Mana Games

[Curtis]

1) I was wondering how the rankings of doubles teams is calculated. I had assumed that the ranking of the team was equal to the sum of the players' rankings. Then I noticed that in the situation I described in the other thread (when teams with a total ranking of 868 were getting into qualifiers while Emily's team that totaled 808 could not, and some others), in every case in which the 'worse' ranked team got in ahead of Emily's, one member of the team would have a much better ranking than the other… and a better ranking than either member of Emily's team. Emily's team both had the same ranking (404), while the four qualifiers who were allowed in place of her were all identical, with one member being a 364 and the other a 504. The two other teams of mine that got into a French Challenger that didn't accept Emily also had unequal rankings, and in each case one was better than Emily. This made me wonder whether admission was granted on the basis of the 'better' partner, rather than both partners? I know that seeding is based upon the combined rankings.

2) The other doubles issue I have is my own inability to properly use the 'favorite partner' feature. I have read that paragraph in the documentation, but I cannot get the 'favored partner' to appear in the list I wish her to be in. On rare occaisions she will show up, but not for the player with whom I wished to pair her. I have tried assigning as favorite players who are worse ranked in both singles and doubles, better ranked in both, and even some who are ranked better at one thing and worse at the other than the player for whom I intended her. How can I determine which players will actually show up if I choose them?

3) Last question is, three or four (or five) times a year a doubles pairing will appear in which the better ranked player is listed last (most of the time the better player is listed first, of course). I was wondering why that happened.

4) This is not a question, but a request for version 2.0. When you click to sort the player list by names, please make them sort by LAST name, rather than first (as it is now).

[manutoo]

Hello Curtis,

1- the ranking of the team = the ranking of the best ranked player

2- the Favorite Partner will pop up in the list only if both of these conditions are met :
- his ranking is not too high compared to ur player's
- he's not playing in another tournament at the moment
So actually, he won't be often in the partner selection list, especially if he's a double specialist...

3- likely coz the ranking of one of the partner changed just the week after the team has been formed

4- noted...

[Curtis]

- he's not playing in another tournament at the moment
So actually, he won't be often in the partner selection list, especially if he's a double specialist...

Ah, that it explains it very well!

[Curtis]

Hello, ManuToo.

I have six more questions:
1) My Emily is left-handed. Why is it that in doubles her team sometimes gets the left-handed bonus and sometimes does not?
2) When you win a tournament and the trophy appears, something is written underneath it, but the writing is cut off by the bottom of the screen. What does it say?
3) I was playing a match, and my opponent had the Play Speed bonus against me. Halfway through the first set, that bonus disappeared. Was this due to that player getting tired?
4) I have noticed that different players tire at different rates, and also recover at different rates, even when staying at the same hotel and playing in the same events at the same tournament. What causes this?
5) When selecting a doubles partner, is it better to pair with someone who has a similar style, or a contrasting style?
6) Four of the styles prefer different surfaces (the three Rally styles and Volleyer). Varied doesn't have a prefered surface. Does Counter (and if so, which one?)?

[manutoo]

1) actually, the bonus takes only in account the 1st member of team...
2) normally, u should be able to read it all, check ur screen config or ur game's Windows position ; it says : "you won [Tournament Name]"
3) yup
4) stamina (and possibly a physiotherapist trainer)
5) it's better to pair with a great volleyer which is already a double specialist (ie: high Double Spirit)
6) Varied kinda prefers hard court ; I guess Counter prefers synthetic (ie: a bit slow court), but it should be checked through a lot of results in the game to be sure of that...

[Curtis]

2) normally, u should be able to read it all, check ur screen config or ur game's Windows position ; it says : "you won [Tournament Name]"
5) it's better to pair with a great volleyer which is already a double specialist (ie: high Double Spirit)

2) It doesn't show up (except the top few rows of pixels) in either full screen or 1280 by 960 windowed mode. I haven't tried other resolutions.

5) I like that! It matches what I just read in "Tilden On Tennis".

Since you are being so helpful I will continue:

7) When players practice at a center that has several court surfaces, do they automatically choose the surface closest to that of their next scheduled tournament? If not, how is it determined? If there is no scheduled tournament do they default to cement?

8) In the documentation it says that sparring is the best way to improve technical skills, though randomly. In my last game I observed that my best player, Tanvier, did not seem to be benefitting from this. I ran a seven week intensive camp at the end of year two, in which each player played each other seven practice sets per week (21 sets total per player, which was when I noticed that some players practiced on cement and others on indoor carpet). By the end of the first five weeks Tanvier's best four skills, which had been in the 82-83 range, had dropped by about five points each. For the last two weeks I switched her to a more normal skills regimen of five hours in each of the four major groups, and they began to come back up again. (Those best scores were generally about five points below her potentials before the sparring started.) My question is, is sparring generally less effective for the elite players than skills training?

