Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
NOTE: Board emails should be working again. Information on forum upgrade and style issues.
Podcast: Talking Images (Episode 22 released November 17th * EXCLUSIVE * We Are Mentioned in a Book!!! Interview with Mary Guillermin on Rapture, JG & More)
Polls: Coming of Age (Results), DtC - Ratings (Results), 1933 (May 12th), 1970s (May 29th)
Challenges: Japan, Mystery/Thriller, Western
Film of the Week: La donna del lago, June nominations (May 28th)

Film World Cup - Season 3 - Discussion before preparation

User avatar
Mario Gaborović
Posts: 3744
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Pančevo
Contact:

#81

Post by Mario Gaborović »

monty on Oct 2 2017, 04:56:11 PM wrote:
Mario Gaborović on Oct 2 2017, 04:39:11 PM wrote:
monty on Oct 2 2017, 04:05:46 PM wrote:I think you'll reconsider when you realize one of the matches this time round will be dedicated to the theme of gay S&M + emaciated Goth chicks, right? :lol:
Do you speak Spanish? I have a rec for you. Coz there's no English subs.
Does it involve a sex doll? Anyhow, bring it on, please.
No sex dolls, but it's from Panama. It's a very good comedy about two nannies who turn tables to their noveau riche bosses, a politician and his spoilt wife/daughters. Maybe I'll use it in the WC, but I need more good films from this obscure country.
I rarely laugh at comedies lately but this one was a real treat. I enjoyed it even though I had to use Google Translate on the right side of the screen to understand it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1264879/

It's on kg.
Last edited by Mario Gaborović on October 2nd, 2017, 11:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12792
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#82

Post by monty »

Don't think I've seen a Panamanian feature before. Thx for the rec, Mario.
mjf314
Moderator
Posts: 11908
Joined: May 8th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#83

Post by mjf314 »

sortile9io on Oct 2 2017, 02:17:39 PM wrote:
joachimt on Oct 2 2017, 01:42:08 PM wrote:
sortile9io on Oct 1 2017, 03:35:56 PM wrote:So it looks like we're heading for a faster version of last year's tournament.
How do you come to this conclusion?
Just because so far 12 people say faster, 9 the same and 8 slower pace. Also shorter duration (15-4) with an equal or even higher number of countries (16-12).
If you calculate the mean vote, it's closer to 1.5 per week than 2 per week.
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#84

Post by joachimt »

Did some more calculations on brokenface's proposal.

Round 1, groups of 4, each match 4 weeks, overlap 2 weeks.
Round 2, groups of 3, each match 3 weeks, overlap 1 week.
Rest, groups of 2, each match 2 weeks, overlap 3-4 days.

With this schedule round 1 takes only 1 week longer, because the matches last 4 weeks, but the pace is about the same as my previous proposal. The advantage is that people who are a bit busy have time enough to plan the watches, because they've got 4 weeks to do so.

The whole tournament would be over in 12.5 months.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#85

Post by joachimt »

I know this schedule wasn't a poll option, but I think it's a good idea. Most people seemed to support the idea of having 2 countries proceed from the groups in round 1. To do so, you'll either need 32 or 64 countries, or you need to solve it with groups of 3 in round 2. I think it's a quite elegant solution.

Without creating a new poll for this...... Is there anyone with strong reasons not to do this?
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
tommy_leazaq
Donator
Posts: 3646
Joined: May 18th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Chennai, India
Contact:

#86

Post by tommy_leazaq »

I'm all for the "Groups of 3" in R2.. It's new so excited to try it out.
User avatar
Mario Gaborović
Posts: 3744
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Pančevo
Contact:

#87

Post by Mario Gaborović »

joachimt on Oct 3 2017, 05:55:37 AM wrote:I know this schedule wasn't a poll option, but I think it's a good idea. Most people seemed to support the idea of having 2 countries proceed from the groups in round 1. To do so, you'll either need 32 or 64 countries, or you need to solve it with groups of 3 in round 2. I think it's a quite elegant solution.

Without creating a new poll for this...... Is there anyone with strong reasons not to do this?
Wait a minute... that option is possible with 48 countries as well; 12x4 and then 8x3, haven't we agreed on that? I guess the only thing left to decide is the number of countries. It's tied right now, but there's also four people who voted for 64 or even 80 (which is way too much).
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#88

Post by joachimt »

Mario Gaborović on Oct 3 2017, 07:11:12 AM wrote:
joachimt on Oct 3 2017, 05:55:37 AM wrote:I know this schedule wasn't a poll option, but I think it's a good idea. Most people seemed to support the idea of having 2 countries proceed from the groups in round 1. To do so, you'll either need 32 or 64 countries, or you need to solve it with groups of 3 in round 2. I think it's a quite elegant solution.

