training when I was 6, then I would be far better, but don't know how many 20 years later.

    The point I want people to see is that limits are often not clear. Maybe you never would be capable of running 100 meters in less than 10.8s, but if you spend 1000 hours shooting to one fixed point from a distance of 30 meters, after 3000 hours you will be the person in the world who shoots better to a fixed point from 30 meters, unless few more people do the same

    Approaching more to football, if you spend 8 hours everyday taking penalties against differnt keepers, in the future you will be one of the best penalty takers of the world (if you are not physically injured). But maybe there is someone who spends half time than you and does it better. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    i agree with you that some of the teachnique can be learn and perfect from spending a lot and a lot of time in training. But most of the other attributes a footballer need, such as the split second reaction, vision to pick out player, the anticipation skill, etc etc etc, are not something you can just train and learn. as i said above, training is something that help a player to discover and hopfully fulfil those potential. to say everyone has the same potential (or no potential limit) is just fooling themselves really

  20. #20
    arrogantio
    Guest

    Default

    From what I can see, most of the factors you've mentioned do affect player development in the current model. The only difference is that your "Player Intelligence" variable isn't also included as a maxima, and doesn't have the same intuitive meaning to researchers and the AI when it comes to comparing players or determining what level they're most likely to end up playing at.
    (although you could of course, design a evaluation algorithm or researchers' tool to calcuate something akin to an Expected Potential)

    There's a very serious problem with your module from a research point of view though.
    Players that have moderately high mental stats at a young age do so because they have an above average level of footballing intelligence... and therefore justifiably ought to be given a higher level of "footballing intelligence" than youngsters of evidently average abilities. This will result in them not only being better at the start but also developing faster. In practice, footballers that are less mature and learn slowly at a young age tend to catch the wonderkids up in growth rate as they get older, and not just because of diminishing returns to training for superplayers.

    SI's player development module consequently accounts for non-linearities in player development much better than your proposal. Some players are fast learners but stop learning early, some players are slow learners but highly responsive to match experience over a period of time.

    There's also an issue with developing attributes in isolation. Ronaldo has a very low tackling stat and very high footballing intelligence and ambition. This does not mean that his tackling attribute should improve more rapidly with appropriate training than an average young defender on the same schedule.... his footballing brain is simply not naturally suited to tackling. The PA model fixes the amount he can develop his all round game meaning you'd have to train him excessively to the detriment of all his other attributes (some of which do not naturally decline) in order to gain anything more than a minor improvement

  21. #21
    Amateur
    Join Date
    15th October 2007
    Location
    Struggling in EPL with Merthyr Tydfil 8.0.2
    Posts
    536

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by andyinuk:

    i agree with you that some of the teachnique can be learn and perfect from spending a lot and a lot of time in training. But most of the other attributes a footballer need, such as the split second reaction, vision to pick out player, the anticipation skill, etc etc etc, are not something you can just train and learn. as i said above, training is something that help a player to discover and hopfully fulfil those potential. to say everyone has the same potential (or no potential limit) is just fooling themselves really </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    i agree with you that some of the teachnique can be learn and perfect from spending a lot and a lot of time in training. But most of the other attributes a footballer need, such as the split second reaction, vision to pick out player, the anticipation skill, etc etc etc, are not something you can just train and learn. as i said above, training is something that help a player to discover and hopfully fulfil those potential. to say everyone has the same potential (or no potential limit) is just fooling themselves really

    split second reaction = agility -&gt; physical
    vision to pick out player = creativity, decisions -&gt; mental
    the anticipation skill = anticipation -&gt; mental


    None of these is a technical attribute, so I agree that training under normal circunstances most people in the world can't get here a good skill. Mental skills involve some hability to learn or good succesful training (not 100% guaranteed).

    I'm not saying that all people can achieve 20 in creativity just with hard training, but they can do it in a technical attribute.

  22. #22
    arrogantio
    Guest

    Default

    if every skill could be perfected with enough training then most set piece specialists would have 20 for their specialism.

  23. #23
    Amateur
    Join Date
    21st January 2008
    Location
    Upper West Side
    Posts
    125

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by arrogantio:
    if every skill could be perfected with enough training then most set piece specialists would have 20 for their specialism. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    No.

    If n is the available time, then you have n time to train your passing skills.
    When n=0 then there is no time left to train another skill.

    Football players don’t train a lot, only about 2 till 3 hours a day on average.

    Some kinaesthetic experts say that there’s room for more. And yes it would influence their performance.

    I read regularly that the real top-players do extra training after the official training. Guys like Bergkamp, Luc Nilis, Ronaldinho and others are or were not over performing for some reason, but partly because they trained a lot.

