OfficeFrustration - View Single Post

**Marshall Barton** · May 1st, 2010, 05:26 PM posted to microsoft.public.access.reports

wrote:
Think I used 'Reply to author' Marsh
Hope you got it. Would you rather I had replied to the list

Yes. I finally found it and am adding it here.

Perhaps I can explain a bit about what I am doing.

The database is to record a history of Motor Cycle Speedway here in
the UK - for the uninitiated, it's 4 men competing over 4 laps (2 per
team) and 13 races that produces a result (Win lose or draw etc)
Teams have come and gone, some still survive. Unlike some sports where
League names are consistent (for example the 'Conferences' in NBA etc)
so each team compete over the years in a variety of different League
names.
I am not recording the individual 'meet' result, but the end of season
table
The tblseason 'table' has the names of these Leagues
So for example in 1928 there were 2 Leagues, recorded thus in the
Access Table
seasonfld leaguefld Rank
1928 Northern League 1
1928 Southern League 2
1929 Northern League 1
1929 Southern League 2
.
.
1956 National League 1 1
1956 National League 2 2
1956 Metro League 3
etc
etc

Quite complicated in structure. Early years the Leagues were 'equal'
and teams competed in areas much like NBA conferences
Later on, there are 'junior' Leagues
For example as above, 1956
NL 1 was the senior League, NL 2 a more 'Amateur' League and Metro the
'baby' league.
This has continued by and large to this day with similar structure but
changing League names

Thus, with what I have posted earlier, if I group and sort the Metro
League comes on my report above NL 1 and 2. Not what I want (hence my
attempt at adding 'Rank')

The other 'team' table records the Teams venues, Trophies, Nicknames
etc.

The 'test' table was my attempt to record the end of season data, and
the report I am seeking help with here, is to print/display annual
Leagues (year per page)

Thanks for your time, I'd be interested to know if you still belive
structure is wrong.

With the league names being semi random, there's not much
use for a Leagues table. In that case, I guess adding the
rank field to the seasons table is ok. I don't like the
idea of having to add a rank number for every record, but I
don't readily see an easy way around it either.

Seems like with your Rank field, all you have to do is sort
the report on both the season and rank fields. That makes
the report trivally easy and maybe that's some kind of
compensation for entering all those rank numbers.

--
Marsh
MVP [MS Access]