text:
I've changed it so that the sweeper is now a centre back and I've moved the CM into the CDM position, we'll see how this tightens things up at the back.
I've changed it so that the sweeper is now a centre back and I've moved the CM into the CDM position, we'll see how this tightens things up at the back.
A quick question, is 2 CM's in the centre set to advanced play maker overkill or can it work?
Yeah, Biggus is absolutely right. The basic positioning for the two central defenders looks like this:
Seeing that should set the alarm bells ringing in an instant. The first barca goal comes from this (a pass goes to the striker in acres of space):
Now that's what you call a clear cut chance! In that amount of space he could make a coffee, drink it, read the morning papers and still have plenty of time left to finish off the chance. The other goal is due to bugged marking during throw-ins, but still.
With that kind of set-up you absolutely do have to prevent shots altogether to stop them from scoring.
Next game against Betis they have 3 SOT and get 3 goals.
1 close range header, a curling screamer from outside the box and a through ball to their striker who's on the edge of the box who then turns and places it into the net.
Just play with two identical Stoppers and move the BWM to DM-Defend (no Hold up ball, Hard Tackling), and all your defensive problems will go away. I don't know if this will have any negative consequences for your attacking play, though. It seemed fine in the second attempt where I won 2-0. I set both MC's to Attacking instead of Support duties as well.
Cheers BiggusD, I'll give your recommendations a go.
ArsenalFan7, all I can say is what works for me defensively.
I use the TC to set up a very fluid, highly creative, counter attacking system, and I try to out number players attacking my defence, and ditto for my forwards attacking them:
I keep practically all settings and player instructions set to default, accept time-wasting (which can be a personal affect dependant on opponents), and I have tried CA ticked, but I prefer to try to keep the ball more. And I instruct my FBs and IFs to CROSS-BALL OFTEN and MIXED AIM:
Hope this helps.
Cheers for all your help :-)
I've had success (in FM11) using 3 at the back, LB CB RB, but IMO it needs 3 central midfielders to support it, that allows 4 attacking players (assymmetrical 3-4-3), which more often than not for me means a LW-FW-FW-FW, because I don't have a RW nearly as good as my top 5 or 6 strikers. It does concede a few goals, esp. on the counter, but its what I use against teams I figure will set up shop, not too often against my main rivals. The fullbacks are fast, the CB is extremely dominant aerially, but I find having too high a line doesn't help my forwards, who are all quicks, so they like to have a bit of space to run into.
Using the advice given but the AI has still had a stupid SOT to goal conversion rate.
I can dominate all I like, it's not much use lately.
Basically your tactic is so attacking that whenever the AI do get a half decent break they'll have all the space in the world to exploit. That's always going to be the trade off. If you want this to improve you have to sacrifice a bit of your attacking power and have more men back to help out. Alternatively, as you're doing just fine in the bigger picture, you could just accept that you can't have an awesome all-conquering attacking tactic that won't get you caught short-numbered at the back sometimes.
When SI fixes (not that they are going to) this yearly problem then people who try to make sense of it will come around and say, "yeah, that needed fixing.."
Next game, Almeria (relegation zone side) get one shot on target and it's a goal. (a header from a indirect free kick)
I think I may be cursed or just insanely unlucky?
Giving that he took the time to upload it & a few of us have had a look at it I think most of what has been said since is more than educated guesswork.
Edit: Beaten to it.
@ArsenalFan - it will take time for your players to adjust their new tactical instructions, I assume you have set a few extra players to a more defensive mindset?
It is also worth remembering that the stats your team are consistently putting up are also unrealistic, you need to find a balance within your tactical approach & if that means you have half as many chances but increase your conversion rate by 3 times then that all is well.
Edit 2: Have you tried watching the full match for a few games? I managed to nailed down & iron out a number of flaws in my tactics after switched to watching the entire match, it's very time consuming but worth it as you see so much more of what is wrong in the bits that the highlights do not show.
Last edited by Barside; 12-04-2012 at 19:55.
To save you messing, ArsenalFan7, you can take a look at my tactic here: https://rapidshare.com/files/1463409196/433count.tac
See what you make of it, and use it at your leisure.
This is the kinda stats it can display:
I think we've reached the point where you might want to considered heading over to the tactics forum.
I'm confused as to why you think you are cursed or insanely unlucky?
You've already stated earlier in the thread that you've let less goals in than any other team in the league and we've already seen that your scoring ratios are similar or better than the AI.
What do you expect to achieve?
Are your expectations realistic?
Because virtually every shot the AI gets on target ends up in the net as a goal?
I expect to win and I am doing this for the most part but I'm trying to get to the bottom of the issue as to why I'm constantly conceding so simply.
But thats only your perception.
You crunched the numbers earlier and your stats show that the AI teams are scoring 0.51 goals for each shot on target against you.
In comparison you are scoring 0.46 goals per shot on target from your own calculations - very similar.
Other forum members have also pointed out how your tactics are extremely attacking. The downside of using tactics like that are when the opposition do get behind and counter attack you are going to give up decent/good scoring opportunities.
If you want to have a better defence you need to sacrifice some of the attack.
Its a dominating ATTACK, not a dominating tactic. Its imbalanced, and there is nothing wrong with that, but the imbalance means when the opposition gets a chance its going to be a good chance. Its a tradeoff, and even though you feel hard done by this is your choice of tactic and style of play. Another tactic could easily get you as many goals, but its unlikely to keep as much possession or generate as many half chances. If you like possession and half chances, and being scored on, on the counter, then you already have the perfect tactic
I prefer goals. If scoring 4 means conceding 1 then I very much prefer that over scoring two, with chance of clean sheet. Thats why one of my favorite formations is using a RM, and on the other flank a LW. Decent for defending, and good for attacking as well.
When we were working on the TC, we tested a number of classic formations, including the totatvoetball tactic. We also tested the Pyramid, the Metodo, the Swissbolt, the Catenaccio, the Zona Mista and a few others. There were two reasons for the testing. Firstly, to see if the TC could produce realistic looking football in any formation. Secondly, to see if modern tactics got better results in the ME, which is importance for its robustness. We found that the closer the tactical shape to modern formations, the better it tended to perform. Hence, the Swissbolt tended to beat the Pyramid, the Zona Mista the Swissbolt, the totalvoetball the Zona Mista, and the modern 4-2-3-1 all of them.Because virtually every shot the AI gets on target ends up in the net as a goal?
I expect to win and I am doing this for the most part but I'm trying to get to the bottom of the issue as to why I'm constantly conceding so simply.
The classic tactic section of TT&F evolved out of these tests, with Millie, especially, interested in seeing whether it were possible to recreate a successful totalvoetball style and have it be competitive against modern formations. I never fully agreed with the final shape, believing that the totalvoetball formation played with a DMC and Sweeper, not a DC and Sweeper. I also believed it should never be more attacking than the Standard strategy, and that most roles should be Defend or Support. However, it was Millie's project and that was the extent of my input.
As the OP has illustrated, the tactic obviously works, but does have some predictable issues in defence, especially if the user is playing very aggressively. As others have pointed out, the full backs play very high and wide, which, while helping keep possession by providing extra passing options, also results in the opposition, should they win the ball, having acres of space to exploit on the break. This space is not helped by the DC and Sweeper playing so close to each other, which I believe is partly a bug and partly inherent to the formation as theorised in TT&F.
What I would suggest to the OP is that he gives up on trying to make relatively experimental tactical shapes deliver perfect football results. The ME tends to reward modern shapes better than classic ones. If one prefers to play controlled or counter attacking football, I'd recommend a 4-2-3-1 deep, the Mourinho 4-5-1/4-3-3, or the formation posted by bullybeef above. If one wants to play a little more aggressively and directly, then the 4-4-2 is a great option. Once you have mastered the basic modern formations, you can then showboat with more experimental ones such as totalvoetball, the 4-6-0, the 3-6-1 etc. Or try to recreate national styles, such as the Argentinian 4-3-1-2, with the one being an enganche. To do so, however, you need to be really comfortable with the logic of the TC and real life football tactical theory.
Or, of course, just be happy with the football you are playing and the results you are getting, while accepting that you will concede soft goals against because of the inherent weakness of the totalvoetball shape.
Last edited by wwfan; 13-04-2012 at 23:09.
It won't be fixed as there's nothing that needs fixing. What might happen, however, is that the AI and ME becomes robust enough to stop aggressive tactics dominating the match stats so heavily. That this is possible is the issue, not that the conversion ratios are flawed. If anything, they are too liberal. It is too easy to convert.
and since there is no bias, why is it that when i CA through the wings the AI FR/FL are able to keep up with my winger and intercept the cross but my FBs are also able to keep up with their wingers and pressure them and yet their cross is perfect into the lonely striker that is between 2 DCs? and i'm talking about general AI teams, small big whetever, my wingers have better stats and yet in same situations the result is totally different. and morale is fine.
and regarding the statistics they prove nothing, they show that overall the conversion ratio are fine, they don't show any quality of gameplays and they don't show anything about player stats. you can cry all you want that the statistics are fine but ppl started this thread compalaining about specific matches and you are trying to make it go to overall matches because you know that will be good for your side. nothing in this discussion was answered by you or any other mods about our strikers missing 1vs1 which happens ALOT against AI meanwhile i had Casillas defend ZERO 1vs1 in 3 seasons and hardly see any AI striker missing a 1vs1 be it a good or a bad player. it's not hard to put the ME "force" the statistics and in fact it seems that our players are missing way too many goals to keep the statistics right because if they didn't waste so many shots on taget as they did the results would be unrealistic.
Another problem is also long shots, any moron AI player will score from outside the box if they are the underdogs, now put xavi alonso, william, douglas costa, ronaldo making long shots with no opposition and see how many times they waste them...
Another problem mods never answer is why is a 1 striker alone in the box, 2 DCs near him and noone else near the area and neither will pressure the striker. and i'm talking about world class DCs.
you know what else the statistics show? that any AI coach is able to make a good tactic or counter us. that ain't realistic...unless you think everyone else here is a bad manager or in RL all teams have the same statistics even though they have different tactics, morale, managers and players...
Last edited by deathspawn666; 13-04-2012 at 16:57.
Last edited by deathspawn666; 13-04-2012 at 17:45.
So pretty much you are in denial (saying statistics prove nothing is illogical). And you don't rate Mancini as a manager.
If your teams weaknesses have been exposed ONE time, by one manager, then other managers can view footage of that game, and use the same exploit, if you haven't resolved the problem!
I manage two teams simultaneously, and I've had 3 European finals AGAINST myself, in the last 5 seasons. So I am pretty sure the opposition aren't THAT clever!
The AI does not attack ME weaknesses and i think your giving the AI too much respect. Its not this all seeing AI that will pick you appart unless your a tactical genius, it uses the same tools we do, and usually much worse than we can.
also about the part of the weakness, by our logic once a tactic shows a weakness everyone can see it and will be able to counter it. do you even watch football??? just beacuse you know the weakness and theorical aproach to counter it it doesnt mean you will be able to do it, it doesn't mean your players wil be able to do it...in FM they WILL be able to do it always. yeah it's realistic alright.
and i don't rate mancini as manager? wait what? i can't have my opinion? if he's such a good manager why didn't he win the champs with the same team as mourinho did? right mancini is really good and mourinho just sucks.
Last edited by wwfan; 13-04-2012 at 21:44.
So did you see Wigan vs Man U the other day, by any chance?
You are asking players to fix their attitudes towards small teams. You just admitted you play small teams pretty much the exact same way you would play Barcelona, and win 3-0.
The game is telling you that the matches against small opponents require a different approach, but you are being stubborn, or you are just not a fast learner.
And by balanced tactics I meant a logical set up of roles and duties, not defensive mentality. Why do you have to you use a balanced tactic? You don't. It's your choice. Just as it is your choice to be frustrated if your approach fails against a team defending well and getting their share of good fortune against you. Your ranting here serves no useful purpose though.