Without creating a new poll for this...... Is there anyone with strong reasons not to do this?
Wait a minute... that option is possible with 48 countries as well; 12x4 and then 8x3, haven't we agreed on that? I guess the only thing left to decide is the number of countries. It's tied right now, but there's also four people who voted for 64 or even 80 (which is way too much).
48 is what I meant. If you do groups of 4 with 2 proceeding and then one-on-one, then you need either 32 or 64 countries. With 48 you need to do it with groups of 3 in round 2 or with only the best 4 numbers 2 proceeding (which makes the tournament a lot shorter).

So yes, 48 countries is the way to go I think.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
jvv
Donator
Posts: 8711
Joined: May 28th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#89

Post by jvv »

My personal preference is 32 countries and 1 vs 1 all the way, but I'm OK with any other schedule as long as the pace isn't too fast (not everyone has seen more than half of the movies already).
User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 5483
Joined: June 3rd, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

#90

Post by Fergenaprido »

I'm also concerned about a faster pace. Even with more time per match, I know I'll burn out quickly, especially with so many iffy films in the first round. My preference is groups of 4 with 32 countries in the first round, then knockout matches from thereon in.

As much as I enjoyed the world cup, I'm really enjoying being able to watch more of what interests me than in what I feel obligated to watch (and yes, I know I don't have to participate, but I do like the cup in general).
🧚‍♂️🦫
User avatar
Mario Gaborović
Posts: 3744
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Pančevo
Contact:

#91

Post by Mario Gaborović »

Fergenaprido on Oct 3 2017, 10:20:04 AM wrote:I'm really enjoying being able to watch more of what interests me than in what I feel obligated to watch
2.5 months is plenty of time to fill in your gaps before we start. Add to it previous 7 you've spent doing godknowswhat.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 11369
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#92

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

Fergenaprido on Oct 3 2017, 10:20:04 AM wrote:I'm also concerned about a faster pace. Even with more time per match, I know I'll burn out quickly, especially with so many iffy films in the first round. My preference is groups of 4 with 32 countries in the first round, then knockout matches from thereon in.

As much as I enjoyed the world cup, I'm really enjoying being able to watch more of what interests me than in what I feel obligated to watch (and yes, I know I don't have to participate, but I do like the cup in general).
I'm with Ferge and jvv. The number of movies one has to watch is my main concern.
I also dislike group matches, cause head-to-head is easier to decide for me, so doing two group matches does not have my preference.

If we do groups I prefer groups of 4, with possible the best #2s advancing also. Best #2 would be to me those that came closes to being #1 in their group.

I'm not so concerned about an Egypt situation happening again. That is part of the game and also the fun of it.

I do think this option warrants a poll question, the fact a few active users in this thread agreed to it doesn't mean the majority does.
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#93

Post by joachimt »

Fergenaprido on Oct 3 2017, 10:20:04 AM wrote:I'm also concerned about a faster pace. Even with more time per match, I know I'll burn out quickly, especially with so many iffy films in the first round. My preference is groups of 4 with 32 countries in the first round, then knockout matches from thereon in.
With my last proposal, only the pace in round 1 is slightly faster. The rest is the same as the previous editions. Round 1 will have 48 movies from the 1st of January till the 2nd of July, so 8 movies a month averagely (if you haven't seen anything yet).
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#94

Post by joachimt »

Lonewolf2003 on Oct 3 2017, 12:06:32 PM wrote:I do think this option warrants a poll question, the fact a few active users in this thread agreed to it doesn't mean the majority does.
I'll add a poll with the various options we have so far. Before opening that poll, I'll summarize the different options here.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 11369
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#95

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

Mario Gaborović on Oct 3 2017, 10:30:34 AM wrote:
Fergenaprido on Oct 3 2017, 10:20:04 AM wrote:I'm really enjoying being able to watch more of what interests me than in what I feel obligated to watch
2.5 months is plenty of time to fill in your gaps before we start. Add to it previous 7 you've spent doing godknowswhat.
2.5 months? We haven't even set a deadline for managers sign up yet, and for sure it's not known when the first round movies will be revealed.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 11369
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#96

