Remove this ad

#101 [url]

Apr 15 14 9:07 AM

this can be a realistic improvement of the system; I will give it a try

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#102 [url]

Apr 15 14 9:24 AM

Argentina 238pts/108 matches

Denmark 246 pts/140 games


Cyprus 92/93


I did this kind of ranking in the past, every four years (WC to WC) with a 2pts/victory system

Quote    Reply   

#103 [url]

Apr 15 14 10:43 AM

Yes my comment was meant to be rhetorical. Adjustments such as you are making are the first baby steps towards a proper ranking system.

Anyway, you still have the problem that a team which doesn't often play strong teams will have higher rankings.
Some Caribbean island maybe, Martinique for example.

Quote    Reply   

#107 [url]

Apr 15 14 4:29 PM

I am not going fast, so for Europe I finished the letter C and I took Argentina and Afghanistan to have a better look at differfent confederations...and it seems hopeless

Afghanistan has 29pts from 37 games, while Andorra has 9 pts from 65 games.....I do not think the difference between the two is so big, so it does not work...give me a motivation to continue:)

Quote    Reply   

#108 [url]

Apr 15 14 4:31 PM

In such a case one can make a ranking dealing % opponents with overall positive scores.

I.e. Uganda played against 50 different opponents.
- against 28 opponents a positive record
- against 6 opponents won as much as they lost
- against 16 opponents a negative record.
Score = 62%

Quote    Reply   

#109 [url]

Apr 15 14 5:13 PM

that is a totally different system, I just count the last results against each opponent, home and away (eventually on neutral  ground), so it gives an actual strength, but some results are not recent , like Luxemburg-Afganhistan)

Quote    Reply   

#110 [url]

Apr 15 14 11:02 PM

Wait a minute! What are you doing? Have you misunderstood Neil? I hope he will be kind and do not let you wander 40 years in the desert ...

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#113 [url]

Apr 16 14 9:38 AM

by continent is a solution, but teams like USA and Mexico in CONCaCAF and new Zealand in OFC play much stronger opposition then a team like Trinidad, Tahiti etc....so also this system has weak points...

Quote    Reply   

#117 [url]

Apr 16 14 7:09 PM

I also make rankings for fun Pieter, but I want to do this as good as possible. So sometimes one has to ask to include or not to include a match. This can be a struggle because there are pros and contras for many matches. But including or not including some matches have not a big impact at all for the placings.

One can make rankings by different kind of formulas. I would say pick up te formula what suits your best. Whatever it is I won't send anyone to the desert for this.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

TheRoonBa

Posts: 5,500 Site Admin

#119 [url]

Apr 17 14 2:56 AM

This is not technically a ranking - it's a league table. Rankings are necessary because league tables only work if every team plays every other team. That's something that many people don't seem to understand. There is a clear functional difference between a ranking and a league table.

Quote    Reply   

#120 [url]

Apr 17 14 6:35 AM

my rankings are no league tables, just the last one I tried on your suggestion... I come back on my initial idea: rankings are not necessary, I can do without them and FIFA could do without them (they did it in the past)

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help