This is all perception bias. Over the years I've been sent and watched many pkms in which the user has complained the ME/AI is against him. In every one, the user's chances were extremely one-dimensional and nowhere near as good as they had stated in their complaint. Moreover, they usually relied on the corner exploit to score their first goal (which the AI doesn't and can't do), after which they tended to score more as the AI team was forced to open up more in search of an equaliser.and since there is no bias, why is it that when i CA through the wings the AI FR/FL are able to keep up with my winger and intercept the cross but my FBs are also able to keep up with their wingers and pressure them and yet their cross is perfect into the lonely striker that is between 2 DCs? and i'm talking about general AI teams, small big whetever, my wingers have better stats and yet in same situations the result is totally different. and morale is fine.
and regarding the statistics they prove nothing, they show that overall the conversion ratio are fine, they don't show any quality of gameplays and they don't show anything about player stats. you can cry all you want that the statistics are fine but ppl started this thread compalaining about specific matches and you are trying to make it go to overall matches because you know that will be good for your side. nothing in this discussion was answered by you or any other mods about our strikers missing 1vs1 which happens ALOT against AI meanwhile i had Casillas defend ZERO 1vs1 in 3 seasons and hardly see any AI striker missing a 1vs1 be it a good or a bad player. it's not hard to put the ME "force" the statistics and in fact it seems that our players are missing way too many goals to keep the statistics right because if they didn't waste so many shots on taget as they did the results would be unrealistic.
Indeed, in one match I was forwarded, the user complained he only won 2-1 in ET after dominating the shot count by circa 35-8. However, on viewing the pkm, it was patently obvious that maybe only 3 (maximum) of the 35 shots were of the same quality as any of the AI's eight. The user was actually very lucky in winning. In another experiment, I proved that the "best super-tactic" massively underperformed a dynamic TC-style tactic in which users were making logical, in-match decisions, with the former having a very poor open play goal conversion (again relying on the corner exploit) whereas the latter scored open play goals from all angles. A similar experiment in FML illustrated how logical in-match decision making nearly always beat "super-tactics", having roughly a 70%-20%-10% WDL record against them.
The AI cannot make decisions with anywhere near this level of sophistication. However, it does use the same basic logic, which at least keeps it competitive against any form of exploitive tactic.
It will be down to the space they are in, which will be a tactical issue (often down to users playing 4 attacking mentality players in the AM/F strata, defensive mentality defenders, and only two MCs protecting the middle). In contrast, AI tactics built on TC logic do not leave this space.Another problem is also long shots, any moron AI player will score from outside the box if they are the underdogs, now put xavi alonso, william, douglas costa, ronaldo making long shots with no opposition and see how many times they waste them...
There is a bug in defensive tracking, which can leave strikers in too much space. However, it affects user and AI alike.Another problem mods never answer is why is a 1 striker alone in the box, 2 DCs near him and noone else near the area and neither will pressure the striker. and i'm talking about world class DCs.
The TC guarantees some level of structural logic, which means none of the AI tactics will be inherently bad. However, the AI cannot make sophisticated in match decisions, giving the proactive user a massive, massive advantage. As the stats illustrate, the user manager has a huge conversion advantage, even when he thinks he hasn't. As long as the user isn't doing anything stupid, he'll always have the edge.you know what else the statistics show? that any AI coach is able to make a good tactic or counter us. that ain't realistic...unless you think everyone else here is a bad manager or in RL all teams have the same statistics even though they have different tactics, morale, managers and players...
This is not a morale issue. It is a tactical one common to users who play with big sides and expect to dominate every match without working hard at it. As you've summed up here...i am already the big dog, playing with RM, thrashing Barcelona every time we face off with at least 3 goals difference because my players actually play good on that match. then comes the small team and suddenly players have even better oportuneties due to lower pressure from AI and now they can't hit the nets, shots go way off the GK... same tactic, morale good, teamtalk didn't do any problem and yet they play like morons. if it was 1 game i could live with it, in RL if that happens once manager will talk to players, explain situation, tell them what was bad and if they're good they will learn. now let's go to FM, you have stupid teamtalks that will only affect morale but not fix their attitude in future games against small teams...
... you don't have a good grasp of real life tactical theory or how FM interprets it. Only the Defend and Contain strategies are "defensive". All the other strategies are focused on beating the opposition. Counter Attack is somewhat defined by the notion of "Attack", keeping the ball deep then striking ruthlessly as space opens up. Standard and Control are all about trying to patiently break the opposition down. Attacking is about trying to dominate in the final third (Overload more so), which is obviously difficult to do if the opposition are packing bodies into it. You simply have to play more patiently against packed defences. If you don't, you start to rely on the ability of high quality players to convert difficult chances at pace and under pressure. Only the individual quality of the player begins to matter. In this instance, a player's form and morale begin to be key.and why should i use a balanced tactic? how many games do you see big team playing defensive against smallt teams? very few times. how many times small teams win due to CA tactics and other team going too offensive? very few. now try that in FM...
can you link the study please? (not doubting you btw, would really like to pu my eyes on it)
about the long shots, when i have 1 DC or DM right in front of the AI player less then 1 meter from him and he still shoots like he's free and scores then there is clearly a problem and the GK is not advanced. my long shot players need to be completely alone to be able to score from a long shot.
about the dcs bug, hum would you then agree that teams playing with 1 striker that gets between 2 dcs have an advantage over teams with 2 strikers? goes both ways ofc (AI and human). i usually play with 2 strikers and usually don't have the "advantage" of the bug and that might give me the feeling that is biased.
about the AI tactics, i've seen AI change tactics in the half time and i've had conceed goals in the first minute of the 2nd half without being able to do any tactic adjustment after the match starts. even if it's not biased my advice for future improvement would be to "avoid" those situations on the ME because we aren't able to see the AI tactic changes effects in the 1st minute. i know this can happen in RL but i never was able to do it.
about underdogs, no i don't expect to dominate the match against small teams however my problem is i actually do dominate but strikers just go dumb mode and miss CCC, i would rather not dominate, create less chances and score. and yes the goal chances are good, lots 1vs1, how better can you get??...should i avoid that? btw i noticed GKs never goes out of the net to try to reduce the angle, maybe a future improvement for the game?
intereristing statement about the CA tactic on FM interpretation, i thought it was mainly defensive
I am now 11 league games into my new season and I have scored 40 whilst only conceding 2, 1 of those being a penalty, so I believe with your help and a few defensive, tactical adjustments the issue is no longer there, at least from what I've seen from the opening to the season.
So yes, thanks all, I guess that's all.
If you get a 1-on-1 you need the player to come in from a certain angle and have no-one nearby. So you want either one-touch-shots or tap-ins, or you want more than enough time and space to trick the keeper into making the move first and stuff like that. Anything in-between and the odds are stacked against the attacker. I don't know if that is realistic, but that's quite frankly irrelevant. SI, when plumbing ME holes, has made sure that just cramming everyone in the centre and throughballing like crazy won't work - so it doesn't.
This is about as good as it gets when playing against a weaker side, it shows how effective a balanced & patient attacking approach can be.
From the start I reigned in the attacking instincts of my players, once we had the 3 goal lead did I slowly start to give them more freedom when in possession & I never felt the need to use the attack or overload mentality instructions whereas a year ago I would have started with an all out attack assault & ran the risk of coming unstuck early on.
The one aspect that I have compromised on is width but there isn't a tactic out there that doesn't have some form of compromise & it's all about ensuring that your weaknesses are not alarming obvious & more to the point problematic when defending, the one saving grace in my style is that if things are getting too crowded in the middle I can easily push players out wide without drastically altering the overall shape of the team.
Thinly veiled bragging
Last edited by Barside; 14-04-2012 at 09:05.
Yep, that's common logic pretty much. It's important to not give the smaller sides any encouragment. If you come out guns blazing, missing shots everywhere and letting the opponent know there are opportunities to break the chances are your players will get nervous when they don't score and the opposition can grow in confidence. If you deny them the ball and patiently work to find a good opening it demoralizes them.
I don't think you necessarily have to fully compromise, I like to make sure that my tactics enable crossing opportunities, shooting opportunities, chances to break while still being built around possession build-up. You need to be able to shift the focus though.
""Not everyone, but those who struggle most are usually those with the least tactical knowledge, even if they think different.""
I have to say I find comments like this do get my goat a bit. I have managed and played for 25 years and as a Manager at both Youth and Adult levels have won Cups and League Championships and yet I am at present struggling with the new patch in FM. First two patches were fine and in fact my first season and a half of the new patch was ok but the wheels have now fallen off and it is very frustrating. In this incarnation tactics (mine at least) seem to fall apart after a very successful 10 games or so and yet in FM for years I have never had any major issues with building a good tactic or two. So I apparently according to some who post on here tactically inept.
Maybe it's because I play the game as a Sunday League Footballer in which your players take 25 years to become motivated to play for you but maybe it's also because quite honestly in FM you cannot 100% replicate real life football. It's already been admitted that defensive tracking back doesn't work too well and your wingers have never heard of helping out your fullbacks, and I have Adebayor up top who IRL wouldn't scuff his 5 chances a game feebly wide.
IRL I play a 4-4-2 and a 4-5-1 very successfully but you cannot as far as I can see replicate that in this years FM because IRL players do close down, do mark properly from time to time and cross the ball with a reasonable success rate and big strong forwards can hold the ball up as instructed. And one defeat after a good run of wins doesn't always send your players running in tears to a phsycologist.
I am not a master FM tactitian and can certainly do better and understand the ME better but at the same time some people need to acknowledge that there are quite a few serious issues in the game that need addressing before you can seriously claim that FM is realistic and not just fob off people who are struggling as "those with the least tactical knowledge."
Well, I've played Football Managers and Championship Managers since the 90s and beyond what the eternal optimists claim, the AI always scores more goals per shots on goal and probably always will. Through the years it has been pretty much the same for me no matter the tactics; I need, on average, 3 shots on goal to score and the AI needs 2. Individual games have differences, but that's how it evens out for me in the long run.
Did you even read the thread, or indeed look at the stats posted on the previous page. The OP actually has the best shots to goal in ratio in the league, and quite comfortably so. Its only againt him, because of the hole his approach that made them or clinical again him on the counter.
Anything the AI can do, you can do better. The question you should be asking yourself is why are you a worse finisher than the AI.
Shots on goal or shots overall? I guess those are shots overall. I'm talking about shots on goal, those which would go in without a goalkeeper saving them or a player blocking the shot.
http://community.sigames.com/showthr...=1#post7731641 and scroll down for the rest of the teams he's up against.
His ratio for goals from shots on target is 0.43 goals per shot. No side gets better than that, and only one side gets above 0.4 (0.402).
I'll have to load my save up to check mine, and ill post it later.
Lucky I decided to check my divisional stats yesterday.
Last season my team managed a ratio of 0.358 goals per shot on target which was the 4th highest in the division, Bayern Munich managed the best ratio of 0.374.
Most teams were between 0.3-0.33, 4 were lower than 0.3 & the last placed side in the division had a meagre 0.076 goals per shot on target.
Edit: Seeing some interesting statistics for the current season, it's too early to tell as I'll need to complete this season & the next plus a third with me no longer managing in the division to get a meaningful sample of statistics but I might have stumbled across a pattern that is not supposed to exist.
Last edited by Barside; 14-04-2012 at 21:12.
It's never necessarily been about how good the AI is finishing in the league, it was always the incredible AI conversation rate against me in games.
I don't necessarily see myself conceding so much anymore but when I do it's usually the AI scoring about 1 in 2 of their shots on target but there's not anything I can do about that so I've just learnt to accept it now and ignore it.
AI teams had a lower than average goals to shots on target ratio when playing against me, the end of season figure came in at 0.243 goals per shot on target.
My starting keeper is amazing & is brilliant at saving penalties which does help & having the German #1 as backup is an added bonus.
Two examples of his fine work.
Last edited by Barside; 14-04-2012 at 22:35.
