[archiver]

Posted by mike aubry.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]


Engineer on team #47, Chiefs, from Pontiac Central.

Posted on 9/5/99 2:06 PM MST


In Reply to: Seeding Calculations posted by Joe Johnson on 8/28/99 8:23 PM MST:



Joe and many others -
Sorry I joined the conversation late, but I have been thinking that maybe seeding
could be revised such that scoring (offensive points scored) would only be one factor
that would contribute to the seeding calculation. As I see it, scoring should be very,
very, easy for everyone to figure out as the game progresses along toward the final
seconds. I think that is the only way the spectators that are not as involved as some
of us lunatics will ever be able to understand the score. Every game that I have ever
seen relied on a relatively simple scoring system. Examples include: Baseball (1 score
for every person crossing home plate) Soccer and Ice Hockey(1 score for every ball or puck that
goes into the goal) Football (Touchdown equals 6 pts, extra point 1 or 2 depending on
if kicked or carried over the goal line, 3 pts for a field goal) Basketball (2 or 3 points when
the ball goes thru the hoop, 1 point for each free throw) Enough of that - you guys already
understand. Now, this is where it gets tricky! Winning a game is recorded as a win, loss, or
tie. Rankings are developed using formulas that include many variables. (Ignoring the most
obvious type - personal favorite) Seeding is just like rankings. Seeding can be a combination
of factors that include things such as: average offensive score, average defensive score, points
given for beating a higher ranked team, points taken away by losing to a lower ranked team, etc.
But whatever the seeding or ranking is determined by - as long as everyone knows the formula
at the start of the season I'm sure we will all be able to adapt. The conversation can still be
stimulating discussing the possibilities though! I do not understand the necessity to create
a scoring system that requires a calculator, mathematician, and statistician to be able to determine
the outcome of a game. You can have the multipliers for seeding factors, I say that if you want to get
the common persons attention - Keep the scoring simple ! That has always been my motto!
Seeding on the other hand can be developed to encourage or discourage offense or defense, as
well as, winning and not winning. Make as complicated algorithm as needed to - but I think the
2 issues need to addressed independently. I would develop tha seeding algorithm simularly to either
PJ's or Joe J's that were shared elsewhere. I think the issue is one of gaining a better method that
we feel will lead to a more accurate ranking, and that all depends on what one wants to weigh heavier
in the mathematical equation. That's my thoughts, I welcome others!
Thanks, Mike