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

joachimt on Oct 3 2017, 12:07:00 PM wrote:
Fergenaprido on Oct 3 2017, 10:20:04 AM wrote:I'm also concerned about a faster pace. Even with more time per match, I know I'll burn out quickly, especially with so many iffy films in the first round. My preference is groups of 4 with 32 countries in the first round, then knockout matches from thereon in.
With my last proposal, only the pace in round 1 is slightly faster. The rest is the same as the previous editions. Round 1 will have 48 movies from the 1st of January till the 2nd of July, so 8 movies a month averagely (if you haven't seen anything yet).
What was/is the previous/after round 1 movies/month rate?
User avatar
Mario Gaborović
Posts: 3744
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Pančevo
Contact:

#97

Post by Mario Gaborović »

Lonewolf2003 on Oct 3 2017, 12:11:23 PM wrote:
Mario Gaborović on Oct 3 2017, 10:30:34 AM wrote:
Fergenaprido on Oct 3 2017, 10:20:04 AM wrote:I'm really enjoying being able to watch more of what interests me than in what I feel obligated to watch
2.5 months is plenty of time to fill in your gaps before we start. Add to it previous 7 you've spent doing godknowswhat.
2.5 months? We haven't even set a deadline for managers sign up yet, and for sure it's not known when the first round movies will be revealed.
I meant MEANWHILE, joachim said that we're about to start around New Year's Eve, so you have more than 2.5 months from now to watch whatever your priority is.
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#98

Post by joachimt »

Lonewolf2003 on Oct 3 2017, 12:13:57 PM wrote:
joachimt on Oct 3 2017, 12:07:00 PM wrote:
Fergenaprido on Oct 3 2017, 10:20:04 AM wrote:I'm also concerned about a faster pace. Even with more time per match, I know I'll burn out quickly, especially with so many iffy films in the first round. My preference is groups of 4 with 32 countries in the first round, then knockout matches from thereon in.
With my last proposal, only the pace in round 1 is slightly faster. The rest is the same as the previous editions. Round 1 will have 48 movies from the 1st of January till the 2nd of July, so 8 movies a month averagely (if you haven't seen anything yet).
What was/is the previous/after round 1 movies/month rate?
Season 2:
Round 1 - 48 movies in 7.5 months (6.4 movies/month)
Round 2 - 16 movies in 2.8 months (5.7 movies/month)
Other round same pace as round 2.

In the above proposal round 1 will be 8 movies/month, round 2 will be 6.4 movies/month, rest will be 5.7 movies/month.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#99

Post by joachimt »

So which options should I put in the final poll?

1. Exactly the same as last edition: 48 countries, groups of 3 in round 1 with 1 proceeding, rest one-on-one
2. 32 countries, groups of 4 in round 1 with 2 countries proceeding, rest one-on-one
3. 32 countries, one-on-one the whole tournament
4. 48 countries, groups of 4 in round 1 with 2 countries proceeding, groups of 3 in round 2 with 1 proceeding, rest one-on-one
5. 48 countries, groups of 4 in round 1 with the four best #2's proceeding, rest one-on-one

Anything else?
Last edited by joachimt on October 3rd, 2017, 7:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
Mario Gaborović
Posts: 3744
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Pančevo
Contact:

#100

Post by Mario Gaborović »

I think the first option is needless, 'cause we agreed by vast majority that THERE WILL BE changes in one of the previous polls.

So I guess what collects most votes here, will be the final outcome? YOu just need to set the deadline.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 11369
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#101

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

Maybe leave out the one-on-one option so people like me who prefer that have to chose one of the group options? Or give people the option to chose 2 options, so they can chose their second best choice too?
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#102

Post by joachimt »

Mario Gaborović on Oct 3 2017, 02:04:12 PM wrote:I think the first option is needless, 'cause we agreed by vast majority that THERE WILL BE changes in one of the previous polls.

So I guess what collects most votes here, will be the final outcome? YOu just need to set the deadline.
Which vast majority? 14 people voted for change, 9 for no change and 5 didn't care. That's no vast majority.

I'll set a deadline for this indeed.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#103

Post by joachimt »

Lonewolf2003 on Oct 3 2017, 02:06:14 PM wrote:Maybe leave out the one-on-one option so people like me who prefer that have to chose one of the group options? Or give people the option to chose 2 options, so they can chose their second best choice too?
I'll let people pick 2 choices.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
beavis
Posts: 2934
Joined: June 20th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Contact:

#104

Post by beavis »

I don't think option 3 and 5 are appealing much
But i can't think of other options to add other than just making it bigger or last longer, and i don't think there is a majority in favor of that. So lets just see what these options will do
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#105

Post by joachimt »

beavis on Oct 3 2017, 02:11:03 PM wrote:I don't think option 3 and 5 are appealing much
But i can't think of other options to add other than just making it bigger or last longer, and i don't think there is a majority in favor of that. So lets just see what these options will do
Hardly anyone voted for more than 48 countries, so no need to include that indeed.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
albajos
Posts: 6942
Joined: May 24th, 2016, 6:00 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

#106

Post by albajos »

I don't see why they didn't. There are for example 85 countries sending in films to the academy awards, and those are non-english only, so adding english speaking counties we could probably reach 96.

