Forum Message
| | Message text Templars wrote:
This is Ashtar's show - Like yourself, I was trying to help when I proposed the grouping I suggested. It was a suggestion - Ashtar can group these by shoe size for all I care. I've taught College Algebra myself. I'm not sure how you obtained the results above but group one, I can assure you has far too many higher ranked players contained in that sample than should be the case. The sum of the ranks of group A, is 128 whereas group D you propose is 137. Therefore, group A contains a higher average seed per group than the latter. The sum of the seeds/ranks in the groups I proposed was 132 in each group for an average of 16.5. This is good enough for the NCAA so it should be good enough for this.
As I said, this is Ashtar's deal and we all know that kills/deaths is not an absolute method of ranking. Some often play games where kills will accumulate and do not take chances. Some exit early to avoid a shootdown whereas others fight to the bitter end - its a game after all. So whatever groups are decided upon, let the games begin an thanks Ashtar for putting the idea together.
The problem with the NCAA system is that it guarantees a pairing of seed numbers that total 33 and a grouping that gives the highest advantage to the #1 seed. Any seeding method will have flaws since it cannot take into account everything. That being said a seeding method was stated and used. In order to have a random element to the group placement you cannot begin by pair teams together for an even seed count distribution. Some variation in seed count is a sign that a proper randomness was used. Although I found flaws in the randomness of Ashtar's method I used it to make the first group list. The second group list I made using a stronger random placement method. |
|
|
|
|
Donate
Leagues
Gonzaga
Blue Max
Cartagena
Wooden Ships...
King Me!
VampiRing
