@wizmark hey how are things going?
G40 League House Rule project
-
Thank you -
You did see the spreadsheet to download, right? Those are the “final results” for 2011.I did not see that, thanks for pointing it out.
-
Tyzoq IS way ahead in TUV at the expense of having almost no tech. so my TUV is really a lot closer, and also the total TUV in the game right now is 3,869 Axis - 2,973 Allies. I don’t know how much the tech actually pumps up my TUV but it’s probably considerable, say 300-400 IPC. then you are only looking at a spread of 15-20% maybe. allies have 22 techs (3 are russian, whos capital is in Axis hands) and the Axis has 4 techs.
Always helps to hear both sides of the story!
19 to 4 tech disparity - that definitely makes up for a chunk of the TUV disparity.I stand behind my rankings that result in 8 points for Tyzoq. Of course Dutchman’s going to talk him up, Dutch you’re the only “statement win” that Tyzoq had last year! :-) :-)
At 5-1 with only 1 win against a very successful player, you shouldn’t be ranked extremely high - so I stand by my system. :-) In other words, I believe a player could be much better than his ranking on the point system indicates. You have to prove it, for the points to come!Don’t get me wrong - I appreciated your post, DD, and hope you continue to comment on this thread from time to time.
Our league is a bit like college football. Everybody doesn’t play everybody else on a schedule like in Professional sports. Also, a “season” may only be 8-12 games. Most players could beat most other players given the right circumstances, so there are “upsets”. The point ranking system isn’t perfect (you should always be able to find over or under-rated players, as in College FB), but I’ve already seen it gives us insights that we wouldn’t have without it.
-
At 5-1 with only 1 win against a very successful player, you shouldn’t be ranked extremely high - so I stand by my system.
I just wanted to make sure it’s clear that I appreciate the work you’ve done. And I do not have any problems with your system. I apologize if I came across as though I did. Like I said I do not feel in anyway that I am as good as Zhukov, Dutchman, Lucky Lindy, Rising Dragon, etc.
PS. Thanks for the comment Dutchman.
-
I just wanted to make sure it’s clear that I appreciate the work you’ve done. And I do not have any problems with your system. I apologize if I came across as though I did. Like I said I do not feel in anyway that I am as good as Zhukov, Dutchman, Lucky Lindy, Rising Dragon, etc.
Oh, no, I didn’t take it that way - thanks for making sure.
-
Thanks for all the info Gamerman. Good stuff!
Boldfresh jumps from #8 to #5. This is Exhibit A for the merit of the strength of schedule point ranking system. Look at the details of his results. 10 games played against Tier 1 players. 11 games vs. Tier 2 players. Only 5 against Tier 3 players.
I think another reason Bold jumped up, is just in the number of games played. With the exception of OBG and Soul, Bold doubled the amount of games played by any other player. I think that is another reason why Tyzoq dropped, its not necessarily due to the quality of opponent as it is he was only able to finish 6 games. Infact Tyzoq is the highest rated player of anyone with less than 10 games.
Assuming you maintain a winning percentage of over 50% and only play tier 2 players. It will always be to your advantage to play more and more games. You gain 2 for a win but lose 2 for a loss, but as long as you win over 50%, it pays to play more and more games. If you play 20 games and go 11-9, you’ll end up with 4 pts, if you play 40 and have the same win% (22-18) you end up with 8 pts. Both players have a 55% but I’m not sure player 2 is better.
I suppose you could argue it is harder to win 22 games (out of 40) against tier 2 players than it is to win just 11 (out of 20) from tier 2.I’m wondering if you considered dividing pts by games played to come with with a players average pts per game?
I think a lot of this has to do with some relatively small samples and I think you even mentioned you had trouble rating players with only a few games.
Also note, I’m not criticising the ranking of Bold, I just used him b/c he played the most games. Bold is infact a really good player and worthy of a jump in the rankings.
Not to get too stats-y, but to steal from Baseball and something like wins above replacement, I think the fact that OBG went 11-11 and yet still had positve pts shows he’s played slightly higher than avg players.
For example if you use tier 2 (since its the avg of tier 1 and 3) as the base line you can look at your numbers:
Gamerman 12-1 and assume you had only played tier 2 you’d be at 22 pts. But your total is 21. 1 below replacement (or -1) Meaning you may not have played the strongest schedule.
Dutchman 8-2 would be at 12 pts (tier 2), but ended up with 14. +2 or 2 above replacement.
Billy 6-5 would be 2 pts but ended with 7. +5 above replacement, signifying he played a strong schedule and did well.
Tyzoq 5-1 = 8 pts but and 8. Meaning he played an average schedule.
Bold 15-11 = 8 pts but had 10. Confirms he played a tough schedule.Intersting stuff. I think I could go on all day. lol!
