46 coaches online • Server time: 15:30
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Secret League Old Wo...goto Post Creating a custom to...goto Post ramchop takes on the...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Azure



Joined: Jan 30, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 18, 2015 - 17:01 Reply with quote Back to top

Awesome job...nice that you went back and looked at the older years as well...well I appreciate it certainly Smile

Does make me yearn for the old days when I had more time to play than I do right now sadly :/
Mossbeard



Joined: Jul 03, 2005

Post   Posted: Jun 18, 2015 - 17:07 Reply with quote Back to top

Great work you are doing on these ratings sonrises, i find them very interesting.

Why would you penalize someone for entering more tournaments?
That makes no sense to me at all as this would discourage people from entering more tournaments.

The only thing that i would like to see changed is when you get a first round bye and then another opponent forfeits so you win a 5 round tournament it only counts as a 3 round tournament.

The number of points should be determined by the total number of rounds in the tournament, rather then the number of wins it took your team to win the tournament.
cdassak



Joined: Oct 23, 2013

Post   Posted: Jun 18, 2015 - 17:26 Reply with quote Back to top

the_Sage wrote:
Well, personally I think 10 minors is a lot.

What I would do islet the score be modified by tourneys entered, so that someone who enters 5 minors and wins 3 gets more than someone who enters 30 and wins 6. Then again, cinsistency should count for something. Entering and winning a single minor shouldn't discourage coaches from playing more minors that year.

I think something like:
sum of the best N results, divided by the (total attempts/N)
would be good.


That's better Smile
Still, it discourages coaches from ever playing Tier 2 and 3 teams in tourneys, doesn't it?
Kam



Joined: Nov 06, 2012

Post   Posted: Jun 18, 2015 - 17:40 Reply with quote Back to top

anisdrin wrote:
The system is inspired in the ATP ranking.
Every measuring system is subjective but I find this one interesting and promotes participation in tournaments. So thumbs up!
Much more interesting than CR.


CR would be great if only tournament games were taken into account. Actually, that would pretty much be what cdassak's been describing:

Quote:
Agreed but I cant see a way around this. Its tourney rankings, so you have to participate to do well. The rule 'best 10 minors count' is there to normalize the participation factor.
But how can the 'rate of success' factor come to the equation?
Winning 1/1 is better than winning 7/10? So 1/1 should have more points in the rankings???
But then, why should a RRR win with Ogres give the same points as winning one with Orcs?
And so forth...


Both rankings would be complete each other IMHO.

_________________
GLN 17 is out!
Image
sonrises



Joined: May 02, 2013

Post   Posted: Jun 18, 2015 - 17:49 Reply with quote Back to top

Thx a lot to all for your comments. Really nice read for me! Wink

Please, keep pouring opinions, i am really interested on your comments and feedback...as long you keep it nice, clean and polite...like so far!

I am open to fine tune-in the rankings and i have my own ideas too, but i will only do it if i find a person or team that would volunteer to creating a script version of this rankings

TOP25 RANKINGS SCRIPT VERSION 2016 Very Happy Mr. Green Very Happy

if we could go into some auto/ browsable format of the rankings, this would allow for some fine tuning and new features. With my limited resources any changes are out of question. sorry.
So, step forward if you have the skills needed pleeeease!!!

NOTE: ehm...Image designers for badges needed too...

Again, keep posting opinions, i will give my own point of view on some of the points arised later on, count on it. Wink

o/


Last edited by sonrises on Jun 19, 2015 - 23:44; edited 1 time in total
cdassak



Joined: Oct 23, 2013

Post   Posted: Jun 18, 2015 - 17:56 Reply with quote Back to top

Just to summarise: I think the rankings should promote (or at least not discourage) participation and diversity.

_________________
Image
sonrises



Joined: May 02, 2013

Post   Posted: Jun 18, 2015 - 17:58 Reply with quote Back to top

I fully agree cdassak. Wink
anisdrin



Joined: Apr 10, 2009

Post   Posted: Jun 18, 2015 - 18:43 Reply with quote Back to top

Also in this rankings you don't need to win the tournament to get points.
I like it.
sonrises



Joined: May 02, 2013

Post   Posted: Jun 19, 2015 - 01:14 Reply with quote Back to top

Hi,

First of all, thanks for your comments and feedback.

