'04 Girls FBR Rankings - 05-13-13

Huh? BW, I'm sure you have the scientific formula to explain how LFS is one up over Dalglish. So LFS took a bad loss against RASE (11-0), they beat DTS (3-2), got beat twice against Dalglish within two weeks (total 8-1) and still at #2. Huh??

Mind I say, probably no team in top 5 or even top 3 took a loss by that large of an amount (11-0) in 04 FBR history. Does goal for and against have any bearing in your formula? Must not have..

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:Huh? BW, I'm sure you have the scientific formula to explain how LFS is one up over Dalglish. So LFS took a bad loss against RASE (11-0), they beat DTS (3-2), got beat twice against Dalglish within two weeks (total 8-1) and still at #2. Huh??

Mind I say, probably no team in top 5 or even top 3 took a loss by that large of an amount (11-0) in 04 FBR history. Does goal for and against have any bearing in your formula? Must not have..

Because with years of factual, historical data, this would indicate that the #2 team would absolutely beat the #3 tea... waittt a minute...
Sorry BW, had to. Just messin with you. But really, perhaps just a minor tweak to the calcs?

The Real Decoy wrote:

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:Huh? BW, I'm sure you have the scientific formula to explain how LFS is one up over Dalglish. So LFS took a bad loss against RASE (11-0), they beat DTS (3-2), got beat twice against Dalglish within two weeks (total 8-1) and still at #2. Huh??

Mind I say, probably no team in top 5 or even top 3 took a loss by that large of an amount (11-0) in 04 FBR history. Does goal for and against have any bearing in your formula? Must not have..

Because with years of factual, historical data, this would indicate that the #2 team would absolutely beat the #3 tea... waittt a minute...
Sorry BW, had to. Just messin with you. But really, perhaps just a minor tweak to the calcs?

Nope. No adjustment needed. If you look at the results, you can make a logical argument for any order of teams #2-4. The same weekend that Dalglish beat LFS twice, LFS tied and beat DT South (the only 2 blemishes on DT South's record this spring), while DT South beat Dalglish.

LFS also beat Dalglish back in Feb., and that result is still in the database and carries the same weight at the recent games. LFS has also beaten Fever 4-0 (Dalglish played Fever to a draw), and beat DT Scott 2-0 in their only meeting (Dalglish has a draw and a 2-1 win over DT Scott).

Bottom line is that it comes down to a numbers game (and yes Margin of Victory is part of the calculation). The FBR numbers currently work out slightly in LFS's favor.

Now, as I've stated many times before, if there was one change I would like to make to FBR, it would be the ability to apply a sliding weight scale to the age of the result, such that more recent results carry more weight than older results. If there was a sliding weight scale, Dalglish would probably come out slightly ahead of LFS, since Dalglish's loss to LFS, and their draws against Fever and DT Scott all happened back in the Feb-1st weekend of March. However, FBR hasn't obliged my request for such a feature in the software yet. So, as I have stated many times before, FBR gives a snapshot of a team's full body of work over the most recent 16 week period, with all results getting equal weight in that time period.

FBR is simply one way to slice the data, and frankly, if you are getting worked up over a team being 1 or 2 spots out of whack, then you are missing the point of why I post the rankings in the 1st place. But again, I've stated that many, many times before as well.

I don't believe I'm getting worked up. Just wanted clarity.. You may have the formula and when you look at it just don't add up. You mentioned the tie to Fever & DT Scott and losses to LFS & DTS for Dalglish. I see Dalglish has 2 losses versus LFS 5. Three of them to Rase and Dalglish and the other two to whom?? So you saying those two other losses have no will effect on thier ranking position? I also believe SDL D1 which LFS and DTS played in probably didn't carry as much weight as TGPL. But hey, I could be wrong..

Bottom line is that it comes down to a numbers game (and yes Margin of Victory is part of the calculation). The FBR numbers currently work out slightly in LFS's favor.

Margin of victory is part of calculation - hard to swallow when you get out scored 29-1 in a total of three games.

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:I don't believe I'm getting worked up. Just wanted clarity.. You may have the formula and when you look at it just don't add up. You mentioned the tie to Fever & DT Scott and losses to LFS & DTS for Dalglish. I see Dalglish has 2 losses versus LFS 5. Three of them to Rase and Dalglish and the other two to whom?? So you saying those two other losses have no will effect on thier ranking position? I also believe SDL D1 which LFS and DTS played in probably didn't carry as much weight as TGPL. But hey, I could be wrong..

Bottom line is that it comes down to a numbers game (and yes Margin of Victory is part of the calculation). The FBR numbers currently work out slightly in LFS's favor.

Margin of victory is part of calculation - hard to swallow when you get out scored 29-1 in a total of three games.

I think you may want to double check your facts on that one.....Oh, and your math. I'm sure BW can help you with both.