96/4=24. 24/3=8. 8/2=4. 4/2=2. 2/2=1. 39 rounds.
Or if that is to many, 72 should absolutely be in reach. (72/3=24. 24/3=8. 8/2=4. 4/2=2. 2/2=1. 39 rounds.)
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#107

Post by joachimt »

albajos on Oct 3 2017, 02:23:23 PM wrote:I don't see why they didn't. There are for example 85 countries sending in films to the academy awards, and those are non-english only, so adding english speaking counties we could probably reach 96.

96/4=24. 24/3=8. 8/2=4. 4/2=2. 2/2=1. 39 rounds.
Or if that is to many, 72 should absolutely be in reach. (72/3=24. 24/3=8. 8/2=4. 4/2=2. 2/2=1. 39 rounds.)
It seems most people think a total runtime of about a year is best. With 39 rounds it will take about 1.5 years.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
Mario Gaborović
Posts: 3744
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Pančevo
Contact:

#108

Post by Mario Gaborović »

albajos on Oct 3 2017, 02:23:23 PM wrote:I don't see why they didn't. There are for example 85 countries sending in films to the academy awards, and those are non-english only, so adding english speaking counties we could probably reach 96.

96/4=24. 24/3=8. 8/2=4. 4/2=2. 2/2=1. 39 rounds.
Or if that is to many, 72 should absolutely be in reach. (72/3=24. 24/3=8. 8/2=4. 4/2=2. 2/2=1. 39 rounds.)
That's unlikely to be voted for, so that's why you should at least vote for what's more probable: 48 (brokenface's system). Otherwise anything else you vote for would be nullified, void, not counted just like 64 or 80 option did. Basically your vote would mean nothing.
Last edited by Mario Gaborović on October 3rd, 2017, 8:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mario Gaborović
Posts: 3744
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Pančevo
Contact:

#109

Post by Mario Gaborović »

joachimt on Oct 3 2017, 02:30:52 PM wrote:
albajos on Oct 3 2017, 02:23:23 PM wrote:I don't see why they didn't. There are for example 85 countries sending in films to the academy awards, and those are non-english only, so adding english speaking counties we could probably reach 96.

96/4=24. 24/3=8. 8/2=4. 4/2=2. 2/2=1. 39 rounds.
Or if that is to many, 72 should absolutely be in reach. (72/3=24. 24/3=8. 8/2=4. 4/2=2. 2/2=1. 39 rounds.)
It seems most people think a total runtime of about a year is best. With 39 rounds it will take about 1.5 years.
I wouldn't mind if we start a bit earlier than New Year's Eve, say Catholic Xmas (25th of December).
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#110

Post by joachimt »

Final poll question added. Voting deadline: October the 10th
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
Nathan Treadway
Donator
Posts: 4457
Joined: June 26th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Springfield, MO, USA
Contact:

#111

Post by Nathan Treadway »

Mario Gaborović on Oct 3 2017, 02:35:01 PM wrote:
albajos on Oct 3 2017, 02:23:23 PM wrote:I don't see why they didn't. There are for example 85 countries sending in films to the academy awards, and those are non-english only, so adding english speaking counties we could probably reach 96.

96/4=24. 24/3=8. 8/2=4. 4/2=2. 2/2=1. 39 rounds.
Or if that is to many, 72 should absolutely be in reach. (72/3=24. 24/3=8. 8/2=4. 4/2=2. 2/2=1. 39 rounds.)
That's unlikely to be voted for, so that's why you should at least vote for what's more probable: 48 (brokenface's system). Otherwise anything else you vote for would be nullified, void, not counted just like 64 or 80 option did. Basically your vote would mean nothing.
Speaking in true democratic fashion. :lol:
iCM

“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ (Matthew 25:37-40)
User avatar
sacmersault
Posts: 666
Joined: November 17th, 2013, 7:00 am
Contact:

#112

Post by sacmersault »

64 countries Round 1: groups of 4 with best 2 proceeding. Other rounds one-on-one.
User avatar
Mario Gaborović
Posts: 3744
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Pančevo
Contact:

