Warrior General Games

Alpha
Rank Prv Chng Team ……………………… Rank Pts ….. Wins
1 4 3 Amsterdam 49ers ……………….. 90.4560 … 3
2 3 1 Maranello Enzos ……………………. 78.4142 … 2
3 2 -1 Belfast Terror ………………….. 76.2039 … 4
4 5 1 Western Europe Wildcats ………….. 75.8802 … 3
5 1 -4 Dublin Irishmen ………………….. 71.3376 … 3
6 7 1 London Hitmen ………………….. 70.2328 … 3
7 6 -1 Hollywood Warren Brotherhood ……… 68.9481 … 4
8 9 1 Dresden Warlords ……………….. 59.6539 … 2
9 10 1 Cork Rebels …………………… 58.6071 … 1
10 8 -2 Birmingham Beavers ………………. 51.1075 … 2
11 11 0 Reykjavik Vikings ………………. 37.6857 … 1
12 12 0 Jellystone Park Bruins …………… 34.0022 … 1
13 13 0 Sinsheim MC Airs ……………… 29.7118 … 0
14 14 0 Roman Revolution ……………….. 25.6791 … 1
15 16 1 Barcelona Jokers …………………. 11.7448 … 0
16 15 -1 Chocolate City P-Funk All-Stars …….. 11.3236 … 0

Beta
Rank Prv Chng Team ………………. Rank Pts …… Wins
1 1 0 Chernobyl Neutrons ………………. 98.9474 … 4
2 5 3 Bjelasnica Red Star …………………. 76.1685 … 3
3 2 -1 Cannes Porn Producers ………….. 74.3513 … 4
4 3 -1 Zurich Scorpions ………………. 67.5072 … 3
5 11 6 Eastwick Savages …………….. 63.3515 … 2
6 8 2 Hawaii Bulls ……………… 62.7619 … 3
7 4 -3 Greenville Badgers …………….. 61.8394 … 3
8 6 -2 Siena IL PALIO ……………….. 58.6835 … 3
9 7 -2 Wildcat Spartans ……………. 57.8809 … 3
10 10 0 Normandy Invasion ……………. 48.4954 … 1
11 9 -2 Wolverhampton Wolverines ………… 46.4195 … 2
12 12 0 Edinburgh Knights …………….. 45.1222 … 2
13 13 0 Berlin Blitzkrieg ……………. 36.0599 … 1
14 14 0 Trojan Magnums ………………. 33.7090 … 0
15 15 0 Erie Barhoppers …………….. 32.3169 … 0
16 16 0 Brasilia Rockets …………… 20.5359 … 0

I still have more work to do on the formatting... I copy right from the spreadsheet.

Also, the numbers are the current ranking, previous ranking, and change between this week and last week. So a positive number is a move up the chart, negative is a move down the list, and a 0 is no change

2 3 1 Maranello Enzos ……………………. 78.4142 … 2
3 2 -1 Belfast Terror ………………….. 76.2039 … 4

Does your system not take in to effect for W/L and head to head meetings???? I apologize if you have answered this already. Just curious.

Its a tried and trusted sacred method ...Thanks again cherrie

Originally posted by Dante929
2 3 1 Maranello Enzos ……………………. 78.4142 … 2
3 2 -1 Belfast Terror ………………….. 76.2039 … 4

Does your system not take in to effect for W/L and head to head meetings???? I apologize if you have answered this already. Just curious.

Shhhh!!! I like it the way it is lol

Originally posted by Noic08Q
Originally posted by Dante929

2 3 1 Maranello Enzos ……………………. 78.4142 … 2
3 2 -1 Belfast Terror ………………….. 76.2039 … 4

Does your system not take in to effect for W/L and head to head meetings???? I apologize if you have answered this already. Just curious.

Shhhh!!! I like it the way it is lol

It does, but it also (specially this early in the season) relies on points scored and points given up, so if you have played some not so great teams and scored a bunch of teams your numbers will look better than others... Belfast has had some QUALITY opponents where maranello has had some easier wins... no worries, time cures all... even cherries rankings...

Originally posted by nate3713
Originally posted by Noic08Q

Originally posted by Dante929


2 3 1 Maranello Enzos ……………………. 78.4142 … 2
3 2 -1 Belfast Terror ………………….. 76.2039 … 4

Does your system not take in to effect for W/L and head to head meetings???? I apologize if you have answered this already. Just curious.

Shhhh!!! I like it the way it is lol

It does, but it also (specially this early in the season) relies on points scored and points given up, so if you have played some not so great teams and scored a bunch of teams your numbers will look better than others... Belfast has had some QUALITY opponents where maranello has had some easier wins... no worries, time cures all... even cherries rankings...

Sorry Nate,

You're wrong on this one. While "time cures all" may be true, this rating system is more fraudulent than the BCS if Maranello is ahead of us (Belfast). We played two games ago!! Now if it were the end of the season and they had a better record, than yes, I would agree that they might be rated higher...but not two weeks after they lost to us. I'll bet THEY would even tell you that if they were being honest!

Fortunately it doesn't matter, because unlike the BCS, we actually have PLAYOFFS at the end of the year. "PLAYOFFS!"

Originally posted by Dante929
2 3 1 Maranello Enzos ……………………. 78.4142 … 2
3 2 -1 Belfast Terror ………………….. 76.2039 … 4

Does your system not take in to effect for W/L and head to head meetings???? I apologize if you have answered this already. Just curious.

It takes into effect wins/losses and strength of schedule. The problem is that it is early in the season, and there isn't a LOT of background yet. Also, I compare teams within their own conference only. Consider that Alpha has several VERY WEAK teams, and you can't compare the play of teams that have played against those teams to teams that do not have that opportunity.