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote: I see Dalglish has 2 losses versus LFS 5. Three of them to Rase and Dalglish and the other two to whom?? So you saying those two other losses have no will effect on thier ranking position?

Other 2 losses are to Tx. Spirit Clark. LFS also has 2 W's against Tx. Spirit Clark

I also believe SDL D1 which LFS and DTS played in probably didn't carry as much weight as TGPL. But hey, I could be wrong..

LFS actually played in SDL Platinum with RASE, Dalglish, Tx. Spirit, DT Scott, etc.

Margin of victory is part of calculation - hard to swallow when you get out scored 29-1 in a total of three games.

Actually 19-1, but hey, who's counting. Even with those three games, LFS still has an average of MoV of +1.6 vs. +2.8 for Dalglish. (By comparison, DTS average MoV is +4.8 and RASE is +7.4). So while it is an advantage for Dalglish, it's not a huge advantage, and is offset by LFS's advantage in Most Weighted Wins and slight advantage in Strength of Schedule.

Again, you can make legitimate arguments for any order of LFS/Dalglish/DTS. LFS Beat (and tied) DTS, who beat Dalglish, who beat LFS.

If your system puts heavy weight on straight W-L record, it's DTS-Dalglish-LFS...
If your system puts heavy weight recent head-to-head + recent MoV, it's Dalglish-DTS-LFS...
If your system puts heavy weight on Weighted Wins and SoS over 4 months, it's LFS-Dalglish-DTS...

Take your pick. I can make a rational argument for any of them. FBR just happens to be one of these options.

bwgophers wrote:
Now, as I've stated many times before, if there was one change I would like to make to FBR, it would be the ability to apply a sliding weight scale to the age of the result, such that more recent results carry more weight than older results.

Couldn't you just plug the data into an excel sheet and do that? You'd just have to subjectively determine what the older games are worth.

The Real Decoy wrote:

bwgophers wrote:
Now, as I've stated many times before, if there was one change I would like to make to FBR, it would be the ability to apply a sliding weight scale to the age of the result, such that more recent results carry more weight than older results.

Couldn't you just plug the data into an excel sheet and do that? You'd just have to subjectively determine what the older games are worth.

As much as people complain about the current state, adding subjectivity to it would make it a million times worse. Two people can't even agree to disagree on here. Imagine one person being subjective on something as "important" as rankings.

The Real Decoy wrote:

bwgophers wrote:
Now, as I've stated many times before, if there was one change I would like to make to FBR, it would be the ability to apply a sliding weight scale to the age of the result, such that more recent results carry more weight than older results.

Couldn't you just plug the data into an excel sheet and do that? You'd just have to subjectively determine what the older games are worth.

Sure, if I had the extra hours in my week to do it, but I don't. Care to help?

The Real Decoy wrote:

bwgophers wrote:
Now, as I've stated many times before, if there was one change I would like to make to FBR, it would be the ability to apply a sliding weight scale to the age of the result, such that more recent results carry more weight than older results.

Couldn't you just plug the data into an excel sheet and do that? You'd just have to subjectively determine what the older games are worth.

Then do it yourself. If you dont like his rankings dont pay them any attention. The day he stops doing them becuase he's tired of answering to all the objections we will blame all the people like you! Take them as they are. If you have a question look at the previous ranking post and I am sure it was answered the week prior.

Thank you for the time you put into this BW

Keep it up BW, I think I have said this before, it's easier to piss and moan about this one than to try to come up with one on your own. I do think there is one thing that 4DaLuv and some others are forgetting here. Dalglish doesn't get the SOS help from playing RASE. And there is only one person to point the finger at for that. Every other game in SDL Platinum was played this year, except that one. Why wasn't there a RASE, DAlglish, LFS round robin on the last day??? I would guess that if Dalglish played us and took the loss, it would bump Dalglish ahead of LFS. And I also think it wouldn't hurt the margin of victory that much. Because I bet LW would take it easy on Dalglish.

Anarchy wrote:

The Real Decoy wrote:

bwgophers wrote:
Now, as I've stated many times before, if there was one change I would like to make to FBR, it would be the ability to apply a sliding weight scale to the age of the result, such that more recent results carry more weight than older results.

Couldn't you just plug the data into an excel sheet and do that? You'd just have to subjectively determine what the older games are worth.

Then do it yourself. If you dont like his rankings dont pay them any attention. The day he stops doing them becuase he's tired of answering to all the objections we will blame all the people like you! Take them as they are. If you have a question look at the previous ranking post and I am sure it was answered the week prior.

Thank you for the time you put into this BW

Anarchy wrote:

The Real Decoy wrote:

bwgophers wrote:
Now, as I've stated many times before, if there was one change I would like to make to FBR, it would be the ability to apply a sliding weight scale to the age of the result, such that more recent results carry more weight than older results.