I'd like to share my point of view on some of the aspects brought up in your posts. Feel free to join the discussion. I'd appreciate your feedback and, if you don't mind Wink , borrow your ideas if they match with current resources and with my "subjective" idea of what a tournament ranking should achieve.
I´ll try to be short and concise, but i guess this is going to end up being quite a wall of writing...ouch

Let's start!

PROMOTING PARTICIPATION AND DIVERSITY

Yes. No doubt. Most of us would agree that each tournament has his own flavour. Rookie team tournaments, race specific tournaments, split by TV bands tournaments, all in tournaments...and majors.
So, a tournament ranking should promote all of them.
And i am quite convinced that most people would agree on this point.
The disagreement may come from how much each tournament should weight on the scores. Difficult discussion as it is quite a "subjective" decision.
I am open to discuss it if people is interested but i will not extend further on this point for this post.

INTENSIVE PLAYING IS THE MOST REWARDED ASPECT IN THE CURRENT RANKINGS

I have to disagree on this one. Participation is encouraged as mentioned in the previous point but up to some extend.
In my opinion, i would say that prticipation is the 3rd aspect more rewarded in the rankings right now.
Long runs of wins would come number one and winning tournaments second in my list. Participation 3rd.

LONG RUNS OF WINS: As the rankings are based on a exponential sequence (10-45-90-180-360-720-1200), what it is most rewarded is to win lots of tournament games in a row. Winning an 8 round tournament can not be matched by winning 3 round tournaments, no matter how many of them a coach play.
Besides, a 20 % bonus is given to any tournament that goes beyond 4 rounds. Coaches getting into 5 rounds or further get this bonus, no matter if they win or not the tournament.

WINING TOURNAMENTS: This would come second. Generous bonus are added to tournament winners. A 20% bonus is given for winning most FUMBBL tournaments.
If you match this bonus in % to an exponential sequence, it means that winning the big tournaments (5-6-7-8 rounds) is far more rewarded than winning a 2-3-4 round tournament.

PARTICIPATION. As commented is rewarded. However, minor tournaments impact are limited to a maximum of 10.

Ok. enough for tonight. Feel free to make questions or simply jump in.

o/
sonrises



Joined: May 02, 2013

Post   Posted: Jun 19, 2015 - 17:36 Reply with quote Back to top

Hi,

This has gone quiet sadly Sad ...but let's give it another go! Feel free to join in with opinions.

Let's try to provoke the discussion then Wink

We all agree that all MAJORS should be counted. However, minors and specially the 3 rounds minors are controversial (Brawls & Smacks).

A repeated argument is that to win 10 brawls/smacks is not such an achivement as it is quite likely that a coach that got 10 of these tournies has played many more. Some add to this that smacks/Brawls level of teams/coaches are lower than other tournaments. Ok. Let's test it!

1. LEVEL OF TEAMS/COACHES in 3 round tournaments.

Legend smacks. Only allowed teams of 1900tv or above. This is Major Tournament level for QF,SF and Final. I am lazy to check coaches but many CR Legends around guaranteed. Wink

Elite smacks. 1600-1900 tv. Major standard for the 1 to 4th round except if you are unlucky and find a big boy in the early stages. Legends coaches around too.

Veteran smack. 1300-1600 tv. Quite common you meet one of these teams in the early stages of a Major.

Rookie smack. Below major standard. Legend coaches still around.

Brawl. No tv limit. Just like most majors. So, Major standard.

2. IS WINNING 10 SMACKS/BRAWLS AN ACHIVEMENT?

This is probably quite "subjective". Nevertheless, i'd like to play a bit with numbers and share it Wink
Let's convert winning 10 tournaments into a possible realistic tournament team record.