Please note, I’m not critising your rankings, but I’m numbers junkie as well, just looking at different ways to use your numbers. 8-)
-
I’m wondering if you considered dividing pts by games played to come with with a players average pts per game?
Good question - yes, I did. While it’s possible to gain more points by playing more games, I still don’t think playing more games is really a big advantage. Comparing Bold and Tyzoq is logical, because Tyzoq had 6 games completed, and Bold had 26.
But notice that Bold has 10 points and Tyzoq 8! They are locked up in a 50 round game - is that not evenly matched? I admit my system is somewhat simplistic, but I think it’s better than the BCS at least! :-)
Put another way, based on my point ranking system, I doubt that if Tyzoq played 26 games against a balanced variety of players that he would go 22-4. Based on his comments above, I think he would agree.
In my opinion, the fact that Bold and Tyzoq have close to the same # of points even though Bold played 26 and Tyzoq only played 6 is a testament to the effectiveness of my simple system. :-)
-
Of course Dutchman’s going to talk him up, Dutch you’re the only “statement win” that Tyzoq had last year! :-) :-)
Hey, I’ll say this, in the the two recorded loses I had this season in the league, I got the holy hell kicked out of me, and it had nothing to do with dice. Props Bold and Tyzok, who are every bit as skilled as I am at this hobby of ours.
-
Sometimes a player’s style/strategy matches up well against another’s. Don’t you think?
-
I admit my system is somewhat simplistic, but I think it’s better than the BCS at least! :-)
AMEN to that!!! Way better than the BCS :-D
-
Standings attached
3 games recorded -
Updated
-
Updated
-
Updated
-
Updated
SouL on top! -
Updated
SouL on top!That was my Christmas present to him. He won’t be there too long I predict :wink:
-
I earned that present! …with ridiculous dicings :)
-
:-)
-
Updated
SouL and Darth lead with 5 points each -
I have a quick question.
At some point are you going to reallocate how many pts you get per win (over each player)?
I’ll use us as an example. I got 3 pts for beating you, but should I? You are currently 0-1 (which would be a 1 pt victory for the current year). I know you are taking 2011 results into account, but players will technically be moving up and down between the 1-3 pt levels (at least for the current year). At some point are you going to switch over and just base things on 2012 or keep using cumulative results for pts? But even then people may be moving up/down in levels.
If so, I’d suggest maybe just adding a column (2011 record) after the pts column. So you can at least see a quick glance of why someone was worth a certain amount of pts for victory. I’m too lazy to click tabs. Lol! Maybe have the 2011 record column then a total record column??Essentially getting something like:
2012 record / 2012 pts / 2011 record / 2011 pts / total record / total pts
The 2011 values would be fixed since we completed that last year but the 2012 values would fluctuate as more people finish games and people move up and down the standings. (total would fluctuate too due to 2012 changes). Then 2012 would become fixed at the end of the year.
This is one of the reasons we did away with our old scoring system (more pts for beating better players) because it got to be too much micro management in that players throughout the year will move up and down in standings and pt value. Meaning everytime a player dropped a level or moved up a level you had to recalculate pts for every player that played that person.
Just some thoughts.
-
These rankings are unofficial, and subjective.
3) I will post my subjective point rankings, which are designed to reflect strength of opponents. (Because players can choose to play who-ever, and there is no schedule)
Here is the methodology for the point rankings:
1)Â I will consider the 2012 and 2011 league standings in determining quality of wins/losses from 2012 league results.
2)Â I will divide all league participants into 3 tiers, based on past records (2012, 2011)
3) I will award points for wins. 3 points against top tier, 2 points against mid-tier, and 1 point against lower tier.
   I will deduct points for losses. 1 point against top tier, 2 points against mid-tier, and 3 points against lower tier.Note that your point rankings will change not only when you complete a game, but they could change up or down if you or your past opponents move up or down tiers.
I do not plan to change the point ranking system during the year, but will consider suggestions or comments for improvement for subsequent years.
To reiterate, this ranking thread is for fun, and nothing else. Enjoy.
Selected parts of my original post.
Here is what I am doing:
I am counting the COMBINED TOTAL of 2011 and 2012 results.
For this very reason that you have listed. I am not a lower tier opponent. I lost one game this year and have not recorded any wins yet. But considering 2011 together with 2012 gives us the best picture of the strength of a player.
Recalculations are a necessity at times but will not happen terribly often. I can recalculate point totals when a player moves up or down a tier in a matter of minutes, especially because I’m tracking all results in a matrix.
Thanks for the input - I asked for input like yours for consideration for future years (I’m not going to change methods midstream)
So just accept your moment of glory on top of the standings and quit trying to argue your points down! :lol:
Suggested Topics
