Warrior General Games

Standings after week 9 games:

[1] 11.61 Spanish Inquisition
[2] 11.36 Romania Roadhouse Rowdies
[3] 10.90 East Berlin Blitzkrieg
[4] 10.27 Chernobyl Disaster
[5] 8.88 Brown Bay Packers
[6] 7.79 Athens Gods
[7] 6.03 Belgrade Bears
[8] 5.16 Barcelona Chupacabras
[9] 4.65 Krakow Krakodiles
[10] 4.20 The Dark Knights
[11] 3.61 Nizhny Novgorod Bulldogs
[12] 2.59 Targoviste Impalers
[13] 2.31 Crete Minotaurs
[14] 1.99 Diaper Vipers
[15] 1.97 Odessa Pipers
[16] 1.53 Boston Piggers
[17] 0.94 Chernobyl CHUDS
[18] -1.19 Rotterdam Rampage
[19] -2.22 Grodno Pirates
[20] -3.52 Warsaw Sabotage
[21] -4.40 Liverpool Poison
[22] -4.47 Everett Wildcats
[23] -4.66 Texas City Storm
[24] -5.37 River City Ransom
[25] -5.67 Bergen Storm
[26] -6.82 Minsk Fire
[27] -7.15 Justice League
[28] -8.41 Green Bay Cheese Heads
[29] -9.48 Macedonian Phalanx
[30] -10.03 Moscow Red Army
[31] -10.19 Oongawa Schmucks (former Minnesota Warriors)
[32] -12.20 Rammstein Rampage


Again, this is calculated based on how well the team did against my predictions (using "raw" numbers).

Okay... I am confused now (well, more than now. It's actually my norm, but I try to hide it.)

I expected Brown Bay to go into 5th over the Gods. So no shock nor confusion there after how well they did.


However... What I am lost on is that if you base these ratings on raw #s, and if we were predicted to loose based on the raw #s, then how did we go down after last week's game (8.56 Athens Gods after week 8) by almost a full point (7.79 Athens Gods after week 9) when we won the game that raw #s had predicted us to loose (50.47 (47.00) - Athens Gods over Targoviste Impalers)?

Clearly, if these numbers were accurate, Disaster would be number 1, so I tend to agree with you Nietzsche.

The baseline for each week would be 0. So since Athens won when you were supposed to lose, you did get a positive number for the week (FYI, you could have lost by around 24-27 and still got positive for the week). 47% is a pretty close prediction and you only won by 1 point, so it wasn't that big of an upset. I will admit, the formula favors blowouts over upsets, but it's really the prediction formula that needs adjusting.

But with that said... this isn't intending to be a power ranking or anything like that... just rewards teams (like Athens), that regularly wins by more than they should.

And if everyone thinks the numbers are trash, then I'll stop posting them. Sure would save me some time... and if my boss knew, she would probably like that I stopped .

please keep posting, they seem pretty accurate to me

Originally posted by Nietzsche
Okay... I am confused now (well, more than now. It's actually my norm, but I try to hide it.)

I expected Brown Bay to go into 5th over the Gods. So no shock nor confusion there after how well they did.


However... What I am lost on is that if you base these ratings on raw #s, and if we were predicted to loose based on the raw #s, then how did we go down after last week's game (8.56 Athens Gods after week 8) by almost a full point (7.79 Athens Gods after week 9) when we won the game that raw #s had predicted us to loose (50.47 (47.00) - Athens Gods over Targoviste Impalers)?



The thing that really throws it off is the fumble return for touchdown with two minutes to go. Take that away, and then you'd probably see a number closer to what you expected. As for myself, a win's a win .

Originally posted by allenc
The baseline for each week would be 0. So since Athens won when you were supposed to lose, you did get a positive number for the week (FYI, you could have lost by around 24-27 and still got positive for the week). 47% is a pretty close prediction and you only won by 1 point, so it wasn't that big of an upset. I will admit, the formula favors blowouts over upsets, but it's really the prediction formula that needs adjusting.

But with that said... this isn't intending to be a power ranking or anything like that... just rewards teams (like Athens), that regularly wins by more than they should.

And if everyone thinks the numbers are trash, then I'll stop posting them. Sure would save me some time... and if my boss knew, she would probably like that I stopped .

LOL -- shhhh, dont tell her

I like them... It seems pretty acurate. I just didnt understand how it was working. It wasnt a complaint... It was a point for clarification

Allenc...you need to redo your calculations or something, I mean come on, what are you thinking...WAY too many inferior Alpha teams in the top 5!!!!

Originally posted by mwoods07
Allenc...you need to redo your calculations or something, I mean come on, what are you thinking...WAY too many inferior Alpha teams in the top 5!!!!

Means Alpha does it with good coaching/gameplanning, not just high level players.

Originally posted by allenc
Originally posted by mwoods07

Allenc...you need to redo your calculations or something, I mean come on, what are you thinking...WAY too many inferior Alpha teams in the top 5!!!!

Means Alpha does it with good coaching/gameplanning, not just high level players.

True dat...but lets be fair and accurate...put the Chupacabras up top, they have the best coaching in the league...check that, in GLB.

Originally posted by mwoods07
Originally posted by allenc

Originally posted by mwoods07


Allenc...you need to redo your calculations or something, I mean come on, what are you thinking...WAY too many inferior Alpha teams in the top 5!!!!

Means Alpha does it with good coaching/gameplanning, not just high level players.

True dat...but lets be fair and accurate...put the Chupacabras up top, they have the best coaching in the league...check that, in GLB.

QFTMF