Many people have already mentioned this but I'll say it again since echoing is fun, but you have to make sure you're not just suffering from perception bias. I had a 3 game stretch in the league where i gave up 4 goals on 6 shots on targets, which is rather unfortunate, but then again I also had a 4 game stretch where I had 0 goals on 11 shot on targets. Average the two, and I gave up 4 on 17 which seem pretty good to me. Every team will have games where the other team pretty much makes every shot on target, but forgetting about the good times while remembering all the bad times is not the right thing to do
This season in league games I have conceded so far (minus penalty goals and own goals):
22 Games:
2 SOT: 1 goal
3 SOT: 1 goal
3 SOT: 1 goal
4 SOT: 3 goals
3 SOT: 1 goal
So that's 15 SOT and 7 goals, so not quite 1 in 2 but almost there.
Last edited by ArsenalFan7; 14-04-2012 at 23:41.
What about the other 17 games?
I thought we were only doing games in which I have conceded but I shall take a look at the rest.
1 SOT: 0 goals
3 SOT: 1 goal
3 SOT: 0 goals
0 SOT: 0 goals
0 SOT: 0 goals
0 SOT: 0 goals
1 SOT: 0 goals
1 SOT: 0 goals
2 SOT: 0 goals
1 SOT: 0 goals
4 SOT: 0 goals (Scored a penalty)
1 SOT: 0 goals
4 SOT: 3 goals
3 SOT: 1 goal
1 SOT: 1 goal (Own goal)
2 SOT: 0 goals
2 SOT: 0 goals
0 SOT: 0 goals
3 SOT: 1 goal
0 SOT: 0 goal
0 SOT: 0 goal
2 SOT: 1 goal
34 SOT: 7 goals (I don't know if you minus that SOT for the penalty?)
So 34/7 = a goal every 4.86 SOT
And from your previous stats, you score a goal every 2.33 shots on target. You are twice as efficient as the AI. Might not be as good in your current season, of course. However, I doubt it has dropped so much as to be worse than 1 in 4.86.
You've provided a fantastic example of perception bias in this thread. Thanks for being open to be proven wrong and for taking the time to post all of your stats. It's been a very illuminating thread and one that should be a "must read" for anybody thinking the AI gets an unfair advantage.
My goals scored (minus OG's and penalties):
14 SOT: 5 goals
6 SOT: 3 goals
3 SOT: 3 goals
5 SOT: 1 goal
6 SOT: 5 goals
10 SOT: 3 goals
4 SOT: 2 goals
10 SOT: 0 goals
11 SOT: 7 goals
13 SOT: 8 goals
5 SOT: 3 goals
10 SOT: 3 goals
10 SOT: 2 goals
6 SOT: 3 goals
5 SOT: 3 goals
11 SOT: 3 goals
10 SOT: 2 goals
10 SOT: 2 goals
11 SOT: 3 goals
7 SOT: 1 goal
8 SOT: 4 goals
4 SOT: 1 goal
179 SOT: 67 goals = a goal every 2.7 SOT
Awkward for me :o
Well I'm glad this has been cleared up.
Thank you and goodbye.
i have seen that odd liverpool formation before.. liverpool used it against me.
holy smoke... this formation is immence with my fast wingers and striker O.O lowest rating 6.9 - keeper
outfield 7.6.
fantastic, i'll show you the match stats
this doesnt close down free kicks at all in another match i tried it on.
Last edited by scott MUFC; 15-04-2012 at 02:09.
After all this tactic discussion I feel that I need to tinker with my tactics now.
How the hell do you put up a significant challenge against teams, when you're underdogs for every game of the season? And for the most part the players you have are quite poor compared to the rest of the league.
I think this thread shows that there might a need for a guide on how to create quality chances in varying circumstances (favourite vs underdog etc).
Aw man, I love these threads, as it was the exact sort of thing I'd whinge about when I was 11.
Yes, very good, alias?
Second alias I've seen since the match.
yes it does happen, but not as often as it does on FM.
In this example you are Barcelona and Barcelona produce similar match stats in real life every match, the only difference is that Barcelona in real life possibly win more games and I would put that down to those FM managers not being as effective as Pep is in choosing the tactic/getting the players to make the most of it.
But you're talking about one match from EPL and other from CL and diffrent teams while in FM you are playing one team and i bet that you will have at least 5-8 wigan -manu matches What's annoying for me is disproportion of lucky wins and draws, AI seems just have a lot more luck then humanBetween the Wigan - Man U match a couple days ago and now the Chelsea - Barca match you would think FM would be praised as a very realistic football simulator.
Last edited by sciegu; 19-04-2012 at 23:29.
yes that is the point, you get it more times then twice, just against you alone. let alone the other matches.
Simply put, the majority of people who complain about this issue either design or download tactics that ensure they generate lots of possession and shots. Guess what, if you achieve this in every match you play, every match you lose will seem statistically unfair. You can only lose matches when you dominate the stats.
Most of these tactics rely on one player scoring lots of goals. If he is having a bad day, there is no second scoring option and the team begins to risk conceding as frustration grows.
Well im very happy with my tactic it generates very good results and quality chances and possesions is about 50/50 , i play 451/433 and three up front scored about 60 from 90 goals so i don't rely on one striker. I'm not complaining about finishing ratio i'm just saying that i don't have as much luck as AI have(90+ own goal, super long shot, gk mistake, late goal from corner or free kick, those things are reserved for AI)Simply put, the majority of people who complain about this issue either design or download tactics that ensure they generate lots of possession and shots. Guess what, if you achieve this in every match you play, every match you lose will seem statistically unfair. You can only lose matches when you dominate the stats.
Most of these tactics rely on one player scoring lots of goals. If he is having a bad day, there is no second scoring option and the team begins to risk conceding as frustration grows.
Last edited by sciegu; 20-04-2012 at 00:20.
I can guarantee the AI is not "luckier" than you. All you need to do is work out why you have the tendency to concede late goals and develop a strategy to prevent it.
One thing which i don't do is reducting through balls, i always thought that when switching to counter or defensive it can even help in launching quick attack.
using the tactic, i am still conceding to the regular silly stuff, corners, those random O.G.s bu it does force them to shoot from range. taken liverpool apart at anfield using it this time they went to attack after i scored and put another 5 past them when they pushed more men for a goal, looked quite good.
Did you mods see the Barcelona - Real madrid? did you see RM playing CA and Barcelona going offensive? did you notice that it was needed 1 of the best coaches in the world and 1 of the best teams with some of the best finishers in the world to be able to win in CA against barcelona? now go watch the whole season of barcelona and tell me how many small teams managed to do that against Barcelona. now go watch small teams doing it in FM. tell me how is FM12 realistic when any small team with 1-2 chances in CA always score.
To counter that how many teams do you see irl playing the same way as Barcelona or indeed regularly putting up the same sort of attacking statistics as them?
In FM it is far too easy to equal & in many cases better real life, the imbalance in the ME is two-way.
Given that only two of those matches were against Real its fair to say other teams have got results against them as well.
In fact the stats tell us that Barcelona drop points in 26% of league games or one out of four on average. The question is how does that stat compare for those users that feel they have a problem?
Teams concede goals because they are not as good as their manager thinks they are & I thought this thread went some way to disproving the misconception of an uber-efficient AI.
As for this two defender bug I've never heard of it & I spend a lot of time posting in the bugs forum, maybe you should post your debut comment in the bugs forum & supply a few match pkm's.
Last edited by Barside; 22-04-2012 at 19:38.
I repeatedly end up scoring the most goals and conceding the least. My shots to goals and shots on targets to goals were the best of any team in the top 5 leagues, even though i could say there were on paper 4-5 side who were better. Last season i conceded 16 goals on the league.
Also not heard of this bug, or seen it, but if its there it should be reported.
i never said hat AI scored in all CA, what ppl are complaining about is matches where our strikers go ****** mode, we dominate the whole game as in prrevious macthes and then AI has 1 chance in a 1vs1 and they score. now go try having your strikers score all 1v1 in a match...ffs i'm tired of watching benzema, higuain, ronaldo wasting 3 or 4 1vs1 because they either think it's cool to shoot straight at keeper all send the ball to the clouds. do they go dumb mode on all games? no. do i score lots of goals? yes more then 100 goals each season and average of 3+ goals each game including barcelona and conceed around 10 goals. however without any explanation they will be morons on a specific games . none of the strikers will score and might have luck if score from corner or long shot and go defensive and still conceed goal because apparently 2 DCs and 2 DMs can't take care of 1 striker and so either end up drawing or loosing which guess what, screws morale for a couple of games. i even tried reload those games with different tactics, especially more defensive approach and guess what, i created less chances, still missed a lot and the quality of the play was the same and the AI miraculous goal still happened and if i was lucky i would be able to draw. was it batter then loosing? yes. does it make me happy? nop just feels like i was never supposed to win. can i win if i reload many times? yes, can i kep reloading and win again with the same tactic that jsut made me win? hardly
Last edited by deathspawn666; 22-04-2012 at 20:48.
The thread title gets me every time My first thought is: The AI is better at finishing off chances? Really?
Not my experience at all.
These threads are silly without at least rudimentary analysis and testing. The thread title should be: 'IS the AI better at finishing off chances?'.
Go through the stats for all your matches (not just where the AI scored) & overall team stats for all clubs in your division, I am confident that you will find the figures will not back up your opinion of this efficient AI goal scoring machine when presented with a 1v1 chance.
Also watch a selection of full matches as the highlights system can give you a false sense of how efficient teams are in front of goal, unless your tactic is mess of conflicting instructions & roles the ME will not consistently produce the events that you claim.
Ideally, I would like to see less results dictated by the extremes of pressure and complacency, but this is an entirely separate issue.
If you have designed a tactic and developed a team that guarantees you will dominate every match statistically, the ONLY WAY YOU WILL EVER LOSE is when your forwards have an off day and the AI catches you on the counter. That's life. Get over it.
i can understand having 1-2 strikers on dumb mode but not 4 or 5. is it realistic to have 4-5 world class strikers? no. is it my fault? no. should i be punished for it? no.
do i want game to be realistic yes? do i want to loose ONLY due to RANDOM stuff that makes sure it stays realistic? sorry but no. is my tactic invincible? no. does it exploit ME? the hell i know, i dunno ME code and weaknesses unless i read all forum threads. also keep in mind ppl have different views on football. i for example thought the DCs problem was tactil, tried many stuff, same results so unless i came here i would never know it is a bug. how do you think i felt that whole time?
if i remember correctly there is also a flaw, told us by moderators, where AM on wings won't go back to help MCs even if they were told to, that is a ME flaw, how do you expect ppl that don't come here know it was ME problem and not bug? that pretty much renders some winger formation useless.
i'm tired of this random game. don't bother answering it unless someone knows how to delete an account, would appreciate if someone told me how to
Last edited by deathspawn666; 23-04-2012 at 01:20.
Because ***** happens in football. The best team doesn't always win and goals conceded can be totally against the run of play and extremely comical. The ME might have some minor bugs that cost you a goal or two, but stupidity, mistakes and randomness afflict every football match, even those played by world class footballers.and why you keep talking about season statistics when i'm talking about specific matches? just because average goal ratio is fine doesn't mean the whole matches were fine. if i scored 20 goals in a match and still have 100 overall does that mean the match was fine? so if i scored 20 of those as own goals how is that my tactic fault?
That's not what happens. You lose because you lose. The ME does not decide you will lose. It just processes data. It is perfectly possible to stop these losses from happening if you know how to change things around when the team is struggling to score. Do you sit and watch the match with your head in your hands, or do you implement Plan B or Plan C?also you keep talking about numbers and not how the goals happen? you admitted that there was the 2DCs bug, so if i exploit it my tactic will start produce unreal stats but ME has to keep it real so FM will just screw me over?
I agree. It is completely unrealistic for any team to have 5 world class strikers in its squad.i can understand having 1-2 strikers on dumb mode but not 4 or 5. is it realistic to have 4-5 world class strikers? no. is it my fault? no. should i be punished for it? no.
Random stuff happens in football all the time. You are never going to eliminate all randomness from FM, no matter what tactic you try, because if you do, then the match simulation will be worth absolutely nothing. You might concede some goals from bugs, but all of them? I doubt it. I'm also 100% sure that you score more through bugs than you concede.do i want game to be realistic yes? do i want to loose ONLY due to RANDOM stuff that makes sure it stays realistic? sorry but no. is my tactic invincible? no. does it exploit ME? the hell i know, i dunno ME code and weaknesses unless i read all forum threads. also keep in mind ppl have different views on football. i for example thought the DCs problem was tactil, tried many stuff, same results so unless i came here i would never know it is a bug. how do you think i felt that whole time?
Computer games always have bugs. I suggest you stop playing everything if bugs annoy you so much. Not good for the blood pressure. In fact, it is probably best you don't even turn on a computer.if i remember correctly there is also a flaw, told us by moderators, where AM on wings won't go back to help MCs even if they were told to, that is a ME flaw, how do you expect ppl that don't come here know it was ME problem and not bug? that pretty much renders some winger formation useless.
i'm tired of this random game. don't bother answering it unless someone knows how to delete an account, would appreciate if someone told me how to
If you wish, I will permanently ban your account.