Couldn't you just plug the data into an excel sheet and do that? You'd just have to subjectively determine what the older games are worth.

Then do it yourself. If you dont like his rankings dont pay them any attention. The day he stops doing them becuase he's tired of answering to all the objections we will blame all the people like you! Take them as they are. If you have a question look at the previous ranking post and I am sure it was answered the week prior.

Thank you for the time you put into this BW

Why won't you stick your thumb up your azz, pull it out and suck it. One person asking questions about what he or she sees is bad??. I'm sure there have been worst outlash from other parents of where their teams ranking is at.

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:

Anarchy wrote:

The Real Decoy wrote:

bwgophers wrote:
Now, as I've stated many times before, if there was one change I would like to make to FBR, it would be the ability to apply a sliding weight scale to the age of the result, such that more recent results carry more weight than older results.

Couldn't you just plug the data into an excel sheet and do that? You'd just have to subjectively determine what the older games are worth.

Then do it yourself. If you dont like his rankings dont pay them any attention. The day he stops doing them becuase he's tired of answering to all the objections we will blame all the people like you! Take them as they are. If you have a question look at the previous ranking post and I am sure it was answered the week prior.

Thank you for the time you put into this BW

Why won't you stick your thumb up your azz, pull it out and suck it. One person asking questions about what he or she sees is bad??. I'm sure there have been worst outlash from other parents of where their teams ranking is at.

Whoa Whoa Whoa Killer!!!! Yes there have been worst questions asked before, I think Tatonka's point was.......Go look on every other FBR that has ever been posted and find the answer. Surely BW gets tired of answering the same question every time he posts one of these. I know I would.

Soccer Po Boy wrote:Keep it up BW, I think I have said this before, it's easier to piss and moan about this one than to try to come up with one on your own. I do think there is one thing that 4DaLuv and some others are forgetting here. Dalglish doesn't get the SOS help from playing RASE. And there is only one person to point the finger at for that. Every other game in SDL Platinum was played this year, except that one. Why wasn't there a RASE, DAlglish, LFS round robin on the last day??? I would guess that if Dalglish played us and took the loss, it would bump Dalglish ahead of LFS. And I also think it wouldn't hurt the margin of victory that much. Because I bet LW would take it easy on Dalglish.

You almost got me got up into that (RASE vs DALGLISH) debate Po Boy. I'm just going to laugh on this one!!

Huh? Taco who??

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:

Soccer Po Boy wrote:Keep it up BW, I think I have said this before, it's easier to piss and moan about this one than to try to come up with one on your own. I do think there is one thing that 4DaLuv and some others are forgetting here. Dalglish doesn't get the SOS help from playing RASE. And there is only one person to point the finger at for that. Every other game in SDL Platinum was played this year, except that one. Why wasn't there a RASE, DAlglish, LFS round robin on the last day??? I would guess that if Dalglish played us and took the loss, it would bump Dalglish ahead of LFS. And I also think it wouldn't hurt the margin of victory that much. Because I bet LW would take it easy on Dalglish.

You almost got me got up into that (RASE vs DALGLISH) debate Po Boy. I'm just going to laugh on this one!!

Why laugh? A simple Dalglish beating by RASE would fix what you are complaining about.

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:

Anarchy wrote:

The Real Decoy wrote:

bwgophers wrote:
Now, as I've stated many times before, if there was one change I would like to make to FBR, it would be the ability to apply a sliding weight scale to the age of the result, such that more recent results carry more weight than older results.

Couldn't you just plug the data into an excel sheet and do that? You'd just have to subjectively determine what the older games are worth.

Then do it yourself. If you dont like his rankings dont pay them any attention. The day he stops doing them becuase he's tired of answering to all the objections we will blame all the people like you! Take them as they are. If you have a question look at the previous ranking post and I am sure it was answered the week prior.

Thank you for the time you put into this BW

Why won't you stick your thumb up your azz, pull it out and suck it. One person asking questions about what he or she sees is bad??. I'm sure there have been worst outlash from other parents of where their teams ranking is at.

My goodness. BW answers to all the questions raised after the rankings post. I am sure he will grow tired of taking hours to compile the information then defend his own unofficial ranking system. He does this for fun, (I think) lol and I dont want the fun to be drained from it while my kid is still playing. Yes there have been worse, but hate to see him have to answer the same questions every week for every age group,well mainly the 04s they seem the biggest Divas!

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:Huh? Taco who??

Ahhhhh...you're drunk. That explains it. Go home and sober up buddy.

Soccer Po Boy wrote:

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:

Soccer Po Boy wrote:Keep it up BW, I think I have said this before, it's easier to piss and moan about this one than to try to come up with one on your own. I do think there is one thing that 4DaLuv and some others are forgetting here. Dalglish doesn't get the SOS help from playing RASE. And there is only one person to point the finger at for that. Every other game in SDL Platinum was played this year, except that one. Why wasn't there a RASE, DAlglish, LFS round robin on the last day??? I would guess that if Dalglish played us and took the loss, it would bump Dalglish ahead of LFS. And I also think it wouldn't hurt the margin of victory that much. Because I bet LW would take it easy on Dalglish.

You almost got me got up into that (RASE vs DALGLISH) debate Po Boy. I'm just going to laugh on this one!!

Why laugh? A simple Dalglish beating by RASE would fix what you are complaining about.

Or not tying scott or screwing around and loosing to LFS. I believe RASE traded it's Dalglish game for a shot at LFS.

Anarchy wrote:

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:

Anarchy wrote:

The Real Decoy wrote:

bwgophers wrote:
Now, as I've stated many times before, if there was one change I would like to make to FBR, it would be the ability to apply a sliding weight scale to the age of the result, such that more recent results carry more weight than older results.

Couldn't you just plug the data into an excel sheet and do that? You'd just have to subjectively determine what the older games are worth.

Then do it yourself. If you dont like his rankings dont pay them any attention. The day he stops doing them becuase he's tired of answering to all the objections we will blame all the people like you! Take them as they are. If you have a question look at the previous ranking post and I am sure it was answered the week prior.

Thank you for the time you put into this BW

Why won't you stick your thumb up your azz, pull it out and suck it. One person asking questions about what he or she sees is bad??. I'm sure there have been worst outlash from other parents of where their teams ranking is at.

My goodness. BW answers to all the questions raised after the rankings post. I am sure he will grow tired of taking hours to compile the information then defend his own unofficial ranking system. He does this for fun, (I think) lol and I dont want the fun to be drained from it while my kid is still playing. Yes there have been worse, but hate to see him have to answer the same questions every week for every age group,well mainly the 04s they seem the biggest Divas!

Agree- I like seeing these- they do not have these on the boys side and I want to see these when BW ranks my daughters age group. . 4daluv look it up TRD questions the system like every other FBR. Bw my advise to you is to put all the LP teams at the top of FBR and then I am sure you will get some Love.

go99 wrote:

Soccer Po Boy wrote:

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:

Soccer Po Boy wrote:Keep it up BW, I think I have said this before, it's easier to piss and moan about this one than to try to come up with one on your own. I do think there is one thing that 4DaLuv and some others are forgetting here. Dalglish doesn't get the SOS help from playing RASE. And there is only one person to point the finger at for that. Every other game in SDL Platinum was played this year, except that one. Why wasn't there a RASE, DAlglish, LFS round robin on the last day??? I would guess that if Dalglish played us and took the loss, it would bump Dalglish ahead of LFS. And I also think it wouldn't hurt the margin of victory that much. Because I bet LW would take it easy on Dalglish.

You almost got me got up into that (RASE vs DALGLISH) debate Po Boy. I'm just going to laugh on this one!!

Why laugh? A simple Dalglish beating by RASE would fix what you are complaining about.

Or not tying scott or screwing around and loosing to LFS. I believe RASE traded it's Dalglish game for a shot at LFS.

Yeah you're right. I'm sure that's the reason.

Soccer Po Boy wrote:

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:Huh? Taco who??

Ahhhhh...you're drunk. That explains it. Go home and sober up buddy.

Exactly, I was agreeing with Anarchy. To argue with BW and this system over one single spot, both spots being under the almighty RASE 04, is just petty and ridiculous. Let BW do what the rest of us enjoy looking at the with the FBRs. Sure, asking a question is fine but don't attack the guy and his software. Find something else to attack, like cheating coaches.

Soccer Po Boy wrote:

go99 wrote:

Soccer Po Boy wrote:

4DaLuvofTheGM wrote:

Soccer Po Boy wrote:Keep it up BW, I think I have said this before, it's easier to piss and moan about this one than to try to come up with one on your own. I do think there is one thing that 4DaLuv and some others are forgetting here. Dalglish doesn't get the SOS help from playing RASE. And there is only one person to point the finger at for that. Every other game in SDL Platinum was played this year, except that one. Why wasn't there a RASE, DAlglish, LFS round robin on the last day??? I would guess that if Dalglish played us and took the loss, it would bump Dalglish ahead of LFS. And I also think it wouldn't hurt the margin of victory that much. Because I bet LW would take it easy on Dalglish.

You almost got me got up into that (RASE vs DALGLISH) debate Po Boy. I'm just going to laugh on this one!!

Why laugh? A simple Dalglish beating by RASE would fix what you are complaining about.

Or not tying scott or screwing around and loosing to LFS. I believe RASE traded it's Dalglish game for a shot at LFS.

Yeah you're right. I'm sure that's the reason.

No way we could pass at a shot to face the team that was gonna take down RASE. DTS was looking promising and then they went and screwed it up