Warrior General Games

Same deal. If you don't know the drill by now, go back and read one of the other rankings threads.

1. Garbage Pail Kids (8-0) [+1]
2. South Central Muddogs (8-0) [-1]
3. Bangalore Hurricane's (8-0) [0]
4. Tucson Slugs (7-1) [0]
5. Tortured Pirate Souls (7-1) [0]
6. Pittsburgh Steel Masters (8-0) [0]
7. Kansas City Pack (4-4) [+1]
8. TRU PUNX!!! (8-0) [+1]
9. Rhode Island PeeWee Pirates (7-1) [-2]
10. St. Catherines Baby Storm Walruses of Windsor (5-3) [0]
11. Orlando Sentinals CPU (7-1) [+1]
12. Virginia Cobras CPU (3-5) [-1]
13. Omaha Blue Jays (5-3) [0]
14. San Jose Spartanz (4-4) [+2]
15. Channel Four News Team Smelly Pirate Hookers (4-4) [-1]
16. Indianapolis Gasser's (5-3) [+1]
17. Pee Wee Assassins (4-4) [-2]
18. Chicopee Giants (4-4) [0]
19. Megalodon Pups (4-4) [+3]
20. Utah Dogs CPU (2-6) [-1]
21. Angry Buffalos (3-4-1) [-1]
22. Hartford Whalers CPU (3-5) [-2]
23. Honolulu Hitmen CPU (3-5) [0]
24. Tecmo Super Bowlers (1-7) [0]
25. Memphis Roosters (0-8) [+2]
26. New Jersey Marlins CPU (4-4) [+2]
27. Houston Lizards (0-8) [+2]
28. Montana Slashers (1-6-1) [-3]
29. D.C. Caps (0-8) [-3]
30. Amish Army (1-7) [0]
31. Washington Ducks CPU (0-8) [+1]
32. Colorado Springs Whales (0-8) [-1]

Sorry it took a while, but a few other things kept me busy.

Lets see if we can Hold the #1 spot for more then 1 week. I feel like this is the BCS series.

Just out of curiosity, what's your obsession with the Kansas City Pack?

My team just beat a team that on paper was better than us and we remain at #6?

Originally posted by Seric
My team just beat a team that on paper was better than us and we remain at #6?
That seemed fishy to me, too, so I checked the spreadsheet for errors but didn't see any. The spreadsheet has Rhode Island's quality of play at an abysmal -56.61446711, which is the third worst in the league (ahead on only Honolulu's -73.46175016 and New Jersey's -88.97773981). That's the only explanation I can think of. The algorithm doesn't consider them better than you on paper. It actually considers them to be much, much, much worse. As the season progresses, that might change.

Originally posted by AnotherLawyer
Originally posted by hexxum

Just out of curiosity, what's your obsession with the Kansas City Pack?

Originally posted by AnotherLawyer

If you don't know the drill by now, go back and read one of the other rankings threads.



I did, and the first 3 have been deleted..

Originally posted by Seric
My team just beat a team that on paper was better than us and we remain at #6?

Note that the spreadsheet does not care about who is better in theory; it simply uses who beat whom, and by how many points. They might have better attributes on the "matchup" page, but may not have performed very well against their opponents, compared to how others have performed against them. It's weird, and probably not as accurate as even the BCS, but by the end of the season it usually works itself out.

Originally posted by drharris
Originally posted by Seric

My team just beat a team that on paper was better than us and we remain at #6?
by the end of the season it usually works itself out.
So by the end of the season, when we have the real "power rankings" also known as the "standings" that's when the "projection" is accurate? So the "Projections" don't actually "project" anything, they just tell us what we already know by looking at the Standings?

Someone please explain to me how this is not a waste of time?

It's for fun, bro. If you don't like my toys, that's cool. It's just something to talk about and complain about. I don't really dig tennis, but I don't try to keep people from playing it.

It just shows you currently who is playing the best against the best. If you take it for more then that your an attention whore =)

Originally posted by DavyJonesLocker
Originally posted by drharris

Originally posted by Seric


My team just beat a team that on paper was better than us and we remain at #6?
by the end of the season it usually works itself out.
So by the end of the season, when we have the real "power rankings" also known as the "standings" that's when the "projection" is accurate? So the "Projections" don't actually "project" anything, they just tell us what we already know by looking at the Standings?

Someone please explain to me how this is not a waste of time?


Again if you can do better. DO IT. IF not Shut up and stop wasting everyone's time.

Originally posted by AnotherLawyer
Originally posted by Seric

My team just beat a team that on paper was better than us and we remain at #6?
That seemed fishy to me, too, so I checked the spreadsheet for errors but didn't see any. The spreadsheet has Rhode Island's quality of play at an abysmal -56.61446711, which is the third worst in the league (ahead on only Honolulu's -73.46175016 and New Jersey's -88.97773981). That's the only explanation I can think of. The algorithm doesn't consider them better than you on paper. It actually considers them to be much, much, much worse. As the season progresses, that might change.

Fair enough

Originally posted by DavyJonesLocker
Originally posted by drharris

Originally posted by Seric


My team just beat a team that on paper was better than us and we remain at #6?
by the end of the season it usually works itself out.
So by the end of the season, when we have the real "power rankings" also known as the "standings" that's when the "projection" is accurate? So the "Projections" don't actually "project" anything, they just tell us what we already know by looking at the Standings?

Someone please explain to me how this is not a waste of time?


Even standings are not completely accurate; they do not reflect strength of schedule. Power Rankings do take that into account. Standings are inaccurate because they only show who was able to be better than their opponent each week, not who was better than all the other teams the whole season. By taking relative power into account for each game, it becomes a more accurate indicator. If a team manages to get zero losses, but only beat a #10 team by 10 points for the final game, clearly they are not super strong and perhaps even got lucky through a season.

When I say that it clears itself out, that is to say that it starts removing people from the top of the list that have many losses. While it is not based on W-L ratio, these teams inevitably start either getting better or worse against their opponents, and it moves them drastically.

As proof it is already starting to even out, look at the top 10 or so the past game or two... you'll see very little mobility now, maybe a position change per game. By the end of the season, that movement will approach zero.

Originally posted by hexxum
Just out of curiosity, what's your obsession with the Kansas City Pack?

Look at who they have played. The Pack have played far better competition then any other team in Pee Wee #21.

They are high because they actually play teams.