text:
WEIRTON - Marc W. DeAngelo and Jeremiah Fernbaugh were sworn in as probationary patrolmen during ceremonies Tuesday morning in Weirton City Council chambers.
DeAngelo is the son of Marc and Linda DeAngelo, of Swearingen Hill. A 2008 graduate of Weir High, he will graduate in December from West Liberty University with a degree in criminal justice.
Fernbaugh, son of Teresa L. Fernbaugh of Avella and the late Merkel Lincoln Fernbaugh Jr., graduated from PA Cyberschool in 2006. He's served four years in the U.S. Navy, serving as a Bowsun's Mate Petty Officer Third Class assigned to Assault Craft Unit 2, Virginia Beach.
Article Photos
SWORN IN — Weirton city officials gathered Tuesday to celebrate the addition of two probationary officers to Weirton's police force. Mayor George Kondik administered the oath of office to Jeremiah Fernbaugh and Marc W. DeAngelo Tuesday in council chambers. Celebrating the hirings were, from left, Fernbaugh, Kondik, DeAngelo and Police Chief Bruce Marshall. -- Linda Harris
Mayor George Kondik administered the oath of office to the pair, telling the crowd of family, friends and well-wishers that the "dedication (the department) has to our city is second to none."
Chief Bruce Marshall said Fernbaugh and DeAngelo will fill vacancies in the ranks.
"We're budgeted for 38 officers, this brings us up to 38," he said. "We're glad to get these two guys, they're going to fit in perfectly."
The two will spend 16 weeks at the State Police Academy, beginning in January.
(Harris can be contacted at email@example.com)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Wedding Photos from around the world
< back to thumbnails >
Requires Login
February, 2016
Save this photo in your wedding notebook.
Requires Login
You must log in before you can save anything to your wedding notebook Log in here.
If you do not have an account, you can register a new account here.
Laura Melisa and scott's Weddingcartagena, bolivar
February, 2016


