News:

Herr Otto Partz says you're all nothing but pipsqueaks!

Main Menu

Question about point system:

Started by Anotherguest, November 09, 2002, 09:20:47 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Anotherguest

Extract from the rules:

I add together your points, and divide it with the number of races done. That`s a number between 0 and 10, the first part. The other part is: No bonus for your first entry, 1 point bonus from the 2. to the 8. entry, and 0.5 points bonus for the following 4 races, if you enter of course. These two parts together make the sum, and if 2 pipsqueaks have equal sum, then the average ranking decides. That`s all. I`m working on the team scoring, until it`s done, the points are simply added together.

Ok now let's take Roy's and Bonzai Joe's score: 79 points : 10
= 7,9  +7 points (2 to 8th entry) + 1 (9th to 10th entry)

This yields that they got only 7.9 points from actual racing and 8 points because they took part in this competition every month!

Now 95% of all pipsqueaks have a far worse average ranking than Bonzai and Roy and the difference between the points they earned racing and the points they got because they took part would be a lot bigger!

My conclusion is that it is a lot more important to race all but 1 month than getting good results. Imagine Alan Rotei would have entered 2 month earlier.He would still have no chance because the extra points have a huge influence....

anotherguest

Ok that was not really a question,it was an assumption.

The question is why the system is the way it is.I've a fairer system in mind....

anotherguest

My idea:

Rank in points + Rank in avr ranking -1 for all 4 races a player took part
lowest score wins

Bonzais score for my ideA: Rank in points: 1+rank in avr ranking : 3
-2 (bc he took part in 10 races) = 1+3-2 = 2

Alan's score would be Rank in p: 3 + avr r: 1 -1 (bc he took part in six races) = 3+1-1= 3

Bonzai would still be leading but Alan would still have a chance to win...

I think it's fairer this way..
what do you think?

al il professore

It is reasonable to expect that genetic influences on traits like IQ should become less important as one gains experiences with age. Surprisingly, the opposite occurs.