Remove this ad


Posts: 5,414 Site Admin

#41 [url]

Mar 5 14 5:46 PM

Of course, we all know that Kenya cancelled the match with Sudan because they didn't want to affect the outcome of the World League of Rankings.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad


Posts: 5,414 Site Admin

#45 [url]

Mar 5 14 7:30 PM

If that's to me, I covered that already above by saying I would eat my own leg. Since I had to repeat this, I will now eat both of my legs in that event.
Half-time scores

Piet 1-2 10.18g WPL Tippmeisterschaft
Population 2-9 We Global
Non-FIFA Football Updates 1-5 ESPN SPI
Chance de Gol 5-1 MJR
Maas 2-3 R Soccer
Cubic Watermelon 0-2 Val
The Roon Ba 1-2 CTR
Random 1-4 Aggregierte
Elo 3-1 Fast Midfielder
Ziaian 8-4 P2P
Mondfoot 1-4 FIFA

Quote    Reply   

#47 [url]

Mar 6 14 6:46 AM

TheRoonBa wrote:
Anyway - we will see what happens. If FIFA wins the league, I will eat my own leg.
Since I had to repeat this, I will now eat both of my legs in that event

Thank goodness for the WPL then.   Throw down your crutches!

I would like a T-shirt printed please:
switzerland.gif FIFA 2-4 scotland.gif 10.18g WPL Tippmeisterschaft

Last Edited By: nfm24 Mar 6 14 6:49 AM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   


Posts: 5,414 Site Admin

#48 [url]

Mar 6 14 11:00 AM

That victory certainly eased my mind.

I had started to think of condiments to make my legs taste better.

I think FIFA did well simply because of the 'randomness' of the day's friendly match results. It's ironic that I set this up to show that it was possible (and probable, even) that most ranking systems/predictions could do better than FIFA.

The WPL had no competition really, although they avoided the wooden spoon in the women's tournament due to a lucky drawing of lots. It seems all resources were diverted to the men's competition.  I am moderately content with 7th place.

Your T-shirt will surely attract many questions among the curious.

Quote    Reply   

#49 [url]

Mar 6 14 11:30 AM

If the aim is to verify the FIFA rankings shortcomings then the experiment would need to be more robust, i.e. more matches over longer timeframe.

Of course, the WPL will still win in any case because of my natural savant-like excellence.

Quote    Reply   

#50 [url]

Mar 6 14 3:25 PM

I think I do not understand the whole concept, but by beating Elo, did I prove we do not need rankings (I hope I did, but I think my hope will be trashed by the "ranking-fans" :))

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#51 [url]

Mar 6 14 6:15 PM

Many thanks for including us. This was a lot of fun to track, and I know it certainly took a lot of time to do. I'm not all that surprised that someone making picks would do better than a ranking system. When looking at an individual game, it does certainly seem a little bit easier to analyze what is going on inside the game (what players may be out, where the game is being played, etc.). "Is Team A better than Team B" is reasonable to guess by itself before a game. You have to adjust your assumptions after the result. Now what happens when Team A plays Team C? Is that assumption going to be different based on what happened in the previous match?

The purpose of the computer rankings is to take all of the prior matches into consideration and predict what would happen between any two random teams. And then after the match adjust your assumptions based on results. Team A against Team B is certainly much easier to predict than how Team A would do against every other team in the world. What is the true strength of a team in the world? What is a team's chances against say 5 other teams in a group stage? That's the real benefit of the ranking systems.

I'm glad We Global did well, and it certainly raised some questions about areas we were missing. We use a Strength of Schedule metric that we've discovered we probably should be weighting a little more heavily. France, Austria, and Wales deserve a little more credit than we gave them. USA, Iran, and New Zealand decidedly less.

Hopefully we get to do something similar again and show consistency that our computer rankings have. Thanks again.

Quote    Reply   


Posts: 5,414 Site Admin

#52 [url]

Mar 7 14 10:58 AM

In general, the ranking systems did better at predicting than the individuals (8 of the Top 10 were 'systems'). Only 2 individuals made the Top 10. Most individuals/ranking systems did better than they would have done if they had just picked at random (which at least shows that most people know SOMETHING about strengths of teams).

So, I would say that ranking systems definitely have some value, as in general, they showed that they are better at predicting outcomes of matches than individuals. If all the ranking systems had finished in the bottom half of the table, I think there would have been reason to think "do we need rankings?". Fortunately (for ranking fans), I think the answer is still "no, we don't NEED them, but they are useful".

Quote    Reply   


Posts: 5,414 Site Admin

#54 [url]

Mar 7 14 11:24 AM

Rankings show progress. And all teams want to progress. There is no other way to show progress (we can all know in our heads how good teams are, but we need a tool to actually show it). For teams who do not reach the World Cup (Guam, Hong Kong, Papua New Guinea, etc.), this is an important measure of their success/lack of success. Many FAs base their progress reports/funding bids on their position in the FIFA ranking. So they do have importance for the smaller teams at least. Of course, it also helps when seeding teams (previous form in tournaments is not a good measure, as sometimes, some teams have easier groups than others).

And in general, individuals/nations/teams like to know their position in global terms. It's a human trait to be curious about how you fit in the 'bigger picture'. It may not be useful, but it is human.

One could also argue - what is the usefulness of having international football? There is no real usefulness in global terms - the world would still turn without football - but we all like (need?) it. ;-)

Of course, we are all free to be hardliners ;-)

Quote    Reply   

#55 [url]

Mar 7 14 11:38 AM

but some teams get better and do not progress because the others are getting more better, but I agree it is human to make a ranking and see how you fit in it...

and I am not really opposed to rankings : I make my own ranking since about 20 or more years...

Quote    Reply   

#56 [url]

Mar 7 14 11:45 AM

Well, I like rankings more for fun. It is hard to make a proper ranking. No ranking will exactly be the same. Making current and all time rankings in individual sports are much easier. Wo did run the fastest 100 meters officially? The official World record holder. Who is officially the fastest 100 meter runner this season? The one who have officially run fastest in this season. That's it.

In football it is a different matter. Which team will win the World Cup? The best one? It is often said the right champions will be the team that (can) beat all its opponents. Nevertheless, it helps for each team to avoud it's bogey teams.

Regarding (national) football teams it is not that easy to make a 100% correct ranking, also as discussed in many other topics. Just like many others I compose my own overall rankings, but I am even more interested in how many times two teams met, the overall scores between both teams etc, etc. Finally each team has a total score and so an all time ranking can be composed (I make two, one based of the numbers of points and one based on average; very simple).

However, I agree there is no usefulness of having international football in global terms as the world would still turn without football. I cannot afford to do more (or less) things if the result between team A and B will be different. Life will continue anyhow. When I played football myself I did it because I like to do it (and to win of course), making some rankings I do for fun (but the overall scores of all teams should be as correct as possible, so if you start this you have to take this seriously).

Quote    Reply   

#57 [url]

Mar 7 14 1:17 PM

pieter wrote:
usefull....? what is the "usefullness" of predicting games,

roonba wrote:
what is the usefulness of having international football?


Quote    Reply   


Posts: 5,414 Site Admin

#59 [url]

Mar 7 14 3:09 PM

The key point to understand is that rankings do not say "Team A is better than Team B". That's not their purpose. They say that MORE OFTEN THAN NOT Team A will beat Team B if Team A is ranked higher than Team B. Once this point is understood, it makes things easier.

It's much more useful to have a ranking than, say, an all-time league table.

Simple example.

England 4-0 Moldova
Moldova 4-0 San Marino
San Marino 0-2 Moldova

Based on a league table, Moldova would be the best team. Based on a ranking system, England would. Because in international football, every team does not play every other team, a ranking system is a much better way of ordering teams than a simple league table. A league table does not take into consideration the strength of the opposition.

But, in any case, the whole point of a ranking is that IT CHANGES to reflect actual events. Just as in life, the ability to accept change usually brings better results.

What about ££££ or ¥¥¥¥ or ₹₹₹₹ even?

Quote    Reply   

#60 [url]

Mar 7 14 4:08 PM

an all time league table with all the teams (207?) involved seems also fun, but it will take a lot of work; when I retire I will make work of it...

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help