text:
I'd like to have seamless control over my computer from my laptop within my home LAN. After seeing this post, it would seem that seamless (no lagginess at all, which VNC introduces) control is possible - but I'm not sure which technologies would work.
I've tried VNC, even with compression on, but there is still a bit of a delay in the frames .


text:
Is there a hyperreal-valued finitely additive measure on all the subsets of [0,1), or at least the Borel ones, that
assigns $b-a$ to $[a,b)$ and to $(a,b]$ for all $a\lt b,$ and
assigns an infinitesimal--ideally, the same one--to each singleton?
It's (1) that's a problem. The Bernstein-Wattenberg construction yields a finitely-additive measure that gives (1) up to infinitesimals. But it would be nice to have (1) exactly.


text:
>Crescent City California News, Sports, & Weather | The Triplicate
RSS feed of all adsRSS feed for: Garage Sales
CALL BY 10 A.M. to get your ad in the next day's paper! 464-2141 Del Norte Triplicate ...
FREE MAPS! Our Map of Del Norte County is available. Pick yours up today at the Triplicate and let us help you with your garage sale travels. ...
Reach all of Crescent City and Del Norte County with your items to sell.
Ads appear Online and in Print
All Ads:
Ads with Photos only:


text:
I have read that there is no need to shoot a nadir and zenith shot when using a shaved Nikon 10.5 on a full-frame camera. Is that correct? The tripod or the bracket is not in the way of the nadir?
If it is correct, does it stitch perfectly?
I have read that there is no need to shoot a nadir and zenith shot when using a shaved Nikon 10.5 on a full-frame camera. Is that correct? The tripod or the bracket is not in the way of the nadir?
If it is correct, does it stitch perfectly?
On a full frame sensor camera, a shaved 10.5 tilted up 5 degrees should remove the requirment for a Zenith shot. I have seen examples, but have not tried it personally.
If you can come up with an invisible pano head and tripod, then a separate Nadir patch shot will not be required. You would have to tilt down. Tilting down would then make a separate Zenth shot necesary. Since Nick has not yet released invisible hardware (I have heard rumors as to such devices), we are left with using an additional Nadir path shot if we want to enclose the sphere.
You can even get the zenith closed with 4 shots around at 0°.
You can download my D700 pics with shaved 10,5 lens. In PTGui change the lens settings to : fullframe 10.5. The sets are taken as follows: 4 around at 0° pitch, +5° pitch, +7,5° pitch, 2x 60°180° visa versa, +90°, Nadir1, Nadir2 with NN5 and Nadir Adapter. Have fun playing around. The result concerning best quality because the center of the lens is used would be an extra Zenith shot. The easiest way should be 4 around at +5° plus 2x Nadir.
Last edited by hindenhaag; 01-03-2012 at 04:20 AM.
it makes sense to me that the tripod will be in the way but several sites have mentioned it this quote: "There is no need for a zenith or nadir shot." is from http://www.virtualtourpro.com/Shaving-Tutorial.htm What are they talking about?
I am downloading the zip file now and will play around with it, thanks!
I took your files and loaded them into PGGui (not the nadirs)
I masked out the tripods in the non nadir images
I loaded the 2 nadir shots, masked out the tripod
Had PTGui create control points for the two nadirs
Had PTHui create contol points for all images.
The result was a pic with the bottom with various shades of muted grey where the tripod was masked out.
what am I doing wrong?
David,"There is no need for a zenith or nadir shot."
You do not need a Zenith or Nadir shot. That is a true statement - BUT - it always depends on what you want to accomplish. If you want a full 360x180 spherical panorama which allows the user to pan all the way in all directions and view the ground as if the camera is floating in space, you will need a Nadir patch shot.
The best part of the image in a lens is in center. The worst part is at the edge. If you tilt at 0 degrees, the seam at the Zenith might not look as good as it could. Tilting up 5 degrees puts more of the better part of the lens in the picture.
Tilting up does leave a hole at the bottom. Even if you shoot at 0 degrees, you still have the tripod in the picture. Some people choose to limit the downward tilt so as to not allow the viewer to see that there is a tripod. In this case you do not have a full spherical panorama. Maybe a 360x160 or something like that.
The Nadir is a good place to put your or your customers logo. If the logo is big enough and your tripod legs were close enough together, you can cover the tripod with what is called a tripod cap. This is usually a corportate or photographers logo. In this case, a Nadir shot is not required. I like to have the full sphere available. I put my transparant floating logo at the Nadir.
Here is the only panorama I have ever done where I put in a static logo in order to cover up the monopod. http://www.dlsphoto.net/Europe2009/P.../Panorama.html Turn up your speakers as there is sound with this one. I think that this Nadir cap works great as it tells the viewer exactly where and when they are. I was holding the camera over my head on a monopod. It was impossible to get a Nadir shot.
The 10.5 lens on a DX camera will leave a rather huge hole at the Zenith and Nadir. The more you tilt up to try to cover the Zenith the more you open up the Nadir hole. In this case, a Zenith shot is required but the huge hole at the Nadir either needs to be covered up with a shot or a very large and obtrusive Nadir cap.
So the statement that a Zenith or Nadir shot is not required when using a shaved 10.5 on a full frame camera is correct. Tilt up 5 degrees and you have a Zenith that is good enough. When in doubt, shoot the Zenith. If you want the entire sphere, shoot the Nadir. Otherwise you cover the tripod with a logo or "mirror ball" (YEACH!!!!) or something like that.
I hope this make sense.
That does make sense... Its all about what actual result is needed. Thanks for clearing it up. I'm going to be in LA in two weeks--two bad I won't have any spare time or I would look you up.
Is the only advantage of using a shaved fisheye on a full frame that you can do a 360 in 4 shots instead of 6? Are there any other advantages?
I did experiment with angling the camera to eliminate the zenith and nadir. I did two rows because I was having a problem getting control points on the zenith with open skies: one at +15, one at -15. The top was perfect without a separate zenith. The bottom was a nice pic of the tripod. I will use that technique for shooting with open skies to eliminate the need for a zenith but will add a couple nadirs
Nice shot on the Tour. Your nadir is so tiny, the logo is not obtrusive at all. Did you shoot extra shots around to insure coverage since you were working on a monopod?
What size output settings did you use in Pano2vr for that shot?
Thanks for your time,
There was no time to take extra shots. I had to eyeball the 90 degree rotation. I almost did not get it. The riders came by 7 times. I had enough time to practice. When the time came to take the panorama, I had seconds to get all 4 shots. As you pan around, look very closely at the direction the people are looking. 4 shots = 4 different directions. This is an example of a panorama creating the illusion that the entire scene was taken with one picture.
Since the people were focused on the riders, they did not move around too much. While processing the pano, it took most of the day to mask out all movement. There should not be any floating body parts or people with two faces. This was back before PTGui had masking built in. I had to use Alpha Channel masks in Photoshop.
The image is 8000x4000. This is typical for the Sigma lens on a D300 body shooting 4 around tilted up 5 degrees. In Pano2VR the cube face size is 2546 with an image quality setting of 90. This is one of the very few panoramas that I enabled zooming. I usually disable zooming and use much lower quality settings. With the sound and extra detail left in, the final image size is around 11 megs. That is really too big for quick loading. As internet speeds come up, load speeds go down.
As to the advantages of shaving the 10.5. One of the biggest advantages I can think of is that you will be shooting with Nikon glass. That alone would be reason enough for me.
Too bad we cant hook up when you are in L.A. It would be nice to put a face to a name. I would be more than happy to show you how I create a panorama, both on the tripod and monopod.
The shot was impressive, nice work--especially on masking out the movement. I have the Nikon 10.5 now on the D300. I was just trying to see it if was worth moving up to a full frame, but I doubt it as I don't expect to be in a rush for the types of shots that I will be doing so reducing from 6 to 4 shots will not be a great advantage.
I will be getting into LA on a Sat night at 8pm, teaching a class on Sunday from 7am - 2 then heading right out for Vegas. I will keep you in mind for my next trip though!
You should be able to produce some wonderful panoramas with your D300/10.5 lens. Keep in mind that throwing money at a panorama will not improve the panorama. Improving your vision and skill as a photographer will improve your panoramas.
It may help if you inspect my project file and compare with your own. Download it from http://www.johnhpanos.com/D700pan.zip .
That is true to an extent, but having good equipment never hurts. I understand the vision. I used to be a professional photo back in the 80s and did pans with a Hulcherama, Alpa and Roundshot so I understand the art and vision of pans. What I need now is a better understanding of this new fangled digtial stuff :)
thanks, I will definitely download and compare
I will put myself a caveat to this discussion. When shooting with a pole at a height of +10 feet from the ground, I prefer using -2.5 degree. My nadir is fully cover and a very very small area needs to be photoshop. Since I cannot take a nadir correctly at this height I prefer taking an additional zenith picture in which 10 feet + does not make a difference. I am using the 8-15mm canon lens at 11.5mm.
Softgad, that sound like a good idea to reduce the nadir. I need to master tripod work before I can attempt pole! LOL


text:
I think it could be a good idea to have the ratio of your answers with 0 votes vs. your answers with 1+ votes on the profile page.
It could give further insight into the quality of a persons answers.
I'm generally thinking of this because I see quite a solid amount of people with relatively high reputation who have 1000 answers with 0 votes (I'm just making the numbers up of course ...) and 100 answers with 10+ votes.
I'm not saying this is bad, I'm just saying that if we can see the 'answer ratio' we can maybe make a slightly better distinction between people that just answer everything to try and 'grind reputation' and people that actually put time and thought into their answers.
This could however lead to people being afraid to answer questions because they might loose ratio...
Thoughts ?


