All Wins over All Losses Revisited Topic

colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Just wanted to chime in about a topic that a few/many of you went ape over and that was the fact that I rate all wins higher than all losses, now that the college basketball regular season is nearly complete.

I have 13-14 Georgia ranked 87th and would you care to guess where I have 26-5 Coastal Carolina ranked?........

115th

And this isn't the only instance where a team with more wins/a higher win percentage is ranked lower than a low win/win% team in BPI.

Just goes to show you, I told you SOS would work everything out and it did and it does, and I wanted to point that out to those of you that think its dumb to rate ALL wins above ALL losses.
3/2/2010 10:53 AM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
That was a monumentally stupid post.

So because you have Georgia ranked ahead of Coastal Carolina (and/or other examples), that means your system works and that having all wins worth more than all losses is the right and best method?

Of course not.

Maybe the discrepancy should be much larger in that and other examples. Maybe your rankings are totally screwed. Or maybe not and their perfect.

But absolutely nothing that you posted above would be compelling enough evidence to reach either of those conclusions.
3/2/2010 11:10 AM
metsmax
Posts: 1598 (0)
Hall of Famer
5 2 836 2
Pro
I'm slow here, what does it mean to say that one rates all wins higher than all losses?
3/2/2010 11:13 AM
kmasonbx
Posts: 847 (0)
Hall of Famer
210
Prospect
So what you're saying is that somehow if a team beats Bryant University by 3, it should be more beneficial than losing to Kansas on the road at the buzzer?
3/2/2010 11:14 AM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 3/02/2010
That was a monumentally stupid post.

So because you have Georgia ranked ahead of Coastal Carolina (and/or other examples), that means your system works and that having all wins worth more than all losses is the right and best method? A lot of folks thought that because I was going to rate all wins higher than all losses that my rankings would more or less be a standings, ordered by win% and I'm showing/telling you how that nothing could be more false than that kind of viewpoint.

Of course not.

Maybe the discrepancy should be much larger in that and other examples. Maybe your rankings are totally screwed. Or maybe not and their perfect.

But absolutely nothing that you posted above would be compelling enough evidence to reach either of those conclusions. The point was/is to show that SOS works everything out and that eventhough WINNING IS KING in my rankings, if you play a crap schedule, you will be ranked accordingly, which many of you didn't think would happen.

3/2/2010 11:16 AM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By metsmax on 3/02/2010I'm slow here, what does it mean to say that one rates all wins higher than all losses
when I do my rankings, all the wins are worth more than all the losses....a 1 point win over a D2 is worth more than a 1 point loss to Syracuse
3/2/2010 11:17 AM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By kmasonbx on 3/02/2010So what you're saying is that somehow if a team beats Bryant University by 3, it should be more beneficial than losing to Kansas on the road at the buzzer?
Yes, and for one simple reason. You play to win the game(s)...a win = success, a loss = failure...its really that cut and dry. Whether you're supposed to win or lose, doesn't matter.
3/2/2010 11:18 AM
kmasonbx
Posts: 847 (0)
Hall of Famer
210
Prospect
That's ridiculous, a team would get far far more credit for nearly beating arguably the best team in the country on the road than they would for nearly losing to arguably the worst team in the country. Most formula's are flawed but any system that blindly rates all wins better than all losses is more flawed than the rest. You do realize some teams actually play regular season games against D2 teams? How can you count a win over a D2 team more than a close lose against a championship team.
3/2/2010 11:28 AM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By kmasonbx on 3/02/2010
That's ridiculous, a team would get far far more credit for nearly beating arguably the best team in the country on the road than they would for nearly losing to arguably the worst team in the country. Most formula's are flawed but any system that blindly rates all wins better than all losses is more flawed than the rest. You do realize some teams actually play regular season games against D2 teams? 370ish actually, and I've included them all How can you count a win over a D2 team more than a close lose against a championship team.
I've done rankings both ways and concluded that my current setup is the best setup. Rankings where all wins AREN'T rated ahead of all losses are inherently suggesting that winning and losing don't matter (which is ridiculous because you play to WIN the game, regardless of opponent) and that's a rather slippery slope if you ask me. Saying that losing is better than winning, if close enough or if you played a good enough team is a loser's mentality. If you can take solace in the fact that "at least I came in second", then you're rather pathetic if you ask me. Moral victories are a figment of peoples' imaginations.
3/2/2010 11:33 AM
porkpower
Posts: 39 (0)
Hall of Famer
240 1 11
Prospect
I am confused by your posts. The best team in the nation is in Lexington baby!
3/2/2010 11:43 AM
metsmax
Posts: 1598 (0)
Hall of Famer
5 2 836 2
Pro
please post link to your rankings, I know its somewhere back in a 20 page thread somewhere, but I dont want to look back in that corner of my mental closet
3/2/2010 11:45 AM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
I thought we had gotten rid of the stupidity! I guess not.
3/2/2010 11:50 AM
furry_nipps
Posts: 661 (0)
Hall of Famer
66
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by metsmax on 3/02/2010please post link to your rankings, I know its somewhere back in a 20 page thread somewhere, but I dont want to look back in that corner of my mental closet


www.bpisports.com
3/2/2010 11:52 AM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By furry_nipps on 3/02/2010

Quote: Originally posted by metsmax on 3/02/2010
please post link to your rankings, I know its somewhere back in a 20 page thread somewhere, but I dont want to look back in that corner of my mental closet


www.bpisports.com
ftfy

(FYI mets the site is pretty annoying to navigate)
3/2/2010 11:55 AM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By porkpower on 3/02/2010I am confused by your posts. The best team in the nation is in Lexington baby
For a while there, I was the only/one of a few computer systems out there that had Kentucky #1...when they were at 1 loss
3/2/2010 11:56 AM
1|2|3...14 Next ▸
All Wins over All Losses Revisited Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.