9) Do the players develop their own 'personalities'? (Long explanation follows.)

In my last game Tanvier was noticably my best player (most area under bars). The other three grouped quite closely, but ran in order Bouvier, Lamarre, Pitkowski. When playing those hundreds of practice sets against each other I kept track of their records, and they did not match their apparent skills sets OR their tournament records. Emily narrowly beat Pitkowski (which I expected), but won over 76% of her sets against Lamarre, and over 62% against Tanvier. Except for her record against Emily, Tanvier performed as expected, winning 70% against Pitkowski and over 80% against Lamarre. Lamarre and Pitkowski played to a tie which was close to expectation. The real anomoly was Emily. I had previously noticed that she does much better in the between match practices at tournaments than she does in the matches that count. (Note that by this time her mental skills were all close to 94%; despite her 36 ranking in singles, she made first round exits in two majors.) This leads me to believe that some players in the game do better in practice than they do in matches. If true, I think that is a good thing for the game, because it is certainly true in real life. (Lamarre went the other way, being noticably better in real matches than in practice, while Tanvier and Pitkowski performed about the same in either situation.)

As other examples, three of the girls won around 40-45% of their set tie-breakers, but Pitkowski was absolutely amazing! Counting both singles and doubles in the 1992 French and British Opens, she was involved in nine tie-breaks, and she (or her team) won them all . That's the kind of thing that gets written up in the newspaper, or talked about on SportsCenter. Similarly, matches against Narvratilova all seemed to go the same way for any of my girls — Martina wins a first set tie-break, only takes 0-2 games in the second set, then roars back in the third.

On paper, Tanvier was nowhere near as good as Navratilova, but was noticably better than Suvarova. In actual matches she went 4-0 against Martina in singles and 5-0 against her in doubles, but she couldn't beat Suvarova to save her life, losing even when bumping by ten and twenty points. Are these all just examples of luck, or are they things which follow logically from the way the numbers interact?

10) I know that the computer players' skills change with the start of each year. Do their potentials also change? And do the potentials of the players I have under contract ever change (other than the power technical skills that vary with their strength)?

11) This is probably more philosophy than you want to get into, but I was wondering why you made the default Emily a Puncher, rather than Varied style? Her potentials seem (to me) to be ideal for a Varied player.

[Guest]

I guess Counter prefers synthetic (ie: a bit slow court), but it should be checked through a lot of results in the game to be sure of that...

They Are best at grass and SYnthetic

[manutoo]

Curtis,

7) they pick the surface of the last tournament they played ; if the surface is not available, they revert to the cement.
You can change the training surface anytime by clicking on it (when u're in the Coach Center).

8) yup, sparring isn't the best thing for top players, especially when they already have additional personal trainers, coz u can't select what skills to train, it's random...

9) no, there's personalities, but depending of the play style & the surface, the results can be quite different even if the total of skills is about the same...

10) potentials never change (except when limited by a physical skill)

11) coz Puncher is one of the most versatile play style, that allows to have good enough results on slow & fast surfaces, and it's also my favorite my style...
And it's harder to win on slow surface with a varied style...

[Curtis]

repeat 10) So, do Motivation and Doubles Feeling for computer players also only change at the beginning of the year? (I assume they must change some time.)

11) I see. So, if my two best strokes were the lob and drop shot, would that make me a Counter?

[manutoo]

10) yup

11) a good counter should also have decent volley skills, a good passing shot, and a great Counter skill, of course

[Curtis]

You are being very helpful. If these questions get annoying, please let me know. You've covered the most important ones already.

repeat 11) I didn't explain that very well, so I'll try again. I noticed that all or nearly all of the players have selected styles that match the technical skills in which they have their highest potentials. (They must have good talent evaluators. ) You have set the game up so that players can be added to the ATP and WTA lists. If I wanted to add a player whose highest potentials were in the drop shot and lob, which style would suit him best? (I am thinking either Counter or Varied.) Or would it be dependant upon more than just that?

12) Almost everything in your game I can relate to the "Tilden On Tennis" book, but it was written around 1950 or 1952, and some things have changed since then. (Court surfaces, for example — he considered grass to be a medium speed and cement to be fast; he also mentions dirt, wood and asphalt, but of course no synthetics.) One thing in your game that I can't find in his book is this 'counter' stroke. Could you please describe it and its purpose? I am wondering if it is what he called the 'half volley'.