text:
18 Dec 2008 6:20 AM #1
Ext.ux.panel.DDTabPanel extends Ext.TabPanel to support drag and drop operations to re-order the tabs.
This extension is the result of the work done in the topic "Draggable Panel in a TabPanel". When I started using the code in that thread, I found that clicking a tab to activate it didn't work any longer, you had to start dragging for it to activate. After some investigation, this was fixed by adding an onMouseDown event to activate the tab. As suggested by mabello, I decided to publish this great piece of work by giving it its own topic and by publishing it on the UX Repository.
This extension is based on the code of thommy and rizjoj and was then fixed, polished and published by myself.
Demo: http://extjs-ux.org/repo/authors/Mat...anel/demo.html
JS File: http://extjs-ux.org/repo/authors/Mat.../DDTabPanel.js
CSS: http://extjs-ux.org/repo/authors/Mat...DDTabPanel.css
UX Repository: http://extjs-ux.org/docs/index.html?...nel.DDTabPanel
Okay, it's in the repository now. Some small adjustments to the documentation have been done which will be reflected in the repository in approximately an hour (the interval between two repository updates).
This thread is open for suggestions, questions, bug reports and appreciations!
Known bugs:
- None, yay!
- The tab panel can't be made stateful.
It'd be very hard to do this as the default tab panel itself doesn't seem to support this either. Seen from a developer's point, it would be very hard too as some tabs are loaded dynamically through AJAX requests and such, how would one save those in a cookie?
- Allow tabs to be dropped on another tab panel by joining the drag and drop sources and targets.
- 1.0.7 (Jan 16, 2009)
- Implemented some more code optimizations from mystix.
- 1.0.6 (Jan 10, 2009)
- Implemented mystix's suggestions.
- 1.0.5 (Dec 31, 2008)
- Tabs with an iconCls now have a left padding on the ghost text.
- 1.0.4 (Dec 19, 2008)
- Fixed bug with west region and code is much cleaner now.
- 1.0.3 (Dec 19, 2008)
- Fixed activeTab configuration not working.
- Added configuration option and method for tabs to enable/disable drag and drop on a per-tab basis.
- 1.0.2 (Dec 18, 2008)
- Fixed conflict between multiple DDTabPanels.
- 1.0.1 (Dec 18, 2008)
- Initial release.
Last edited by Matti; 16 Jan 2009 at 9:43 AM. Reason: Updated to version 1.0.7
18 Dec 2008 6:49 AM #2
Thanks for doing that.
You made an excellent job.
Keep up the good work!
18 Dec 2008 7:53 AM #3
Excellent work!!
Thanks for share,
18 Dec 2008 8:04 AM #4
18 Dec 2008 9:27 AM #5
18 Dec 2008 9:45 AM #6
+10. great job.
p.s. a draggable option on each "tab" would be good.
18 Dec 2008 11:02 AM #7
An update has been sent to the SVN (version 1.0.2) which should fix the conflict between multiple DDTabPanels. This was caused by the class using the same drop target identifier for all panels and the helper class selecting the wrong drop header. Well, that's what you get when you try to get the most out of a quickly written extension I guess. Maintaining this thing sounds a lot more creepy now... :P But I can handle it.
That is a great idea indeed, I'll certainly have a look at it tomorrow.
18 Dec 2008 2:19 PM #8
What about this extension: http://extjs.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32485
Here is demo: http://www.polomuseale.firenze.it/ext/test/test.html#
I prefer ghost dragging
22 Dec 2008 3:18 AM #9
Thank you very much for this extension!
There is, unfortunately, a problem with tabs dragging when 'west' region is set. Something is wrong with calculating X offset where to put a dragged tab. Please try adding this to the first window items in the demo file and try it yourself:
PHP Code:
region: 'west',
width: 200,
html: 'test'
I would be very grateful if you could fix these issues.
22 Dec 2008 4:08 AM #10
Doesn't seem to work in IE. This is a great extension though.
Thread Participants: 26
- galdaka (2 Posts)
- vtswingkid (3 Posts)
- mystix (4 Posts)
- dawesi (1 Post)
- ifnot (1 Post)
- marcing (1 Post)
- tobiu (12 Posts)
- adam.jimenez (7 Posts)
- wm003 (2 Posts)
- miti (1 Post)
- mabello (1 Post)
- JamesC (1 Post)
- mholyszko (4 Posts)
- moegal (1 Post)
- Remy (1 Post)
- gthe (1 Post)
- ttbgwt (1 Post)
- Scorpie (1 Post)
- simplessus (1 Post)
- arthurakay (5 Posts)
- Mjollnir26 (3 Posts)
- Xander75 (2 Posts)
- mschwartz (6 Posts)
- mjmonserrat (1 Post)
- adbox (2 Posts)
- george.neculai (1 Post)


text:
The currently accepted theory of the expansion of the universe would suggest that for any point in the universe, there is a 'boundary' (somewhat like the Schwarzschild radius) beyond which it cannot see the stars that may be there. (since beyond that radius the expansion must appear to be faster than light). However this also implies that stars that are currently visible should disappear when the expansion takes them across that boundary (as some must since the expansion is ongoing). Now even allowing for a very long delay in this being observed from earth say, it still means that after billions of years we must be seeing stars "dropping" out of our visibility radius. Is this an observed phenomenon? or am I misunderstanding something?
This happens when the universe has accelerated expansion, or when the cosmological horizon goes away slower than the speed of light, so that it is at a fixed location. Right now, the cosmological horizon is expanding outward in such a way that new things are coming in, new galaxies, into our field of vision.
In the future, when the universe is deSitter (and also in the past, when inflation was happening) the cosmological horizon was sitting still and stuff just fell into it. This is the situation you describe, and it doesn't describe the universe today, although we are in the transition period from a big-bang universe, where stuff is coming in, to a separating universe where stuff comes out.
The important thing is that there is an interplay between how fast the universe expands and how fast the horizon moves away, an interplay which is determined by the ratio of ordinary matter to cosmological constant, and right now the ordinary matter is about 30%, while the cosmological constant is 70%.
For a detailed discussion see "Expanding Confusion: Common Misconceptions of Cosmological Horizons and the Superluminal Expansion of the Universe" by Davis and Lineweaver:
ever since the big bang,there universe has been expanding.other stars continues to burst and expand when they get hotter.so yes other stars wil disappear in the future and no longee be seen with naked eyes.


text:
Mimobot - Darth Vader 4GB USB 2.0 Flash Drive for $4.79 + free shipping
Show your loyalty to the Empire, join the Dark Side, use a Darth Vader Flash Drive.
Other characters available with the same space and price are:
C-3PO: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Mimobot+-+C-3PO+4GB+USB+2.0+Flash+Drive/3217737.p?id=1218386651068&skuId=3217737&st=mimobot&cp=1&lp=1
R2-D2: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Mimobot+-+R2-D2+4GB+USB+2.0+Flash+Drive/3217585.p?id=1218386646683&skuId=3217585&st=mimobot&cp=1&lp=5
Yoda: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Mimobot+-+Yoda+4GB+USB+2.0+Flash+Drive/3217512.p?id=1218386648439&skuId=3217512&st=mimobot&cp=1&lp=3
Non-star wars:
Optimus Prime: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Mimobot+-+Optimus+Prime+4GB+USB+2.0+Flash+Drive/3217558.p?id=1218386649262&skuId=3217558&st=mimobot&cp=1&lp=9
Megatron: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Mimobot+-+Megatron+4GB+USB+2.0+Flash+Drive/3217728.p?id=1218386651067&skuId=3217728&st=mimobot&cp=1&lp=10
7 Comments add a comment
Also for $6.39 each 4GB storage
Boba Fett:
Hal Jordan:
Batman is $6.39, too.
@misterchuu: Batman's all gone. Knew I should've grabbed one while I had the chance. :[
@misterchuu: actually Batman has been Out of Stock, it's why I didn't list it in this deal. So don't feel too bad
@animerika: He was in stock briefly when I looked at him originally, but it must've been a cancelled order or something. It went too quick. I got in for an Optimus though, and I'm debating ordering a Megatron to match. Many thanks for posting these!
@misterchuu: you know, I believe you because I was R2D2 was out of stock a few days ago and got back in stock and it's what I bought. I also wish batman was the same.
You're also very welcome, I'm glad to share a deal with my fellow wooters. I think a Megatron one to go with your Optimus Prime would be very cute :D
damn, the sale ended and it's back to $5.99
still a good deal compared to the actual prices of mimobots but not exactly a sale
gonna expire this deal now


text:
Document Actions
At Hunter College, you are more than a student attending classes, writing papers, and preparing for examinations. Your primary reason for being here may be academic, but it does not fully describe you. Participating in athletics and student organizations, reporting on campus issues, working in student government, or performing in theatrical productions also may interest and excite you. Such co-curricular activities are an integral part of your Hunter education, and many are funded, in part, by the Student Activity fee.
Click on the following links to find out how to get involved here at Hunter.