TEAM A plays 40 Brawls/Smacks a year. He managed to win 10. They need to play 4 tournies to win 1, so 1:4 ratio. Doesn't look impressive! Cool
However, we know that winning a 3 rounds tourney equals to a (3-0) team record. (30-0) team record for those 10 they won. Shocked Shocked That's impressive! Mr. Green
Ok, this is not correct...they played 40 tournies!
so, let's imagine this team actually did as follows:

10 titles (3-0) = 30-0 team record
10 finals (2-1) = 20-10
10 semis (1-1) = 10-10
10 1st R (0-1) = 0-10

Team A won 10 SMACK/BRAWLS. With a 1:4 ratio per tournament entry and a 60-30 (W/L) team record on those tournaments. Is 10-10-10-10 the correct mix? who knows but feel free to make your own mix!! Wink

3. HOW MUCH WINNING 10 SMACKS/BRAWLS WEIGHT IN THE RANKINGS? TOO MUCH?

To decide how much they should weight is at the end a "subjective" decision again.
However, we currently give 54 points for wining one of these 3 rounds tournaments. With the 10 minors limit rule, this equals to a max of 540 pts for the rankings.

In 2511, 540 pts would've secured the 26th position in the rankings.
In 2512, 540 pts would've secured the 27th position in the rankings.
In 2513, 540 pts would've secured the 26th position in the rankings.
In 2514, 540 pts would've secured the 27th position in the rankings.

Outside the TOP25!!!

anyone join the discussion? be my guests please! Wink

o/
Kam



Joined: Nov 06, 2012

Post   Posted: Jun 19, 2015 - 17:43 Reply with quote Back to top

I'm in a rush so more coming later, but I believe your example is flawed. If you take the current ranking for instance, I have 113 points, which is almost half of the points of #25, and my only achievement was to make it to a XFL final. I've had a few more victories that are yet to be counted (a RRR win, plus a few points here and there), which is probably going to take me even closer to the top 25. Yet, I don't think I've done any better than the coaches who have won a major qualifier this year.

_________________
GLN 17 is out!
Image
xnoelx



Joined: Jun 05, 2012

Post   Posted: Jun 19, 2015 - 17:55 Reply with quote Back to top

I'd also suspect that the 10-10-10-10 model is incorrect. I don't know about anyone else, but for me, it would be much more like 30 round 1 losses, 10 round 2 losses, 3 round 3 losses, & 1 win.

_________________
Image Nerf Ball 2014
sonrises



Joined: May 02, 2013

Post   Posted: Jun 19, 2015 - 18:04 Reply with quote Back to top

true! it is flawned and i played a bit with numbers to provoke discussion Mr. Green

ok, Let's analyse your case.

113 pts so that's a (4-1) in an XFL
RRR win (4-0), 108 pts

so, you got 4 wins runs twice. One with rookie team another with a race specific tournament. This would be 221 pts. 42th position in 2515 as of today. In 2514, 221 pts would have secured 68th position at the end of the year.

Let's compare it to winning a Major qualifier. Let's take a (4-0) qualifier. 118 pts.
It is a 4 win run in an all in tournament.

118/221 = .534. So, one 4 wins run in a major equals to 53% of 2 x 4 wins runs in minors.

we agree?

thx kam

O/


Last edited by sonrises on Jun 19, 2015 - 18:51; edited 2 times in total
sonrises



Joined: May 02, 2013

Post   Posted: Jun 19, 2015 - 18:09 Reply with quote Back to top

@xnoelx

i fully agree that 10-10-10-10 is flawned.

But let me take your example and play with it too Mr. Green

30 (0-1)
10 (1-1)
3 (2-1)
1 (3-0)

so 19-44 to win 1 tournament. 54 pts plus 3 finals = 30 pts. 84 pts total.


...and more interesting....63 games to win 1 tournament. so. to win 10, 630 games in a year Shocked .

so, winning 10 smacks or brawls is an achivement? worth 540 pts?

Wink

thx mate

o/
Mossbeard



Joined: Jul 03, 2005

Post   Posted: Jun 19, 2015 - 18:46 Reply with quote Back to top

I don't think teams should be penalized for getting a first round bye or opponent forfeits.

This means getting more points for 2nd, 3rd and 4th then for 1st, which doesn't seem right to me.

I think points should be awarded based on number of rounds in the tournament.


As far as penalizing players for playing more tournaments i don't understand why you would want to do that at all.

Somebody who enters 5 minors and wins 3 should NOT get more than someone who enters 30 and wins 6, MAYBE they should get more then someone who enters 30 and wins 3 but I don't even see the advantage of doing that.
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic