Tweet
The Trivia Bytes staff are pleased to release its 2012 Ranking System that has enhanced its patented 'KING of the HILL Ranking System' by incorporating the opinions of an expert and prestigious panel, the winning GM's of the past Imperial Bowls.
The rankings will publish a weekly "annointed twelve", aka the favorites as ordained by the panel to earn a playoff berth.
The rankings will be computed by using a twenty percent weighting of the "King of the Hill" methodology. The remaining eighty percent will be allocated amongst the eight Imperial Bowl Champion GM's, each with a 10% voting contribution. If TB fails to receive a vote from a panel member in any week, a "King of the Hill" ranking will be substituted. The rankings will be published on Wednesday.
Our impartial and illustrious panel has the following composition:
:arrow: Pirates GM - Orlando, 2003 Champ
:arrow: Boss - Madison, 2004 Champ
:arrow: Suicane - St. Louis, 2005 Champ
:arrow: Cringer - Little Rock, 2007 Champ
:arrow: r00k - Norfolk, 2006 & 2008 Champ
:arrow: Warhammer - Hartford, 2009 Champ
:arrow: Coder - Vermont, 2010 Champ
:arrow: JesterBlaze - Lawrence, 2011 Champ
Below is the philosophy behind the King of the Hill ranking methodology.
The System uses a unique but simple methodology. It discards complex formulas that attempt to weight schedules, home field advantage and other such subtle nuances that are found in other ranking systems.
Instead, the King of the Hill Ranking System relies on "what have you done for me lately" and then applies the simple rules of the old schoolboy game, "King of the Hill." Climb to the top - stay on the top. Stumble with a loss and you are thrown down the hill, how far depends upon the rules below.
RANKING CRITERION 1 "of what have you done for me lately": LOSSES are the key factor of the ranking system. Teams are first sorted by the number of incurred losses. A weekly loss can throw a team considerably down the hill and it will need to regroup for the climb again. Note: teams may have an unequal number of wins that are a result of the bye weeks. A team is not penalized because it did not play in a given week and will maintain its position on the hill.
RANKING CRITERION 2 "of what have you done for me lately": PEDIGREES are also important. There are many teams that are in the playoffs year after year and TB has a bias that these teams will probably get there again. Thus, the second sort uses pedigrees from the previous season in order to rank teams with the same number of losses. The Ranking System has a bias that treats playoff performance on a higher level than the pure win-loss record of a team except as explained in Criterion 3.
RANKING CRITERION 3 "of what have you done for me lately":
A winner of a head-to-head game in the "current season" automatically ranks it ahead of the loser of that head-to head game and also for the remainder of the season. This can present a situation where performance in the prior year is overrided and given less emphasis.
__________________
... devoted to the study of meaningless information ...
... and obviously with too much time on one\'s hands ...
The rankings will publish a weekly "annointed twelve", aka the favorites as ordained by the panel to earn a playoff berth.
The rankings will be computed by using a twenty percent weighting of the "King of the Hill" methodology. The remaining eighty percent will be allocated amongst the eight Imperial Bowl Champion GM's, each with a 10% voting contribution. If TB fails to receive a vote from a panel member in any week, a "King of the Hill" ranking will be substituted. The rankings will be published on Wednesday.
Our impartial and illustrious panel has the following composition:
:arrow: Pirates GM - Orlando, 2003 Champ
:arrow: Boss - Madison, 2004 Champ
:arrow: Suicane - St. Louis, 2005 Champ
:arrow: Cringer - Little Rock, 2007 Champ
:arrow: r00k - Norfolk, 2006 & 2008 Champ
:arrow: Warhammer - Hartford, 2009 Champ
:arrow: Coder - Vermont, 2010 Champ
:arrow: JesterBlaze - Lawrence, 2011 Champ
Below is the philosophy behind the King of the Hill ranking methodology.
The System uses a unique but simple methodology. It discards complex formulas that attempt to weight schedules, home field advantage and other such subtle nuances that are found in other ranking systems.
Instead, the King of the Hill Ranking System relies on "what have you done for me lately" and then applies the simple rules of the old schoolboy game, "King of the Hill." Climb to the top - stay on the top. Stumble with a loss and you are thrown down the hill, how far depends upon the rules below.
RANKING CRITERION 1 "of what have you done for me lately": LOSSES are the key factor of the ranking system. Teams are first sorted by the number of incurred losses. A weekly loss can throw a team considerably down the hill and it will need to regroup for the climb again. Note: teams may have an unequal number of wins that are a result of the bye weeks. A team is not penalized because it did not play in a given week and will maintain its position on the hill.
RANKING CRITERION 2 "of what have you done for me lately": PEDIGREES are also important. There are many teams that are in the playoffs year after year and TB has a bias that these teams will probably get there again. Thus, the second sort uses pedigrees from the previous season in order to rank teams with the same number of losses. The Ranking System has a bias that treats playoff performance on a higher level than the pure win-loss record of a team except as explained in Criterion 3.
RANKING CRITERION 3 "of what have you done for me lately":
A winner of a head-to-head game in the "current season" automatically ranks it ahead of the loser of that head-to head game and also for the remainder of the season. This can present a situation where performance in the prior year is overrided and given less emphasis.
__________________
... devoted to the study of meaningless information ...
... and obviously with too much time on one\'s hands ...
Comment