What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Commish question: power ranking system (1 Viewer)

Third

Footballguy
My league uses a power ranking system where we compute our standings based on three categories. Here is the question. Say we rank our teams from 1 to 10 based on head to head record and then award 10 points for 1st, 9 points for 2nd, on down to 1 point. This early in the season, we obviously have ties. What if I have 2 teams at 2-0, 6 teams at 1-1, and 2 teams at 0-2. How do I adjust the awarding of points based on these ties? Is there a mathematical formula to divide up the 55 points (1+2+3+4.....) evenly when there are ties? Thanks.

 
My league uses a power ranking system where we compute our standings based on three categories. Here is the question. Say we rank our teams from 1 to 10 based on head to head record and then award 10 points for 1st, 9 points for 2nd, on down to 1 point. This early in the season, we obviously have ties. What if I have 2 teams at 2-0, 6 teams at 1-1, and 2 teams at 0-2. How do I adjust the awarding of points based on these ties? Is there a mathematical formula to divide up the 55 points (1+2+3+4.....) evenly when there are ties? Thanks.
Pretty simple. Just add up the points each tied team would get, and divide by number of teams.2-0 = (10+9)/2 = 9.51-1 = (8+7+6+5+4+3)/6 = 5.50-2 = (2+1)/2 = 1.5
 
Last edited by a moderator:
decimal scoring is your friend. :yes:

edit to add: perhaps not as obviously as I thought, then you could tie break with points. :bag:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My league uses a power ranking system where we compute our standings based on three categories. Here is the question. Say we rank our teams from 1 to 10 based on head to head record and then award 10 points for 1st, 9 points for 2nd, on down to 1 point. This early in the season, we obviously have ties. What if I have 2 teams at 2-0, 6 teams at 1-1, and 2 teams at 0-2. How do I adjust the awarding of points based on these ties? Is there a mathematical formula to divide up the 55 points (1+2+3+4.....) evenly when there are ties? Thanks.
Pretty simple. Just add up the points each tied team would get, and divide by number of teams.2-0 = (10+9)/2 = 9.51-1 = (8+7+6+5+4+3)/6 = 5.50-2 = (2+1)/2 = 1.5
I disagree. If 2 teams are tied for first they should both get the full 10 points. No one would get the 9 points for 2nd place since there is no 2nd place team.
 
Good point GregR.

Is this for WW? let your league host site do it. I expect this every year, don't you?

 
My league uses a power ranking system where we compute our standings based on three categories. Here is the question. Say we rank our teams from 1 to 10 based on head to head record and then award 10 points for 1st, 9 points for 2nd, on down to 1 point. This early in the season, we obviously have ties. What if I have 2 teams at 2-0, 6 teams at 1-1, and 2 teams at 0-2. How do I adjust the awarding of points based on these ties? Is there a mathematical formula to divide up the 55 points (1+2+3+4.....) evenly when there are ties? Thanks.
Pretty simple. Just add up the points each tied team would get, and divide by number of teams.2-0 = (10+9)/2 = 9.51-1 = (8+7+6+5+4+3)/6 = 5.50-2 = (2+1)/2 = 1.5
I disagree. If 2 teams are tied for first they should both get the full 10 points. No one would get the 9 points for 2nd place since there is no 2nd place team.
why shouldn't they both get 9?Why arbitrarily have more points available in one of three categories that are supposed to be weighted equally.9.5 is what's fair.
 
Pretty simple. Just add up the points each tied team would get, and divide by number of teams.2-0 = (10+9)/2 = 9.51-1 = (8+7+6+5+4+3)/6 = 5.50-2 = (2+1)/2 = 1.5
This is how CBS does their power rankings. Ex: 12 team league:4 teams are 2-0: 10.5 each4 teams are 1-1: 6.5 each4 teams are 0-2: 2.5 each
 
My league uses a power ranking system where we compute our standings based on three categories. Here is the question. Say we rank our teams from 1 to 10 based on head to head record and then award 10 points for 1st, 9 points for 2nd, on down to 1 point. This early in the season, we obviously have ties. What if I have 2 teams at 2-0, 6 teams at 1-1, and 2 teams at 0-2. How do I adjust the awarding of points based on these ties? Is there a mathematical formula to divide up the 55 points (1+2+3+4.....) evenly when there are ties? Thanks.
Pretty simple. Just add up the points each tied team would get, and divide by number of teams.2-0 = (10+9)/2 = 9.51-1 = (8+7+6+5+4+3)/6 = 5.50-2 = (2+1)/2 = 1.5
I disagree. If 2 teams are tied for first they should both get the full 10 points. No one would get the 9 points for 2nd place since there is no 2nd place team.
why shouldn't they both get 9?Why arbitrarily have more points available in one of three categories that are supposed to be weighted equally.9.5 is what's fair.
Because they are both in 1st place and first place gets 10 points. There would be two 1st place teams and no second place team. That's just how ties are generally handled.
 
