2013 - AAG 40 League

FYI if the playoffs started now or very soon, these are (APPROXIMATELY) who would probably be in them:

RGP44, 7-0, 1.000, #2
Alexgreat, 9-0, 1.000, #7
Allweneedislove, 19-2, .905, #1
Zhukov, 8-1, .889, #4
Gamerman01, 21-3, .875, #3
Arathorn, 6-2, .750, #13
Hobo, 11-4, .733, #9
Ziggurat, 16-6, .727, #6

Nobody can argue this is a good group for the playoffs.
However, by rankings, these players would be excluded:
#5 Hank13 (10-4, .714)
#8 Cow (10-4, .714)

Note that these players could easily qualify by the end of the year by win% (current rules) but yes if they really wanted to be in the playoffs then they will pick weaker opponents.

Hank and Cow are ranked #5 and #8 using my system but are not in the top 8 by win % because they play tougher competition.
Half of Cow’s games were played vs. tier 1.  Only 3 were below tier 2.
Half of Hank’s games were played vs. tier 1, with very few against below tier 2.

So there’s the difference between straight win % and a strength of schedule calculation such as my own.
I think having 3 tournament/playoff at the end of the year that excludes no one but the tier 4’s (I’ll call them apprentices) would alleviate the concerns about the playoff qualification/determination, and include everyone who wants, in the fun.
Winner of the tier 1 playoff is crowned winner of the league for the year.

What do you think, Jenn?

Unless Jenn objects, I am planning to sponsor 2 additional playoffs at the end of the year, for players who will not qualify for the official playoff.

A playoff for any excluded tier 1’s, and tier 2’s who sign up, and
A playoff for any tier 3’s who sign up.

I will establish the brackets and administer/moderate the tournament.
Any tier 1 who does not qualify for the playoffs may enter the tier 2 tournament (these will be lower tier 1’s), so that no one tier 3 or above is exluded from a playoff.

Only the winner of the league playoff by win % will be named league champion (the official league playoff) and
if you play in the official league playoff you are not eligible for these additional playoffs.

I will create a web document sign up sheet and provide the link here soon.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydF93TUcwNFB2Y1JvYm9weThsdzV0cEE&usp=sharing

Here’s the sign up.

Good point.  Great idea, Jenn, I’ll leave it as 2 tourneys right now to separate tier 2 and 3, but it will depend on interest.

If there are like 8-16 players total interested, we could just do 1 junior tourney, yes.

@Gamerman01:

I will establish the brackets and administer/moderate the tournament.

I’m sorry, I went to bed too late last night.  I was going to say this and almost forgot.

If Jenn is willing, she will also moderate the additional playoff(s) with me (answer questions, settle disputes).
I did not intend to exclude you, Jennifer

@Cmdr:

Lol, I read that part in, originally!

Good.

The only question really is if we will have a tournament this year or not.  There was interest, but with the Senior Varsity and the Junior Varsity play offs maybe we do not need a tournament as well?

Right, I think this can serve as the tournament for anyone who’s not playing in the 8 man league playoff.

Actually, tier 4’s can feel free to sign up as well.  Will probably end up being one add’l tournament.  Call it the NIT (USA college basketball tournament for the teams that aren’t good enough to get invited to the NCAA tournament in March).

Yeah, sounds great.

I think if we get 16+, I would prefer 2 tourneys of 8 split by upper half and lower half of rankings of those signing up, but let’s see how many actually sign up in the coming weeks first.

Signup is here, guys.  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydF93TUcwNFB2Y1JvYm9weThsdzV0cEE#gid=0

There seems to be some obvious flaws in ranking players for the league finals based on their win percentage.

For example, you have a tier 1 player like Alex who is undefeated but has only played low-level players. Since his spot in the finals is assured, there is no reason for him to play any other games as a loss will affect his win percentage. For the same reason, anyone on the bubble (me, cow, etc.) has no incentive to compete against players who are equal to or better than them and are better off playing people they should be able to beat.

The beauty of Gamerman`s points per game ranking is that it encourages you to always try to play people close to your skill level or better, making the overall AA experience better as well. From personal experience (this being my first year on AA.org) this also helps players improve as I see a lot of players that I started out with like Alex and Zigg up in Tier 1.

I realize these rules were set at the beginning of the season and I don`t have any expectation that they will be changed but it is something to consider for next year.

(Also I am in no way taking a shot at Alex as I know from the 4 games we have played outside of the league he is a very good player and excellent person :))

@Hank13:

There seems to be some obvious flaws in ranking players for the league finals based on their win percentage.

For example, you have a tier 1 player like Alex who is undefeated but has only played low-level players. Since his spot in the finals is assured, there is no reason for him to play any other games as a loss will affect his win percentage. For the same reason, anyone on the bubble (me, cow, etc.) has no incentive to compete against players who are equal to or better than them and are better off playing people they should be able to beat.

The beauty of Gamerman`s points per game ranking is that it encourages you to always try to play people close to your skill level or better, making the overall AA experience better as well. From personal experience (this being my first year on AA.org) this also helps players improve as I see a lot of players that I started out with like Alex and Zigg up in Tier 1.

I realize these rules were set at the beginning of the season and I don`t have any expectation that they will be changed but it is something to consider for next year.

(Also I am in no way taking a shot at Alex as I know from the 4 games we have played outside of the league he is a very good player and excellent person :))

i liked your post hank.  are you in politics?  if not, i think you should consider running for office.  :wink:

@Hank13:

There seems to be some obvious flaws in ranking players for the league finals based on their win percentage.

For example, you have a tier 1 player like Alex who is undefeated but has only played low-level players. Since his spot in the finals is assured, there is no reason for him to play any other games as a loss will affect his win percentage. For the same reason, anyone on the bubble (me, cow, etc.) has no incentive to compete against players who are equal to or better than them and are better off playing people they should be able to beat.

The beauty of Gamerman`s points per game ranking is that it encourages you to always try to play people close to your skill level or better, making the overall AA experience better as well. From personal experience (this being my first year on AA.org) this also helps players improve as I see a lot of players that I started out with like Alex and Zigg up in Tier 1.

I realize these rules were set at the beginning of the season and I don`t have any expectation that they will be changed but it is something to consider for next year.

(Also I am in no way taking a shot at Alex as I know from the 4 games we have played outside of the league he is a very good player and excellent person :))

I would perhaps be willing to relinquish my spot in the playoffs to one of the higher ranked players, even though I might have a better win%.

I try to play tier 1 and tier 2 players, now that I’ve wrapped up my previous games (I have three games running, two against tier 1 and one against a tier 2 player). Should I win these, only then would I feel myself “worthy” to replace Cow/Hank in the official playoffs.

Just my two cents.

@Gamerman01:

Yeah, sounds great.

I think if we get 16+, I would prefer 2 tourneys of 8 split by upper half and lower half of rankings of those signing up, but let’s see how many actually sign up in the coming weeks first.

Signup is here, guys.  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydF93TUcwNFB2Y1JvYm9weThsdzV0cEE#gid=0

Signed up, just in case.

No need to apologize, Arathorn.  You’ve only finished 8 games - you might very well be in the top 8 rankings by the end of the league year.

As of today you’re in, but we’ll see how things look at the end of the year.  You might be ranked in the top 10 by then.  Or top 8.

Signup is here at this link, and yes you should sign up if you want to play unless your name is Allweneedislove (or myself  :-)), who appear to be the only ones who have basically clinched at this point.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydF93TUcwNFB2Y1JvYm9weThsdzV0cEE#gid=0

I for one am in favor of a weighted system either similar to OR exactly like Gamer’s ranking system in order to choose playoff participants. Obviously it’s too late in the game to change things for THIS year. But I’d like to see changes for NEXT year. I’m all about seeing the heavyweight tee off against each other instead of avoiding each other. I’d even be for instituting a required amount of games against tier 1 and/or tier 2 as a part of the minimum amount of games. Or maybe go in the other direction and institute a maximum amount of tier 3/4 games that count for the rankings, something like what college football does in only counting 1 FCS opponent each year towards bowl eligibility.

The minimum games against tier 1/2 players or the maximum against tier 3/4 players would depend on how many league games are needed to qualify for next year’s playoffs. But I’m envisioning something like 20-25% of the minimum amount of games needed to qualify need to be against tier 1/2 players, that should encourage people to schedule tougher opponents. Especially when you don’t know if someone will go in for a rough streak and drop a tier.

Signed up as I doubt I’ll get in.  :-D

@seththenewb:

Signed up as I doubt I’ll get in.  :-D

Ditto.

i signed up first, which counts for something right?  :roll:

@Hank13:

@seththenewb:

Signed up as I doubt I’ll get in.  :-D

Ditto.

Which I think is a crying shame. We’ll see what happens in our game (hope springs eternal!) But I think you’ve earned a spot based on your winning percentage AND your SOS. You didn’t get too fat on cupcakes, quite a few top names in your games this year.