13) One thing in his book I was wondering if you included in your game, or if the modern styles of play have made it obsolete. He was very disparaging of a style of play that had arisen in California in the late 1930s, which he called the 'western style' and which is in your game the Volleyer. (Tilden seems to have been either a Puncher or Varied, but probably also a Chameleon. He believed that you should conform your game to your opponent's, rather than try to force him to play yours.) The way he described it, the rally stroke was the most important (after serve and return, but returns were a variation on the rally stroke) because even if you rush the net you would still have to play one rally stroke on the way in. Is that reflected in your game, or can modern Volleyers go directly from serve/return to net play?

14) Last question about Tilden, I promise . He felt that it took a competant tennis player five years of concentrated study to become championship caliber. Assuming that the default characters in your game start as competant, would you estimate that it takes around five years for them to approach their potentials in the technical skills? I've never gotten much past two years, but based on where Emily was at that point, four or five years would seem reasonable to me. She can reach her potentials in the mental skills and all but Reflexes among the physical skills by the end of the first year. (I am playing on the Incredible level, of course.)

[manutoo]

11) yup as stated in my previous answer, lob & dropshot aren't enough to type a player...

12) Counter is not a strike ; it's the ability to use the speed of the incoming ball to send it back quickly as well ; ie: a player with a high counter skill, but low powers (or not too high) in FH & BH will play fast only if his opponent plays fast...

13) volleyers in TE means : go to the net as soon as possible, on 1st occasion, even if it's not the best one. So it leads to a lot of serve volleys, even sometimes on 2nd serve, and likely some return volleys from time to time, but less than the traditional net rushing during the rally on the 1st ball that is a bit short

14) I'm not sure, I'd say it'd take something like 3 to 5 years, depending of your own coaching competence... Why don't u play 5 years and tell me the answer..?

[Curtis]

14) I'm not sure, I'd say it'd take something like 3 to 5 years, depending of your own coaching competence... Why don't u play 5 years and tell me the answer..?

Because I have to start over every time you release a new build?

Right now I'm at the start of year two, and I'm having a hard time getting myself back into the game. Emily and Sarah Pitkowski are stuck in Futures due to low doubles rankings, even though Emily went 69-0 in doubles and won all fourteen tournaments she entered. Sarah was 'only' 60-6, winning twelve of the thirteen she entered. (Her loss was in the finals, the only time she faced Emily.) Emily has finally been allowed to apply to a low Challenger, but was warned that she might not be accepted. Sarah had to register for France 1 and 2 instead, and hope that after winning them she can move up.

It's so boring! Neither of them has lost more than two games in a match in over three months, they have maxed out their experience points and have nothing left to spend them on, the other girls have taken up a petition to have them banned from Futures play, Emily and Sarah SIGNED the petition, and they still can't move up. As late as two weeks ago, when they were at 420 and 423, they were still being made to go through qualifying for Futures. (Emily is now at 388 in doubles and Sarah 404.) Winning a singles title will bring them up ten to twelve spots, but a doubles title only four or five, and then they lose them again as soon as they take time off.

My other two players are more interesting. Alexandra Fusai won singles and doubles in three high Challengers to end the first year, and is now moving up to International play. Sandrine Testud is a much better player on paper, but she keeps making first round exits, even in tounaments she should be able to sleepwalk through, and she had to declare bankruptcy a few weeks ago. They are both working their way through Australia and New Zealand now (Sandrine mostly by hitching rides on manure trucks).

[Curtis]

15) When a player goes to a tournament she is charged for travel and seven days in a hotel. If she makes an early exit, is she still charged the full amount, or only for the days she used?
If the full amount, that brings up the question of what happens when she then travels elsewhere the same week to participate in a qualifier. Is she charged for another whole week, even though she's only at the new site a day or two?

[Rob4590]

Curtis - if your players are around 400 in doubles - try entering them for challengers - even if they have to go through qualifying, if they are that good then they will still probably win the tournament, and winning one challenger is worth 3-4 times as many points as a futures.

Challenger qualifying + challenger >>>>> 2 * futures IMO (even though they both take two weeks) - plus you get more training time in the week of the qualies.


Plus you'll be surprised how often they do get into events that you enter - even if it says they might not get into the qualies due to ranking - remember, you have to enter at least 4 weeks in advance - so by the time the event comes around, you are likely to have played at least one more event - and your ranking gone up (even slightly) will allow you into the event. This is especially true if you enter the lowest challenger event on the week's list - the higher ranked "challenger" players tend to go for the bigger money events.