Mongoose wrote:
I am still of the opinion that league stats are the least biased measure of how good your opponents are. I also feel that a better stat on the league stats page would be your average finish instead of the average league points.
Average finish would be a simple calculation that would tell you the strength of your opponents. It would be calculated by assigning 1 point for each 1st place finish, 2 points for each second and so on. Add all the points up and divide by the total number of leagues played and you will have a useful statistic. A perfect score would be 1.0 while the worst would be 8.0 and the true average would be 4.5.
I sampled a few players and made the calculation.
The top 5 league winners were all around 2.6 to 3.0 while I did calculate DBurke to be at an amazing 1.8. This number could even be used as a parameter for challenge leagues.
Opinins please!!
While I like the idea of using league stat's, there are problems in doing so. As I mentioned in another post in this thread, league stat's are not a cumulative record like the regular ones; they are only based on the past two years of play. That's not a particularly large window for data, when you consider the most senior members of the site have been around 10 years or more. Second, some players don't play leagues at all, so it would be impossible to rank them. Third, and more serious, the league stat's have been broken for a long time with data on games not being properly saved. If data is unreliable your rankings will be invalid.
regards,
markrendl |
Donate
Leagues
Gonzaga
Blue Max
Cartagena
Wooden Ships...
King Me!
VampiRing
