|
|
Member
Posts: 3899
| Pretty good company in the top 50. Congrats to Larry Smith, Pat Cavins, Chris Dombroski, and any other MFer's I missed that made the top 200.
Making this top 200 is no small accomplishment, I believe. I have fished as a co-angler in 3 RCL's the past 2 years, and I only drew 1 pro who is on the list. And he is in the bottom 50. So assuming it is a pretty accurate ranking, I guess I just suck at the draw!
Zach, what/how are the bonus points determined?
Edited by Shep 11/13/2003 10:08 AM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | Bonus points shown were not accurate, they were just something that I was playing with during development, so I removed and will adjust later today. Points for each tournament can be earned a few different ways, for example, by winning a tournament. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Ya' got me confused AGAIN. What happened to the 9th and 10th place. Names have changed. Do you have ESP? Ted was the name on the list that I ? earlier. How did he drop?
Great dialogue. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 120
Location: Devils Lake, ND | I see some what of a flaw in the design, but before I get to that, I need to get one thing clear. No matter what type of system you come up with, there is no way tht Johnnie Candle could be in the top 25, I just haven't fished that good.
Now that we know this is not me whining, it seems that if a pro could fish 3 tournaments a year on bodies of water that he/she feels they will do well at, and they do compete well, then this angler is higher in the rankings.
There should be a way that anglers are rewarded for fishing situations they do not like. For leaving home more often. Let's face it, the more tournaments you fish, the better chance you have of performing poorly in a few.
If an angler fished the east division of the PWT the past two years, they would have had only one tourney not on the great lakes. This angler could have been from OH or MI and took a chance to go out west to compete in more evetns and not done well. If he was concerned about his world ranking, he/she just made a big mistake. Looks like to get a high ranking, an angler should pick three tournaments that they can do well at and leave it at that.
I love the concept of the ranking system, and for the most part it seems pretty close. I feel proud to be in the top 200, and I do hope to move up. I am sure that sponsors will be made aware of this and it will be used to track professionals. It is in the Bass world.
I just dont agree with the guy at the ramp that tells me he limits out everytime he fishes, yet when asked how many days he spends fishing his answer is three. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Zach,
You asked for comments. Always be careful what you ask for 
Up front, I want to applaud you and anyone else responsible for this painstaking and demanding venture. I can only guess on the amount of hours and sleepless nights that went into this. I’m sure that more sleepless nights are ahead while you defend your premise concerning the ranking system. I have a few comments and questions. Understand that they are not taken lightly and do not reflect distaste or animosity toward your efforts. They are only intended to give you a “heads up” on the types of questions already being asked and to spark conversation with my peers.
I was very surprised to see some names so low on the list like Gary Roach (172), Mike Peluso 169), Bruce Samson (73).
It looks like the championships are weighted more than regular tournaments. I understand your reasoning but do not necessarily agree with your conclusion. Because you include the results of those who make the championship(s) and they are rated by their performance at these, makes the outcome(s) already weighted. You’re putting double emphasis on that one outcome. Does my analogy make sense? Those who make the championship(s) get rated on something that others do not get rated on, thus it’s weighted already?
It would be interesting to compare your results with the money earned by each of these individuals. Have you ever done this? You state that in walleye tournament fishing, the primary goals are as follows: To win the tournament, to finish in the money, and to qualify for the championship. The WWR model mimics these goals, and rewards for all three. With this model, wouldn’t just using the earnings of the anglers reach the same conclusion? It would be interesting to compare.
A comment was made on WC that indicated that the PWT was weighted more than the RCL. Is this true? If so, what’s the rationale?
My last comment is a repeat of the one I made prior to the release of the standings. I would think that the person who does both tournament series should receive some kind of bonus points. It a grueling schedule that does not allow that individual the ability to sit on a lake prior to a major tournament. It also prevents them from only fishing home/pet lakes. Your thought?
We have all heard people in the ranks asking for a TRUE national championship. I can see the day when your ranking system could/would be used for an invite to a very prestigious event. Congratulations on the vision. I bet it took guts and fortitude to post the results.
I noticed that your terms of use policy states: “Portions of the rankings or leaderboard data may be reproduced with permission from Walleye FIRST via an RSS feed or XML web service. I guess that I was the first person in recorded history to break the terms of this agreement because I posted top ten yesterday on WC without prior permission. Sorry! Please don’t sue It won’t happen again, really.
Edited by Sunshine 11/13/2003 12:47 PM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | After submitting the above post, I noticed and read Johnnie Candle's post. Although I disagree with his humble comments on his ranking, I concur with all of his other ideas.
He eloquently stated one of my concerns and did a better job of it. Thanks for posting Johnnie. Hope to see your presence on this board.
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2680
Location: Essexville, MI./Saginaw Bay. | I am sure that sponsors will be made aware of this and it will be used to track professionals. It is in the Bass world.
Edited by walleye express 11/13/2003 12:39 PM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Hey Dan,
You have great insight. If I made the top 100, I would certainly make sure that my sponsors were aware of it.
Edited by Sunshine 11/13/2003 12:44 PM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | Lots of questions here, which is a good thing. We realize we are "putting ourselves out there" by developing this system. We want to have this thing questioned ... we are not afraid to make adjustments to improve it's accuracy. Expect a few adjustments to the model between now and the beginning of tournament season as this thing undergoes public scrutiny, and weaknesses are brought to light and subsequently addressed through changes in the calculation. And, although the position of the top 5 or 6 looks to be very secure regardless of the adjustments made, if you rank lower than 7th or so, assume that your rank will shift around a bit as we make our changes prior to the beginning of the 2004 tournament season.
Johnny I agree with your points about the tournament frequency. I just finished an email conversation with Rick Olson regarding the same issue (oh yeah, I alo fixed a major screw up in one of his tournament finishes).
We are working on an adjustment for the system which addresses that issue. We hope to have it done by Sunday. During the development of the system we played around with a number of things to address this. The most interesting one was a coefficient based upon the mileage difference between your home zip code and the zip code of the tournament waters you fished. It produced some pretty goofy results.
Zach |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2680
Location: Essexville, MI./Saginaw Bay. | I cuncur Dennis. This may have the effect to spin off the intended train of thought this post was intened for and I'll try and remove and repost it if the time hasn't ran out. Your a smart man.
Edited by walleye express 11/13/2003 12:49 PM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | Dennis, concerning your question regarding the top 10, yes, the top ten we posted yesterday incorrectly based on an old version of our bonus point structure. We adjusted it and the top 10 changed ever so slightly.
Regarding some of your other questions, let me look through the data and think about them a bit.
Overall I am very happy with how the system has assigned points. There are a few individual situations that concern me, and we are working on ways to address those.
Keep the feedback coming.
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1656
| Zach, I like the system and I like how you're handleing the scrutiny.....Now for my 2 cents, if you have room in your piggy bank. 
Like Dennis pointed out, I question the merit of Championship tournaments mainly the PWT but also the RCL to a more limited extent. To me it seems that if you qualify you get points based on your explaination. But it also seems you enjoy a benefit that others don't. While it can hurt you to some degree it is minimal compared to the reward gained for having fished a championship.
In a nut shell, it seems there is weight given for qualifing (which is good), but it also seems there is more weight given for fishing a championship. A reduncy if you will.
Looking forward to seeing the system tweeked and watch it work through the up-coming season. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | Dennis, I start with the easy questions first, one at a time. Gary Roach. One of the greatest anglers of all time and a pioneer in the industry. In tournament fishing over the past 2 years he has one money finish out of 11 tries. Take the same 2 year slice in the 80's and 90's and the result would be much different. So, the ranking is a reflection of the past 2 years only. Average the results in with his entire career and maybe one of the best over a lifetime. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | Championship qualifying. A champ tournament has a higher possible point value than a qualifier. No extra points are given for making the championship, only for fishing it. Ex. a 5th place finish in the champ is worth more than a 5th in a qualifier, but not a significantly more. I believe the pwt top gun uses champ points in the same way. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Okay, one more time and then I'll shut up and sit back to listen to other views.....................
Zach,
Again, I ask why should a 5th place finish in the championship be worth more than a 5th in a qualifier. Why are you putting more value on that one event vs. 6 others? If an angler does well there they are already being rewarded without the added weight. Their average performance ranking would go up without the added weight. Wouldn't it??? Conversely, you’re punishing the angler who has a bad day at the championship because their poor performance counts more in the ranking. Is this deliberate?
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 389
| Wahooooo! I made the top 200! Ok, I'm doing the walleye dance here...very excited. LOL
Just one question...how does my bratty "big brother", jerry, finish above me when he only fished 6 and I fished way more than him in the past two years?
Ok, I know I flopped in some...but really..jerry???? Come on..I have to finish above him. LOL I'll never hear the end of it now. ugh.
Thanks Zach, for all your hard work. It's a neat idea.
Juls |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | Juls, I would feel very proud to make the top 200. There were many more eligible anglers than that. It will be fun to watch you move up through the rankings.
The first 3 tournaments that will fall off for you next year will be an 88, 143, and a 131. What a great opportunity. If you replace those with top 35's you will rocket up in the standings.
Zach |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 389
| Thanks Zach,
I'll do my best to do just that!
Juls
p.s. I wasn't being a smarty pants in my earlier post...I actually DID do the walleye dance when I saw my name on the list. Ok, I know you don't know what the walleye dance is, but let's just say, it's pretty goofy. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1656
| Juls,
Does that walleye dance look similar to the Elaine dance from seinfeld? |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | One thing I would like to add, if you click on your name in the listing, you can access your two-year summary. These are the finishes that your rank is based upon. Review carefully for any errors. If you find one, please contact us immediately at [email protected] or call Zach Boudreau at 507-895-7510. I have encountered 2 errors today alone which have been corrected.
Thanks,
Zach |
|
| |
|
|
Hey Jerry, how much money did you win for that 18th place at the Detroit River?
And Juls, you fished 12 tournaments? Thats alot! |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2567
Location: Manitowoc, WI | LOLOLOLOL....:)))) I OWN YOU, JULS!!!!! I'm looking at this for the first time as I've been up in a tree holding on for dear life for the last day, due to this wind. These rankings are very interesting. I'm proud to see my name on this list with all these great walleye fisherman....even Juls!!!!! Thank goodness I am ranked ahead of her. Yes, Juls, you will not live this down!!!
18th place at Detroit River paid $5,000 if I remember correctly, Rick. |
|
| |
|
|
Cha-Ching! |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Zach,
I have another nonjudgmental question for ya'
You indicate that the ranking is a two year average. What happens to the young/new guy/gal that is just starting out. If they were lucky/proficient enough to do well their first year would they not make the list because they do not have a two year track record?
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 49
Location: sheboygan,wisconsin | I think the two year format is perfect and remember you have to start somewhere,the creme always rises to the top give it time.No matter what
time frame you would use someone could say why three years, why not five, why not ten |
|
| |
|
Location: Rhinelander | We will have something for the rookie, too. Zach is working on how to present the data overall for that catagory. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 3899
| Seems as thought this topic is getting more play time on WC. Just thought I'd bring it to the top again. I am feeling fiesty today! You know what that means, Steve! |
|
| |
|
|
"Poof", and those fiesty posts just vanish! LOL!
But more to the point, this ranking may become important to sponsors someday...soon. But at the moment, the more serious thinkers among us have come to a quick conclusion about its uselessness. My bet is these naysayers will be dead wrong on their assessment.
WWR makes for great entertainment and am enjoying it immensely!
Edited by Rick Larson 11/18/2003 3:45 PM
|
|
| |
|
| I think a person's ranking could be potentially a significant tool in working with his sponsors.
Rankings are going to cause ripples, no matter how done, unless all variable are eliminated. That will never happen, of course.
Looking at those Rankings....I'd still take Perry Good as one of my top 5 choices for a team member if I was wanting a high money finish.
|
|
| |
|
Location: Rhinelander | T-Mac,
I am pretty sure the rankings will become a 'standard' many will follow as the season progresses and the data is added for the new events as the old fall off. This is a great tool to honestly compare performance and consistency, and give those who quietly have been performig in the upper level when compared to their peers, with no coverage whatsoever. The WWR will change that, for good. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | T-mac, an interesting stat I threw in there in the power factor. It is an indication of the person's affinity for the top 10. The higher the percentage, the more of a factor top ten finishes are in their overall game. Kind of an interesting list. It just goes to show you that a list can say alot of different things, it just depends from what angle you look at it.
I have alot of stats like this in the can that we will be releasing throughout the winter.
1 Bruce Samson 8.10%
2 Todd Riley 7.80%
3 Perry Good 7.70%
4 John Kolinski 7.50%
5 Tommy Skarlis 7.40%
6 Gary Gray 7.20%
7 Pete Harsh 7%
8 Keith Kavajecz 6.80%
9 Dan Stier 6.70%
10 Dan Plautz 6.20%
11 Daryl Christensen 5.30%
12 Tom Backer 5.20%
13 John Gillman 5.10%
14 Jamie Friebel 5%
15 Jim Klick 5%
16 Shannon Kehl 4.70%
17 Dave Kraft 4.60%
18 Jeff Russell 4.20%
19 RICK WALTER 4.10%
20 Bill Peter 4%
21 Brad Davis 4%
22 Andrew Kuffer 3.90%
23 Robert Crow 3.90%
24 Charlie Johnson 3.80%
25 Gerrick McComsey 3.80%
26 Gary Parsons 3.70%
27 Carl Grunwaldt 3.60%
28 Tom Keenan 3.40%
29 Scott Allar 3.20%
30 Mike Gofron 3.20%
31 John Campbell 3.10%
32 John Butts 3%
33 Kim Papineau 2.80%
34 Bill Ortiz 2.70%
35 Scott Fairbairn 2.50%
36 Rick Zachowski 2.50%
37 Eric Olson 2.40%
38 Bob Hanson 2.40%
39 Eric Naig 2.30%
40 Mark Christianson 2.30%
41 Joe Wilson 2.30%
42 DAROLD SWANK 2.10%
43 Todd Macy 2.10%
44 Richard Boggs 2%
45 Rick Nascak 2%
46 Gil Mollet 2%
47 Tim Reitan 2%
48 Troy Morris 1.90%
49 Mark Martin 1.90%
50 JERRY HEIN 1.80%
51 Richard Franklin 1.80%
52 Wally Luoma 1.80%
53 Ross Grothe 1.70%
54 Rick Olson 1.70%
55 Ernie Olson 1.70%
56 Steve Lamb 1.60%
57 John Hertensteiner1.60%
58 Aaron McQuoid 1.60%
59 Rick Cole 1.60%
60 Mark Sak 1.50%
61 Royce Drye 1.30%
62 Rick McLaughlin1.30%
63 Mark Brumbaugh 1.20%
64 Will Lage 1.20%
65 John Bergsma 1.10%
66 Ronald Gazvoda 1.10%
|
|
| |
World Walleye Ranking Thoughts