#113

Post by Mario Gaborović »

sacmersault on Oct 3 2017, 07:22:48 PM wrote:64 countries Round 1: groups of 4 with best 2 proceeding. Other rounds one-on-one.
Have you read the previous posts? There was no interest in such a big format, so we offered five solutions listed on the Page 1. You can vote for two options.
User avatar
Angel Glez
Posts: 2360
Joined: April 2nd, 2012, 6:00 am
Location: Spain
Contact:

#114

Post by Angel Glez »

Whatever you decide is fine with me. Having said that I think the old format is the best one because the first round (where all managers are still alive and all participants are fresh) should be the big filter, with knockout after that.
User avatar
Gershwin
Donator
Posts: 7149
Joined: May 17th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Leiden, NL
Contact:

#115

Post by Gershwin »

I prefer option 2, or otherwise option 3. I don't like having too many countries, I don't like having too many films, and I don't like a very fast pace (which would mean I'd have to skip some rounds).
RokP 250

Profiles: Untappd - Last.fm - iCM
User avatar
Armoreska
Posts: 13505
Joined: November 1st, 2012, 6:00 am
Location: Ukraine, former Free Territory
Contact:

#116

Post by Armoreska »

Looks like R1 with 4 countries and half proceeding is comfortably winning, and the amount of countries will depend on how many managers sign up (so probably 48 again)?
he or A. or Armo or any

Image
currently working towards a vegan/free world + thru such film lists: GODARD, r/antinatalism recommends,..
the rest
ANARCHISTS, ANIMAL RIGHTS, Assisted suicide, Existential films, SOCIALIST CINEMA (an amalgamation of lists), Feminist lists, various GSSRM lists (aka LGBTQ+), 2010s bests, Visual Effects nominees, kid-related stuff, great animes (mini-serie or feature), very 80s movies, mah huge sci-fi list, ENVIRO, remarkable Silent Films and Pre-Code (exploring 1925 atm) and every shorts and docu list I'm aware of and
/forum.icmforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1434
and "Gordon" Liu Chia-Hui/Liu Chia-Liang and Yuen Woo-ping and "Sammo" Hung Kam-bo
imaginary awards | youtube channels | complaint lounge | explain how big a fan of slavery you are here, ..viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1535 and here: ..viewtopic.php?f=12&t=4484
User avatar
Mario Gaborović
Posts: 3744
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Pančevo
Contact:

#117

Post by Mario Gaborović »

Armoreska on Oct 4 2017, 07:35:02 AM wrote:Looks like R1 with 4 countries and half proceeding is comfortably winning, and the amount of countries will depend on how many managers sign up (so probably 48 again)?
We can easily sign-up for three to manage, no problem. :cheers: I like when you say "comfortably winning", the big countries' managers will get loose and then I'm gonna seal their destiny with Moldova: :whistling:

https://rusorel.info/blogs/wp-content/u ... t-1968.jpg
User avatar
jvv
Donator
Posts: 8711
Joined: May 28th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#118

Post by jvv »

joachimt on Oct 3 2017, 12:07:00 PM wrote:Round 1 will have 48 movies from the 1st of January till the 2nd of July, so 8 movies a month averagely (if you haven't seen anything yet).
I think an average of 8 movies per month is too much.

I already had a problem keeping up with 6.5 movies per month.
User avatar
Mario Gaborović
Posts: 3744
Joined: April 11th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Pančevo
Contact:

#119

Post by Mario Gaborović »

jvv on Oct 4 2017, 08:49:52 AM wrote:
joachimt on Oct 3 2017, 12:07:00 PM wrote:Round 1 will have 48 movies from the 1st of January till the 2nd of July, so 8 movies a month averagely (if you haven't seen anything yet).
I think an average of 8 movies per month is too much.

I already had a problem keeping up with 6.5 movies per month.
You guys are forgetting that some of these films you've probably seen before; to greater or lesser degree.

I dunno which ones are going to be chosen ofc, but let's say that 15% is very likely.
Last edited by Mario Gaborović on October 4th, 2017, 2:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33902
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#120

Post by joachimt »

jvv on Oct 4 2017, 08:49:52 AM wrote:
joachimt on Oct 3 2017, 12:07:00 PM wrote:Round 1 will have 48 movies from the 1st of January till the 2nd of July, so 8 movies a month averagely (if you haven't seen anything yet).
I think an average of 8 movies per month is too much.

I already had a problem keeping up with 6.5 movies per month.
Slower means it would be 4 weeks with 1 week overlap or 5 weeks with 2 weeks overlap. I'll do some calculations about that....... later.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
Post Reply