text:
Out of nowhere, Tan Mom has competition for Worst Tan: competitor number 49 at the Arnold Classic Europe bodybuilding competition, who appears to have self-tanned only his body. Here's the full shot:
The Arnold Classic Europe is the, you guessed it, European edition of the Arnold Classic, a bodybuilding competition sponsored by Arnold Schwarzenegger.
[image via AP]


text:
Advanced Internet Searching
Location:St. Helena Branch
Date & Time:Tuesday, January 22, 2013 - 10:30am
Date & Time:Tuesday, February 26, 2013 - 10:30am
Are you tired of getting millions of hits when you just need one website? Learn to master Internet searching using Google, Bing and other websites! Registration is required, space is limited.


text:
FORT RILEY, Kan. (WIBW) -- The "Big Red One" Headquarters is gearing up to lead a regional command in Afghanistan.
The 1st Infantry Division soldiers will be responsible for an area roughly the size of the state of Virginia.
A ceremony Wednesday marked the final step in the group's preparations for the year-long deployment. The Army's oldest continuously serving division cased its colors by wrapping up a "Big Red One" flag on Fort Riley's Cavalry Parade Field, representing their official farewell.
The division will be taking charge of the military operations in Eastern Afghanistan, partnering with the Afghan National Security Forces. They'll be in command of thousands of troops, including soldiers from every branch of the U.S. Armed Forces and members of the NATO Coalition Forces.
Last month, Army Chief of Staff General Ray Odierno visited Fort Riley and reviewed an intense training exercise that the 1st Infantry Division Headquarters conducted. He declared the training event a success. Almost 3,000 military and civilian personnel from five nations and every branch of the Armed Forces were involved in the exercise, known as Unified Endeavor 12-01. They took part from Fort Riley to Germany to Fort Knox, Ky., to Suffolk, Va. The exercise walked the division's leaders and soldiers through the mission they are set to conduct in Afghanistan. Odierno said, "It's clear to me from what I've seen this week they will continue to do an incredible job as they prepare to deploy to Afghanistan."
"We're at a key part of the campaign. What's critical is our ability to work with the Afghans, the Afghan National Security Forces in particular, to help them take charge and be in the lead in a very permanent way. It's about transitioning to getting Afghans to where they can take full sovereignty," said Major General William C. Mayville Jr., Fort Riley's Commanding General. Mayville will be the senior leader of Regional Command East.
"We're fighting an insurgency, I think, quite successfully and now it's about developing lasting and enduring solutions- rule of law, local governance and the ability of local governments to provide basic public services," he added.
Over the next few weeks, the soldiers will be getting ready for their mission and saying good-bye to their families.
"I think our division has a good crew and there's a whole lot of unit cohesion so I think we're definitely ready for this one,"said Sergeant First Class Juan Torres, accompanied by his wife and three children.
"I'm confident that we're trained and ready to go. I'm confident in the organization and I think that we have everything we need to accomplish this mission. So we're looking forward to it. It's time to get this thing going," General Mayville told reporters. He told the crowd during the ceremony that the troops faced a "touch enemy" and difficult terrain but that their mission is all about building trust and stability and continuing the momentum of the last 10 years of the campaign in war-torn Afghanistan.
The first soldiers of the division headquarters will begin deploying to Afghanistan later this month. Seven hundred soldiers are being deployed.


text:
Should there be a badge for N instances of on-topic mentioning of Joel's name (SO, JoS, FogCreek, Joel's software, EBS, all count)?
I personally think such a tag would be Way Cool.
I'm not entirely sure how to go about implementing such tag, but may be some relevant sub-string searches in answers up-voted at least once?
Example: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1529385/how-to-write-technical-specs-for-a-project


text:
Techmount Universal 7/8" (22mm) up to 1 1/4" (32mm) Handlebar Mount, black, silver or chromeThis is the Techmount 3rd generation mounting system. They were able to combine all of the current production handlebar sizes from 7/8 (22mm) up to 1 ¼ (32mm) into one mount system. This allows it to fit virtually every motorcycle with tubular handlebars. Requires only ¾ of handlebar space and can be mounted at any angle. Available in Black, Silver oe Chrome. Having no need for a shaft, makes this mount system very strong and very compact. Learn More$79.95 $34.95
Techmount BMW Control Mount, blackBMW Control Mount system that mounts onto the handlebar control pinch bolts (clutch or brake side). 1.5" shaft length. Height variable from 1.0" to 2.5". Single mounting plate with dimensions 2.25" x 3". Learn More$94.95 $41.29
Techmount GEN 4 Brake & Clutch Control Clamp Mount for BMW F650GS, F800GS, F800R, F800S, K1200R. K1200S, K1300GT, K1300R, K1300S, K1600GT, K1600GTL, R1200HP2, R1200R, R1200S, R1200GS & R1200ST
The Control Clamp Mount fits BMW clutch or brake control clamp. Replaces the two factory pinch bolts with new stainless steel bolts and spacers on the handlebar controls.Learn More$44.95
Techmount GEN 4 Handlebar Mount for 7/8in (22mm), 1in (25mm), 1-1/8in (28mm) & 1-1/4in (32mm) Handlebars-SilverAllows Techmount GEN 4 extensions or device cradles to be mounted onto motorcycle handlebars from 7/8in - 1-1/4in (22mm-32mm). Learn More$39.95


text:
Help Save the Arctic at www.savethearctic.org
At 4am local time in Russia, six Greenpeace activists, including Executive Director Kumi Naidoo, set off in three inflatable speedboats from the Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise and scaled Gazprom's 'Prirazlomnaya' Arctic oil platform in the Arctic. They are there to demand that the Russian company abandon its dangerous Arctic drilling plans.
The six climbers have taken up positions on the structure and have interrupted the platform's operations. The activists are out of reach and have enough supplies to last them for several days.
From the Arctic Sunrise, Greenpeace Campaigner, Dima Litvinov, says: "This is the face of Arctic destruction. Prirazlomnaya is the first ice-capable permanent oil platform in the Arctic. It is a perfect example -- it is a personification of the slowly creeping industrialization of this pristine area. And especially, given the information that is coming in all the time about the rapidly decreasing ice cover in the Arctic, it is an obscenity. It is an insult that the same companies that are responsible for this crisis are now seeking to profit from it."
Help your cat join the CATavist movement against #badtuna at http://www.catsvsbadtuna.org and take action yourself at http://www.greenpeace.org/badtuna
The fishing communities of Kiribati, a Pacific nation comprising 33 small islands, speak about their loss of livelihood and erosion of their culture at the hands of destructive and oversized fishing vessels operating under European flags,...
1 - 5 of 890 results.
Sign the Petition Here:
64613 People have signed
Marine Reserves now!
118444 People have signed
Embed this widget on your site
<script src="http://www.greenpeace.org/new-zealand/widgets/petition-widget.js" type="text/javascript"></script>


text:
Book your room at Hotel Whitcomb
Get an overview of this hotelVenerable San Francisco landmark near Union Square
On hip theater row
Located in the San Francisco theater district with a BART and MUNI station at its entrance, this downtown hotel is 6 blocks from Union Square and within a mile of Moscone Center and SFMOMA.
Victorian ambience
Built in 1910, Hotel Whitcomb, A Historic Hotel of America, has an opulent lobby with marble columns, Austrian chandeliers, and Janesero paneling; an intimate bar features a Tiffany stained-glass ceiling.
Wireless Internet
Air-conditioned guestrooms and parlor suites at The Whitcomb have high ceilings, downtown views, well-lit desks, phones with voice mail, and complimentary wireless Internet access.Would you like to give us feedback? Share it! Opens in a new window
Hotel Whitcomb1231 Market St San Francisco CA 94103
Hotel Amenities
Hotel Amenities
With a BART and MUNI station at its entrance and a cable-car stop within 4 blocks, Hotel Whitcomb, A Historic Hotel of America, is across from the Bill Graham Civic Auditorium and the Orpheum Theatre. Union Square shops and restaurants are 6 blocks away.
Popular with theatergoers, the Market Street Grill has a changing menu with an emphasis on steak and seafood. The small, adjacent bar has a lovely Tiffany ceiling. A Starbucks kiosk in the lobby is open 24 hours on weekends.
Meeting and event space includes a ballroom for 400 guests, 7 meeting rooms, and a business center provides high-speed Internet access and other services (surcharge). Guests can make use of the 24-hour fitness center. Valet parking (surcharge) is available on site. Luggage storage and tours/ticket assistance are also provided.
- 24-hour business center
- 24-hour fitness facilities
- 24-hour front desk
- ATM/banking
- Bar/lounge
- Breakfast available (surcharge)
- Coffee shop or café
- Free newspapers in lobby
- Concierge services
- Conference space
- Conference space size (feet) - 6,300
- Conference space size (meters) - 585
- Dry cleaning/laundry service
- Elevator/lift
- Express check-in
- Express check-out
- Free WiFi
- Gift shops or newsstand
- Luggage storage
- Meeting rooms 7
- Multilingual staff
- Number of buildings/towers - 1
- Number of floors - 6
- Number of meeting rooms - 8
- Porter/bellhop
- Restaurant
- Smoke-free property
- Total number of rooms - 460
- Tours/ticket assistance
- Valet parking (surcharge)
- Wedding services
- Year Built 1910
Family Friendly Amenities
- Free Wi-Fi
- Refrigerator (on request)
- Rollaway/extra beds available
Available in all rooms: Free WiFi
Available in some public areas: Free WiFi
Valet parking (surcharge)
Room Amenities
- Air conditioning
- Blackout drapes/curtains
- Cable TV service
- In-room climate control (air conditioning)
- Free toiletries
- Cribs/infant beds available
- Daily housekeeping
- Desk
- Dial-up Internet access (surcharge)
- Free WiFi
- Hair dryer
- In-room safe
- Iron/ironing board
- Pay movies
- Phone
- Premium bedding
- Premium TV channels
- Private bathroom
- Refrigerator (on request)
- Rollaway/extra beds available
- Shower/tub combination
Where to Eat
Market Street Grill - Lobby restaurant with large fireplace, white tablecloths, steak and seafood specialties. Menu changes with each Broadway-style show at the nearby Orpheum Theatre. Adjacent bar features Tiffany stained-glass ceiling. Breakfast, lunch, and dinner served. Bar open from early evening to late evening.
Starbucks - Lobby kiosk serving coffee drinks and pastries. Open from early morning to late evening, 24 hours on Friday and Saturday.
Nearby Things to Do
Jogging, cycling, and rollerblading are popular along the Embarcadero, 1.5 miles away. The hotel is a mile from Yerba Buena Gardens, which includes a historic carousel, bowling alley, ice-skating rink, and children's play area.
Four miles away, the Presidio Golf Course is a public 18-hole course deep inside the city's verdant park near the Golden Gate Bridge. Golden Gate Park has walking and running trails, a playground, gardens, and tennis courts.
The recreational activities listed below are available either on site or near the hotel; fees may apply.
- Golfing nearby
- Sailing nearby
- Hiking/biking trails nearby
To make requests for specific accessibility needs, complete the "Special or Accessibility Requests" section of "Trip Preferences" when you book your hotel.
- Accessible bathroom
- Roll-in shower
- In-room accessibility
Hotel Policies
Check-in time ends at 4 AM
Check-in time starts at 3 PM
Check-out time is 11 AM
Payment types
- Pets not allowed
You need to know
Extra-person charges may apply and vary depending on hotel policy.
Government-issued photo identification and a credit card or cash deposit are required at check-in for incidental charges.
Special requests are subject to availability upon check-in and may incur additional charges. Special requests cannot be guaranteed.
- Deposit: USD 50.00 per stay
Optional extras
- Breakfast fee: between USD 15.00 and USD 25.00 per person (approximately)
- Valet parking fee: USD 38.00 per night (in/out privileges)
- Early check-in fee: USD 50.00
- Late check-out fee: USD 50.00
- Refrigerator fee: USD 25 per night
- Rollaway beds are available for an additional fee
Hotel Name
- Hotel Whitcomb
- Hotel Whitcomb San Francisco
- Whitcomb
- Whitcomb Hotel
- Whitcomb San Francisco
- Whitcomb Hotel San Francisco
- Whitcomb San Fransico
We should mention
Children 17 years old and younger stay free when occupying the parent or guardian's room, using existing bedding.
Awards & Affiliations
- The property is a member of Historic Hotels of America.