My league uses a power ranking system where we compute our standings based on three categories. Here is the question. Say we rank our teams from 1 to 10 based on head to head record and then award 10 points for 1st, 9 points for 2nd, on down to 1 point. This early in the season, we obviously have ties. What if I have 2 teams at 2-0, 6 teams at 1-1, and 2 teams at 0-2. How do I adjust the awarding of points based on these ties? Is there a mathematical formula to divide up the 55 points (1+2+3+4.....) evenly when there are ties? Thanks.
Pretty simple. Just add up the points each tied team would get, and divide by number of teams.2-0 = (10+9)/2 = 9.51-1 = (8+7+6+5+4+3)/6 = 5.50-2 = (2+1)/2 = 1.5
I disagree. If 2 teams are tied for first they should both get the full 10 points. No one would get the 9 points for 2nd place since there is no 2nd place team.
why shouldn't they both get 9?Why arbitrarily have more points available in one of three categories that are supposed to be weighted equally.9.5 is what's fair.
Because they are both in 1st place and first place gets 10 points. There would be two 1st place teams and no second place team. That's just how ties are generally handled.
they are tied for first or tied for second technically. If you are "third" you don't say you are second.Standings usually go like this1 10-01 10-03 8-23 8-2Also say for example you award $$$ for first and second. Your prize pool is $500. $300 for first $200 for second.If 2 teams/players tie (like golf for example and there is no tiebreaker) You can't both give guys $300, you only have $500.This can be applied to points.1st place is 10 points2nd is 93rd is 8.So 2 teams tied for first 9.5 seems correct to me.just my .02
 
they are tied for first or tied for second technically. If you are "third" you don't say you are second.Standings usually go like this1 10-01 10-03 8-23 8-2Also say for example you award $$$ for first and second. Your prize pool is $500. $300 for first $200 for second.If 2 teams/players tie (like golf for example and there is no tiebreaker) You can't both give guys $300, you only have $500.This can be applied to points.1st place is 10 points2nd is 93rd is 8.So 2 teams tied for first 9.5 seems correct to me.just my .02
Well, no, they are tied for 1st. They are not tied for 2nd, there is no second.But look, I understand exactly what you're saying, and I completely understand the reasoning behind it. And if it was something finite, like money, as opposed to "made up points", yeah, splitting it would be best since you can't just manufacture the extra money (at least that's what the Secret Service agents keep telling me when I try to buy the ink they use in $20 bills).I'm just saying that when this situation comes up in sports, it generally is not handled by averaging the points over the positions and giving the average.
 
It's the same thing with power rankings, because you'll have more than one category. The reasons for categories is to rank these teams equally in different areas. If you don't add the points and divide by number of teams, then you don't come out with the same number of points in many cases.

IE:

4 teams (to keep my head from exploding this early in the morning)

2-0 (tied for 1st)

2-0

0-2 (tied for 3rd)

0-2

If you give 4pts for first, 3pts for second, 2pts for 3rd, and 1pt for 4th...giving them full points for a tie will throw off the balance of the category. Normally, you'd only give a total of 10pts for record. Now you're giving 4 + 4 + 2 + 2 = 12pts if you give full points for ties. This skews the power rankings, because one category will have more total points than others. You'll have other categories, such as total points, which are much less likely to be tied, and will only get 10pts compared to 12pts...so Record becomes a bigger factor than Total Points.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Minor Hijack

Speaking of POWER RANKINGS... anyone know how RTSports calculates their power rankings? I've done it manually (very similiar to the CBS ystem) for the past few years. Now they have a "power ranking" and it comes out VERY different than mine. Just curious if anyone knew their formula.

 
GregR said:
belljr said:
they are tied for first or tied for second technically. If you are "third" you don't say you are second.Standings usually go like this1 10-01 10-03 8-23 8-2Also say for example you award $$$ for first and second. Your prize pool is $500. $300 for first $200 for second.If 2 teams/players tie (like golf for example and there is no tiebreaker) You can't both give guys $300, you only have $500.This can be applied to points.1st place is 10 points2nd is 93rd is 8.So 2 teams tied for first 9.5 seems correct to me.just my .02
Well, no, they are tied for 1st. They are not tied for 2nd, there is no second.But look, I understand exactly what you're saying, and I completely understand the reasoning behind it. And if it was something finite, like money, as opposed to "made up points", yeah, splitting it would be best since you can't just manufacture the extra money (at least that's what the Secret Service agents keep telling me when I try to buy the ink they use in $20 bills).I'm just saying that when this situation comes up in sports, it generally is not handled by averaging the points over the positions and giving the average.
Every fantasy league I've ever played in that awards points for categories has used the method belljr's post. Most fantasy baseball leagues are set up this way. If two guys in a ten team league both have more home runs than anyone else, they'll each get 9.5 points for the category. Not sure where you're getting "it generally is not handled by averaging the points over the positions and giving the average."
 
they are tied for first or tied for second technically. If you are "third" you don't say you are second.

