Talk Fantasy Football

The rule book mentions using win ratio and team value as a way to determine what teams can go into a tournament.

As win ratio could be calculated differently, what is the method that is being implied here?

The traditional method is (wins + (draws/2)) / # games played

So a .500 record means you have won, drawn & lost in even amounts, a 1.000 that you've won every game.

Don't pay too much attention to that section. Its a set of recommendations for people who literally have no idea about how to set up a league and should not be taken as anything more.

DoubleSkulls wrote:Don't pay too much attention to that section. Its a set of recommendations for people who literally have no idea about how to set up a league and should not be taken as anything more.

Translate .. it was by GW employees not the BBRC.

Galak

Well this helps for some statistics. It at least gives me some ammunition to say that the win % should include a draw as half a win in the calculation.

What are your thoughts on a league setting win ratio to pure win % where win % = wins / games?

That means you count draws the same as losses - effectively zero. Which feels wrong since people who draw games got a better result than those who lost.

Really you need to think about your league. If you've got a fixed schedule (i.e. everyone plays the same number of games) then 3/1/0 for W/D/L is fine and easier to understand. If its open (so they don't play the same number of games ) then you may need something like win record.

In our league the rankings are counted by wins / games and we don't have draws.

We use a special way of the overtime rules from the rulebook. When the result would be draw after 2 halves we do the following:

1. Secret weapon players are sent off to the dungeon using the regular method (I mean using bribes etc.).

2. The remaining players go to the reserves.

3. KO rolls are made.

4. Both coaches sum up the followong: their gate, the strength of the players in their reserves.

5. The coach who has the higher value is nominated the victor of the match by the referee and they gain one TD (but no SPP), because the crowd and the players "persuade" him, that they were better.

6. The other coach may appeal against this decision. If he does, then an overtime is played using the regular rules. Note: no KO rolls are made, because they were made in point 3.

7. If the result is still a draw after the overtime, then repeat the process.

Note: There is no tiebreaker for the case when the sums are equal ('cause never happened before). One could be that only the players' strength are summed up (because they are closer to the ref therefore they have a higher "convincing power").

I don't think win ratio's should be used as a way to rank teams whatever method you do it.

Though imo win ratio shouldn't count draws, as they aren't wins...

better off having a points system and if you want to stop those who play the most games having a big advantage you can use the points per game average

that introduces the problem of someone going on a great streak from the outset and to then stop playing the team, you can either have then an active teams ranking, or perhaps give a small bonus to the average points per every x games played

adjust to suit etc.

The Waterbowl League (Veterans Division) uses something similar to the rulebook - but only to determine play off seeding. We take the (win + (draw/2)) / No Games Played to get a value between 0 and 1, then multiply this by the current TV of the team. Like I said, this is only used to determine where your team is seeded in the playoffs, after that it's a knockout so it's down to the better teams/players for the title.

The Premier Division uses a fixed schedule and a 3/1/0 (like Football*)








*the kind played in most countries; not to be confused with American Football

In my experience as league commissioner, win ratio is an excellent way to rank teams in an open league where teams play different numbers of matches. We use 3 points for a win, 1 for a draw, 0 for a loss (to encourage coaches to go for the win, like soccer). Win ratio is the number of points divided by the number of games. We usually set a minimum number of games for a team to qualify for the rankings (e.g. one per calendar month).

Of course, if you play in any kind of scheduled or semi-scheduled league where teams are playing the same number of matches, then there will be better methods of ranking teams than win ratio.

Hope that helps.

that isn't win ratio, that is points ratio smeborg ;]

So's a win ratio, its just effectively giving 2 points for a win instead of 3.

it is if you include half the draws yes

that is why i object to that being called a win ratio

One thing I had noticed in our first league was coaches losing a game just wanted it to be over. So to encourage people to play to the end we added stats into our ranking system.

And since OBBLM supported it easily this is what we go with:

-{8*[won] + 4*[draw] + 2*[lost] + 1*[td] + 1*[cas] + 2*[intcpt] + 0.4*[cp]}

It encourages people to play the whole game, to run up the score, to still try to score even when the game is lost, to try to kill other players(more than usual), and helps the game keep a meaning even after the outcome is secured.

We're up to two player fatalities for trying to farm points in the standings too. A ghoul tripped, fell, and died trying to GFI to pick the ball up for a late completion, and a Goblin wanting 3 SPP and 1 point in the standings became a gobbo snack for a troll on the last turn of a game they were winning 3-0.

Grumbledook wrote:that isn't win ratio, that is points ratio smeborg ;]

Your entirely right, Grum, I was just being polite to funnyfingers and GW who used the term wrongly first .

I'd already argued with funnyfingers about that elsewhere ;]