    Luc Nilis was doing extra free kicks for 30 to 60 minutes EVERY day. And guess what? Yes, no surprise, he was a free kick specialist. He played only 3 matches for Aston Villa and broke his leg. And that age, it means game over… But he was certainly an amazing football player.

    Back on track…

    And there is always the limitation by your talent in some given skill. I’m having no football talent at all, but with some training and continuously repeating I could enhance my passing from 1 to 12 or 13 maybe, but that is the end point.

    Achieving that level will cost me so much effort in such way that there’s no time left to improve something else.

  24. #24
    Youth Team
    Join Date
    9th May 2003
    Location
    Wembley, Block 133, Row 23, Seat 296 - COME ON YOUR SPURRRRS!!!!
    Posts
    4,279

    Default

    Im with Stumostro in their are just some things that cannot be taught and that we are all born with a certain potential to do well or not so well.

    Although saying that there should be certain attributes that maybe could be taken out of the PA equation that can be taught such as a certain amount of positioning, improving upon already natural physical attributes (however marginal) etc- but this is not unlimited no matter how much time is involved as the OP suggests.

  25. #25
    Amateur
    Join Date
    15th October 2007
    Location
    Struggling in EPL with Merthyr Tydfil 8.0.2
    Posts
    536

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by George Graham:
    Im with Stumostro in their are just some things that cannot be taught and that we are all born with a certain potential to do well or not so well.

    Although saying that there should be certain attributes that maybe could be taken out of the PA equation that can be taught such as a certain amount of positioning, improving upon already natural physical attributes (however marginal) etc- but this is not unlimited no matter how much time is involved as the OP suggests. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I have read that ALL skills are learnt but those involving corporal functions (relating the body). Some people who have good touch can learn set pieces faster than another. But with no training, they are worse than another: lots of players surely take set pieces better now than Maradona does (I'm speaking januaray 2008, 20 years ago there wasn't anyone close to him)

    Another thing that we shoud have in mind is that players training is less successful with time: a player who has a passing attribute of 6 may last 3 months improving to 7, but maybe then 6 months improving to 8. Why? Maybe he has understood how passing work and has little room to master it (quite unusual, passing is a simple technique), he has lost motivation training it (more probably, training passes is not really funny), or just he has bad touch and he's not good with the ball... But if he is really motivated, trains a good amount of hours, is young... he will improve to 8, 9 and far beyond.

    But if he trains passes a lots of hours:

    -A lot of other attributs would decrease due to lack of training

    -His fitness will drop due to overtraining

    -He surely will have less morale training passes.

    -His creativity, decisions, technique, first touch... are very important and closely related with passing in matches: even having a 20 in passing player will be a crap AMC if he lacks all those skills.

    But he can be a great passer with lots of hard pass training

  26. #26
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    20th June 2004
    Posts
    2,019

    Default

    there shouldn't be PA anyway. or at least variable one. IRE you have only your skills-&gt; (C)A. there are also many factors that determine how much can you improove, age being the most important one. but on th eother hand no one can improve without some limit. it's just far easier for the game to have it in it's system and it would needed complete re writng. I don't think SI will change that in next few years.

  27. #27
    Youth Team
    Join Date
    3rd March 2003
    Posts
    4,762

    Default

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:
    there shouldn't be PA anyway. or at least variable one. IRE you have only your skills-&gt; (C)A. there are also many factors that determine how much can you improove, age being the most important one. but on th eother hand no one can improve without some limit. it's just far easier for the game to have it in it's system and it would needed complete re writng. I don't think SI will change that in next few years. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    The current model of CA and PA maybe simplistic in theory but it's the most accurate and realistic way of doing it. Evwerybody has a potential that they can reach. To get rid of PA would be the most ridiculous thing to do.

    They could re-write the system but it would only be a more complex version of the current system, everybody has a current ability and a potential ability, but a lot of people won't reach their potential (amatuers and professionals) due to various factors. If I were signed up by a professional football team tomorrow then yes I would most likely become a better player than I am now, but only because I haven't yet reached my potential. I don't know how good I could become with the right factors going my way, but one thing's for sure, even working with the best coaches in the world I wouldn't/won't ever be good enough to be one of the best players in the world.

    The current system works because it's not overly complex and it's realistic.

  28. #28
    Amateur
    Join Date
    17th October 2007
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    193

    Default

    The very idea of a variable PA doesn't make sense. Its how good you can physically make yourself play with excellent trainers and skills. Having a PA that switches is absolutely ridiculous because it contradicts the purpose of a PA.

Closed Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts