|
|
Member
Posts: 49
Location: sheboygan,wisconsin | any news on the team ranking yet |
|
| |
|
| ttt |
|
| |
|
| wondering also if there is news yet
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 84
Location: townsend,wi | also wondering? next week or when????? |
|
| |
|
| ttt |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 84
Location: townsend,wi | Zach any idea when???????????????? |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | The only thing we can promise is that it will be before the first team tournament of 2004 in March. Still working through some issues on the team scoring. It is being developed in parallel with the World Muskie Rankings so they should both come out around the same time. I will tell you that our initial test runs of the team rankings have produced some pretty interesting results.
Zach |
|
| |
|
|
Are the smaller, say less than 50 entrant events also included? Or maybe better to ask, what is the qualifications to have an event counted? |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 49
Location: sheboygan,wisconsin | thanks zach for the update my thinking is the team ranking have to be a nightmare to figure out |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | Rick, you just defined the very issue we are working through, we are evaluating a million different options on that one.
Right we are leaning toward a type of minimum entrant option, so a circuit may be included in the ranking, but if a tournament within that circuit does not meet the minimum entrant number then the event will not be counted. Just what that number should be is the main question. Obviously the MWC is the benchmark circuit in this ranking, so all other tournament will be curved against it in one way or another. If we were ranking only 2 or 3 circuit of similar size this would be a piece of cake.
The question is this; what is a win worth in a 50 boat tournament relative to a win in the MWC? What is a 2nd place, 5th, 10th, worth? If I fish a 30 boat circuit over a wide geographic area, win 2 of them and place in the top 5 in the other 3, how does that stack up against someone finishing in the money in every MWC tournament? What are everyone's thoughts on these scenarios? Do you just superimpose the distribution of the larger tournament over the smaller one? 1st place in a 50 boat tourney is worth 4th in a 200? 2nd is worth 8th?
Geo you're right, the variables in the team ranking quadruple when compared to the pro ranking, mainly due to the wide disparities in tournament sizes and circuit locations, as well as the team vs individual aspect. What we don't want to do is rush this out and have something that does not represent reality, so we are covering all the bases and looking at every option.
Zach
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 49
Location: sheboygan,wisconsin | I for one am glad you are doing it and very glad to see so much thought goes into it,all bashers on the ranking should think about that!I for one do not think a first place finish in a 50 team tourament equals a fourth place finish in a 200 team tourament not even close but that's why i think this would be so hard to figure out |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | Thanks Geo, I agree. This conversation has made me think of another option that I hadn't even thought of before. I'll be testing it tonight.
Zach |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Zach,
None of us can even imagine the hours and scenarios that you are going through. Accolades on the attempt.
A few thoughts...........
A characteristic that sponsors look for on application forms concerning team tournaments is if it has a championship. It appears that in this industry many put more value into a series with a culminating activity. You may want to consider this as a prerequisite for admitting team data in.
I would think that one weighting system that you could use would involve using the number of participants in a given tournament as a value to the assigned place. Let me explain. If a tournament has 100 people participating, then the first place team would receive 100 points and the second place team would receive 99 and so forth...... This way a tournament with 300 participants would automatically receive 3 times the weight as one with 100 participants and 6 times the weight as one with 50. That would sound fair to me.
Are you only using data from tournament series or are you also using data from individual events like the Mercury Nationals?
You don’t have to answer this one, but I would imagine that it would be quite difficult to make sure that you have all information from around the entire country. I’m sure that once this grading system is accepted the chore will become much easier with tournament directors wanting to get their info to you.
My hats off to you for tasking on such a big job. Keep a positive attitude and remember that that regardless of what you come out with not everyone will be happy.
It’s always easy to criticize the driver of the train from the caboose.
Edited by Sunshine 1/22/2004 2:12 PM
|
|
| |
|
|
My opinion is fishing an entire circuit should have higher weighting. The extra challenge here is the participants will have to fish out of their element in completeing it. Vs A team who may elect to just fish the waters they are most familiar with.
Do agree the number of entrants should be in play, with maybe the entry fee playing a part in the weighting.
Somehow you must qualify the events, but don't think that the size of the tournament should be involved as winning a small tournament will not count for many points anyway.
Man, now that you opened it up for us to comment, I could go on and on and on! LOL
Edited by Rick Larson 1/22/2004 2:10 PM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 129
| I would like to commend Zach on his work with the first ranking (individual) and for the team ranking that he is currently working on. It sounds like an overwhelming task!
I doubt that you will ever come up with a "fair" (meaning fair in everone's mind) way to accomplish the team ranking, mainly because there are so many team circuits. To determine how each differing circuit's events are valued would be tricky, at best. I agree with several other's view that a small circuit win should carry less "weight" than the undoubted top team circuit-the MWC.
That being said, what if a smaller circuit tourney was held the week before, or the day before, or better yet, the same day as a larger circuit on the same body of water? And what if the winning weight in the "lesser" circuit was good enough to win or place very high in the "greater" circuit?
Not trying to be critical of the process (hope it didn't sound that way), but really trying to expound on the complexity of what Zach has undertaken. His head must be spinning! Mine is! Interested in seeing what he comes up with.
Tim
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1406
| Sunshine I like your point system. Why would a smaller field of teams be less value than a larger venue? I would think they should be equal. How would this fair in the championships then when these smaller events still maintain that competative level. Weather or not your up against the best of the best or the local boys shouldn't matter. Your there and your competing, so I think the size shouldn't matter. At least thats what I keep telling the wife anyway!!!
Good Luck
Tyee |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 49
Location: sheboygan,wisconsin | size does matter what odds do you like 1 in 50 or 1 in 200 also you would have to take into account two day vs one touraments not an easy task |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1406
| Geo, I couldn't convince the wife either! My point is, its competition and someone has to win. What the odds are shouldn't make a difference when figuring out the best of the best! The complications come in to play when your addressing a championship event when the field is smaller. I believe these events are weighted differently anyway but still should be figured in. I can see a grand national event someday from all circuits when the best of the best compete call it a pro bowl if ya will. I like better odds personally but wouldn't want to be discounted from the standings because I wasn't in a big tournament. I would love the opportunity to compete against some of the best in a small event if ever I am fortunate enough!
Good Luck
Tyee |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 49
Location: sheboygan,wisconsin | you right but you have to some how take into account the size of the field
and as far as the championships going with a smaller field you earned your way
there and maybe should recieve bonus points for all of them only a thought I will leave all of that to zach he did a great job with the first one I will except how ever he would sort this out |
|
| |
|
|
Oh yes, thats right geo. 2 day tournaments are worth 2ce as much as 1 day'ers!  |
|
| |
|
| zach I think making the championship in your circuit should be bonus points and also good finishes in a championship should be big bonus. A top 5 finsh in a mwc should be worth four times what a top five finish in a wwa because there is 4 times the boats. Thanks for working hard on this zach were all eager thats all. |
|
| |
|
| Instead of having a 1st for a large event be worth more than a smaller event.Maybe concentration should be put on finishes other than 1st. a 10th place finish in a large tournament should not be rated the same as a 10th in a smaller. Maybe you should look at the way the MWC is copmaring the Central the the East division when it comes to figuiring out who wins the Team Challenge. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 240
Location: La Crescent, MN | thanks for the feedback paul |
|
| |