Standings usually go like this

1 10-0

1 10-0

3 8-2

3 8-2

Also say for example you award $$$ for first and second. Your prize pool is $500. $300 for first $200 for second.

If 2 teams/players tie (like golf for example and there is no tiebreaker) You can't both give guys $300, you only have $500.

This can be applied to points.

1st place is 10 points

2nd is 9

3rd is 8.

So 2 teams tied for first 9.5 seems correct to me.

just my .02
Well, no, they are tied for 1st. They are not tied for 2nd, there is no second.But look, I understand exactly what you're saying, and I completely understand the reasoning behind it. And if it was something finite, like money, as opposed to "made up points", yeah, splitting it would be best since you can't just manufacture the extra money (at least that's what the Secret Service agents keep telling me when I try to buy the ink they use in $20 bills).

I'm just saying that when this situation comes up in sports, it generally is not handled by averaging the points over the positions and giving the average.
Every fantasy league I've ever played in that awards points for categories has used the method belljr's post. Most fantasy baseball leagues are set up this way. If two guys in a ten team league both have more home runs than anyone else, they'll each get 9.5 points for the category. Not sure where you're getting "it generally is not handled by averaging the points over the positions and giving the average."
I'm getting it from real life. I said sports are not generally handled that way. I would be surprised if say, NASCAR were to average the points if they had an exact tie. In cross country where teams get points based on their runners finish, tied 1st place runners would both get 1, not 1.5.Maybe fantasy baseball handles it that way, I don't know. (Or care, I mean, it's baseball!) ;)

 
I'm getting it from real life. I said sports are not generally handled that way. I would be surprised if say, NASCAR were to average the points if they had an exact tie. In cross country where teams get points based on their runners finish, tied 1st place runners would both get 1, not 1.5.

Maybe fantasy baseball handles it that way, I don't know. (Or care, I mean, it's baseball!) ;)
I think most sports split the points. Giving double points for a tie would lead to some extremely bizarre scoring. Imagine a league where there's one team that's 7-5, one that's 5-7, and everyone else is 6-6; the 7-5 team gets n points, all of the 6-6 teams get n-1 points, and the 5-7 team gets zero. Does the 5-7 team really deserve to be n-1 points behind next-to-last place in that scenario?
 
they are tied for first or tied for second technically. If you are "third" you don't say you are second.

Standings usually go like this

1 10-0

1 10-0

3 8-2

3 8-2

Also say for example you award $$$ for first and second. Your prize pool is $500. $300 for first $200 for second.

If 2 teams/players tie (like golf for example and there is no tiebreaker) You can't both give guys $300, you only have $500.

This can be applied to points.

1st place is 10 points

2nd is 9

3rd is 8.

So 2 teams tied for first 9.5 seems correct to me.

just my .02
Well, no, they are tied for 1st. They are not tied for 2nd, there is no second.But look, I understand exactly what you're saying, and I completely understand the reasoning behind it. And if it was something finite, like money, as opposed to "made up points", yeah, splitting it would be best since you can't just manufacture the extra money (at least that's what the Secret Service agents keep telling me when I try to buy the ink they use in $20 bills).

I'm just saying that when this situation comes up in sports, it generally is not handled by averaging the points over the positions and giving the average.
Every fantasy league I've ever played in that awards points for categories has used the method belljr's post. Most fantasy baseball leagues are set up this way. If two guys in a ten team league both have more home runs than anyone else, they'll each get 9.5 points for the category. Not sure where you're getting "it generally is not handled by averaging the points over the positions and giving the average."
I'm getting it from real life. I said sports are not generally handled that way. I would be surprised if say, NASCAR were to average the points if they had an exact tie. In cross country where teams get points based on their runners finish, tied 1st place runners would both get 1, not 1.5.Maybe fantasy baseball handles it that way, I don't know. (Or care, I mean, it's baseball!) ;)
Are we talking made up sports or real sports? It'd just be easier if you said "That's a great point, bentley. Hadn't thought of it that way. You're right."
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top