The reason Maranello is ahead of Belfast is that they've played a harder overall schedule and scored more points than Belfast. Points scored and strength of schedule do affect ranking. Again, the problem with the rankings this early in the season is that there is just not a lot of information on team's actual strength... Maranello played Chocolate City, and that helped their ranking. As the season progresses, this will all even out.

Originally posted by EnFuegoTBR
Originally posted by nate3713

Originally posted by Noic08Q


Originally posted by Dante929



2 3 1 Maranello Enzos ……………………. 78.4142 … 2
3 2 -1 Belfast Terror ………………….. 76.2039 … 4

Does your system not take in to effect for W/L and head to head meetings???? I apologize if you have answered this already. Just curious.

Shhhh!!! I like it the way it is lol

It does, but it also (specially this early in the season) relies on points scored and points given up, so if you have played some not so great teams and scored a bunch of teams your numbers will look better than others... Belfast has had some QUALITY opponents where maranello has had some easier wins... no worries, time cures all... even cherries rankings...

Sorry Nate,

You're wrong on this one. While "time cures all" may be true, this rating system is more fraudulent than the BCS if Maranello is ahead of us (Belfast). We played two games ago!! Now if it were the end of the season and they had a better record, than yes, I would agree that they might be rated higher...but not two weeks after they lost to us. I'll bet THEY would even tell you that if they were being honest!

Fortunately it doesn't matter, because unlike the BCS, we actually have PLAYOFFS at the end of the year. "PLAYOFFS!"

As I said in the Week 3 post (the first one I did for these rankings)... this is just for fun. I try to make it somewhat realistic, but it isn't meant to be the end all, be all of realism or actual rankings. It's just a quick thing I put together for fun. Rather than whining and complaining... do a rankings system yourself if you don't like it.

Originally posted by cherrie
Originally posted by Dante929

2 3 1 Maranello Enzos ……………………. 78.4142 … 2
3 2 -1 Belfast Terror ………………….. 76.2039 … 4

Does your system not take in to effect for W/L and head to head meetings???? I apologize if you have answered this already. Just curious.

It takes into effect wins/losses and strength of schedule. The problem is that it is early in the season, and there isn't a LOT of background yet. Also, I compare teams within their own conference only. Consider that Alpha has several VERY WEAK teams, and you can't compare the play of teams that have played against those teams to teams that do not have that opportunity.

The reason Maranello is ahead of Belfast is that they've played a harder overall schedule and scored more points than Belfast. Points scored and strength of schedule do affect ranking. Again, the problem with the rankings this early in the season is that there is just not a lot of information on team's actual strength... Maranello played Chocolate City, and that helped their ranking. As the season progresses, this will all even out.

Isnt this the winded version of what i said... thanks for making it more complicated than its needed to be...

Originally posted by nate3713
Originally posted by cherrie

Originally posted by Dante929


2 3 1 Maranello Enzos ……………………. 78.4142 … 2
3 2 -1 Belfast Terror ………………….. 76.2039 … 4

Does your system not take in to effect for W/L and head to head meetings???? I apologize if you have answered this already. Just curious.

It takes into effect wins/losses and strength of schedule. The problem is that it is early in the season, and there isn't a LOT of background yet. Also, I compare teams within their own conference only. Consider that Alpha has several VERY WEAK teams, and you can't compare the play of teams that have played against those teams to teams that do not have that opportunity.

The reason Maranello is ahead of Belfast is that they've played a harder overall schedule and scored more points than Belfast. Points scored and strength of schedule do affect ranking. Again, the problem with the rankings this early in the season is that there is just not a lot of information on team's actual strength... Maranello played Chocolate City, and that helped their ranking. As the season progresses, this will all even out.

Isnt this the winded version of what i said... thanks for making it more complicated than its needed to be...

Yeah, it is... but I didn't read your post when I replied.

Originally posted by cherrie
Originally posted by EnFuegoTBR

Originally posted by nate3713


Originally posted by Noic08Q



Originally posted by Dante929




2 3 1 Maranello Enzos ……………………. 78.4142 … 2
3 2 -1 Belfast Terror ………………….. 76.2039 … 4

Does your system not take in to effect for W/L and head to head meetings???? I apologize if you have answered this already. Just curious.

Shhhh!!! I like it the way it is lol

It does, but it also (specially this early in the season) relies on points scored and points given up, so if you have played some not so great teams and scored a bunch of teams your numbers will look better than others... Belfast has had some QUALITY opponents where maranello has had some easier wins... no worries, time cures all... even cherries rankings...

Sorry Nate,

You're wrong on this one. While "time cures all" may be true, this rating system is more fraudulent than the BCS if Maranello is ahead of us (Belfast). We played two games ago!! Now if it were the end of the season and they had a better record, than yes, I would agree that they might be rated higher...but not two weeks after they lost to us. I'll bet THEY would even tell you that if they were being honest!

Fortunately it doesn't matter, because unlike the BCS, we actually have PLAYOFFS at the end of the year. "PLAYOFFS!"

As I said in the Week 3 post (the first one I did for these rankings)... this is just for fun. I try to make it somewhat realistic, but it isn't meant to be the end all, be all of realism or actual rankings. It's just a quick thing I put together for fun. Rather than whining and complaining... do a rankings system yourself if you don't like it.


I'm not actually complaining...i think they're great. They're a lot of fun and make for great discussions. I was more poking fun at my fellow GM Nate.

Bottom line is,
just win baby!

Originally posted by boldtroll
Bottom line is,
just win baby!

Exactly... Unfortunately I will get to see my Scorpions drop some more in rankings when we lose our next game.. Since we are playing Chernobyl Neutrons and I have yet to see a way to over come this level gap LOL.

Thanks for doing this cherrie. I always appreciate it.