text:
The Brazos Valley Fair & Exposition is pleased to release the final results of the 2012 Inaugural Brazos Valley Fair & Expo. The Brazos Valley Fair opened its doors for the first time this year and was held this past September.
The Fair had an attendance of 16,165*, and final numbers showed a net profit of $20,919.76 after all expenses had been paid, including all Expo facility rental fees, from revenue generated directly by the Fair. Jim Mazurkiewicz, President of the Brazos Valley Fair & Expo stated "The inaugural Fair was extremely successful and exceeded our expectations. We are very pleased with the results and are now evaluating every facet of this years' Fair so that we can make the adjustments and improvements necessary to make the 2013 Fair bigger, better and more successful."
The 2012 Fair had over 900 livestock show entries from across the state of Texas and the Southern United States, 472 rodeo contestants, 40 Food Challenge contestants, 122 entries in the 5K Run, and had approximately 356 volunteers and committeemen who helped make it a reality. A total of $33,000 was awarded to contestants in all competitive events including rodeo, livestock shows, Youth Western Art Show and the Food Challenge Contest. The total amount of contributions made to local charities was $2,300. In addition, the Fair was awarded the "Best New CPRA Rodeo of the Year".
The Brazos Valley Fair & Expo was organized for educational, scientific and charitable purposes to encourage, promote and maintain agricultural science, research, and educational functions. It is the general policy of the Fair & Expo that the excess of its revenue over expenses will be used for the furtherance of its exempt purpose, including the granting of scholarships and the funding of related capital additions and improvements. The funds of the Brazos Valley Fair & Expo are used exclusively to meet the necessary expenses for its upkeep, operation and capital improvements of the Brazos County Expo, in furtherance of the exempt purpose of the organization.
Due to the successful start of the Brazos Valley Fair, the Fair Executive Board, although not originally planned the first year, has decided to begin its scholarship program immediately by awarding scholarships to graduating high school seniors at the conclusion of the 2012-2013 academic year. More details regarding the scholarship program will be released in the coming months. In addition, several small capital improvements have already been made at the Brazos County Expo.
The success of the first fair was due, in large part, to the help and support of the committeemen, volunteers and sponsors. Committeemen and volunteers generously donated their time and effort to help make the event a success. Sponsors were extremely generous in supporting this new event and we hope to continue these partnerships and build new ones for the 2013 Fair. The Fair thanks the citizens of Bryan-College Station and all of the communities in the Brazos Valley whose support was vital to its success. Fair management will be diligent in their quest to increase the entertainment value for all fair goers. The staff and volunteers will continue to expand and grow the event into something very, very special in the future.


text:
Concord church that took tax fight to Supreme Court sells to developer
An East Concord church that lost a lengthy tax dispute in state Supreme Court last year has sold to a Nashua developer. Destiny Christian Church's property on Mountain Road will be subdivided to build new homes.
Post a comment
You must sign in before you can post comments. If you are experiencing issues with your account please e-mail email@example.com.


text:
Houston Astros vs Texas RangersFri, May 10, 2013 - 7:10 PMMinute Maid Park in Houston, TX
We are sorry, the date for this event has already passed. This event took place on 5/10/2013. Click here to view upcoming events for Houston Astros.
Still unsure? Check out our user reviews for:
Have a question? Need help? Call us at 800.477.5285


text:
WEIRTON - Upset they weren't involved in the process before it was presented to them for a vote, Weirton City Council Tuesday nixed proposed major changes in the fire civil service code.
"This isn't some small tweak they're making," Ward 6 Councilman David Dalrymple said. "This is major legislation, and to slide it under the door, essentially (is upsetting)."
The changes, passed at the Fire Civil Service Commission's September meeting, would have separated departmental regulations from the actual Weirton Fire Department Civil Service Code.
When asked for an explanation, Commission member Joe Stankiewicz, in the audience at Tuesday's city council meeting, said they'd merely tried to reorganize the rules and regulations governing fire personnel. He said the change would remove departmental rules from civil service commission rules, something city firefighters "have been after a long time."
Council initially voted to table the proposed ordinance, but was forced to rethink its decision when it was pointed out that if no action was taken by them within 20 days of the civil service commission recommendation "it becomes the rule." That 20-day clock would have run out in four days, not enough time for them to meet with commission members to learn more about the proposal and return it to the council floor for a vote.
"Table it and it takes effect anyway in four days," City Manager Valerie Means said.
Faced with the prospect of the decision being taken out of their hands, council voted to reconsider the proposal and then voted 5-1 against adopting the changes.
"The Civil Service Commission did not have the courtesy to sit down with us," Ward 4 Councilman George Ash said. "We don't have all the information. I don't want to support something like this (without it)."
Ward 7 Councilman Terry Weigel cast the lone vote in favor of the rules change. Ward 1's Ron Jones was not at the meeting.
In other action, Mayor George Kondik was forced to cast the tie-breaking vote on the fire department's request to bring a national expert in for a fire safety training program.
Chief Jerry Shumate said the program would teach firefighters, among other things, how to "look at a structure and determine what a fire is doing." He acknowledged the training takes them "above and beyond" anything that's currently available in-state, and said funding for it would come from the department's budget.
Ash, though, questioned the need to bring an outside expert in since the department has already asked council to authorize the hiring of a training officer.
"I thought we were going to wait until we decided if we were going to have a training officer or not?" Ash asked.
Shumate, however, pointed out that the seminar presenter's level of expertise "is well above what anybody in the state" can offer.
"I think when the training officer does come to fruition, it's going to make his job a little easier," Ward 3 Councilman Fred Marsh said.
Means pointed out the program would help address shortcomings found in the community's last Insurance Services Office audit.
"Part of the results of that study was that we were lacking in training and in record keeping," she said. "This would bring training up to speed and assist with the (upcoming) ISO audit."
Means said the in-house training officer would be able to bring the department up to "the bare minimum, but this will get us above and beyond" that level.
Council also:
Approved purchase of two Rapid Intervention Team packs for the fire department, which will provide an emergency air supply in the event a firefighter is trapped in a burning building; authorized the annual aerial service inspection of the fire department's tower trucks, and signed off on the purchase of a treadmill and weights for the Gilson Avenue fire station, needed to comply with on-the-job fitness requirements for firefighters.
Accepted a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hazard mitigation grant for the project, which will allow them to acquire a number of flood-prone properties on Willow Street. Properties on the creek side of Willow Street are eligible for the program, under which existing structures would be demolished and replaced with green space. The city would have until 2015 to complete acquisition and demolition of the properties.
Passed ordinances extending yellow "no parking" areas on Pike and Dickson streets and painting a single center line on a 125-foot section of McHendry Street, all on an emergency basis.
Passed a resolution to place liens to recover costs incurred in demolition of properties on Orr Street and Cove Road.
Signed off on the purchase of six personal computers for various departments as well as new duty pistols for city police.
Designated two handicapped parking spaces on Sunday's only at the First United Methodist Church, 3301 West St.