Re: sets or points
- From: "Mike" <jsvba@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 11 Jul 2005 10:43:08 -0700
After that, the question is how to win Match. Since Match depends on
Sets, and Sets depends on Points, why not make the argument that
ULTIMATELY, everything is based on the foundation of points? Hence,
even by your "order of importance," it is easily argued that points are
the more fundamental unit.
nope, your argument doesn't hold up because a team could score fewer
points in total than the other team and still win the match. A team
cannot win fewer sets and win the match.
So which is more improtant?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: sets or points
- From: Paul G. Wenthold
- Re: sets or points
- References:
- sets or points
- From: lvh
- Re: sets or points
- From: Robert M. Franz (RMF)
- Re: sets or points
- From: Mike
- Re: sets or points
- From: Philip Kendall
- Re: sets or points
- From: Mike
- Re: sets or points
- From: Paul G. Wenthold
- sets or points
- Prev by Date: Re: sets or points
- Next by Date: Re: sets or points
- Previous by thread: Re: sets or points
- Next by thread: Re: sets or points
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading