Let's assume a league of 7 particpants and a Bot X having a details sheet looking somewhat like this:
| Enemy | Battles fought | Score Share | Points |
| Bot A | 7 | 55.7% | 2 |
| Bot B | 3 | 60.2% | 2 |
| Bot C | 2 | 27.8% | 0 |
| Bot D | 5 | 89.5% | 2 |
| Bot E | 3 | 50.0% | 1 |
| Bot F | 8 | 48.5% | 0 |
The number of pairings will be 6. Bot X collects 7 points so its total score is 7. Also, if there is a tie, the sum of the scores is used to decide the final ranking (it is the %wins appearing in the /PremierLeague results). In the example the % wins would be (55.7 + 60.2 + 27.8 + 89.5 + 50.0 + 48.5)/100.
Chat:
Er... it's actually called "The Premiership"... I think premier league is used in other sports, and football in other countries, but not English football... -- Tango
It is? I wasn't aware. I thought "premiership" was a pet name for it. Well, as long as you know what I mean... =) -- PEZ
Nope, it's official name is the premiership. But Premier League is used in other places/sports with the same/similar scoring so it doesn't really matter. -- Tango
What about using something like described on the IsTheBotBetterOrWorse page to say it's a tie (49% - 51%) is too short i think.--Synnalagma
One of the objectives of the PremierLeague is to make the ranking system SIMPLE. Using a pure statistical tool to decide the ties doesn't sound simple at all. My proposal would be just the opposite: ingore the ties. You get 3 points by beating a bot (%score > 50%) and no points if you tie or lose. -- Albert
Yeah, that would work. It would keep things even simpler. And as for the better-or-worse suggestion. I wouldn't like he PL to be yet another opaque ranking system to me. -- PEZ
On the subject of Premier League not used in English Football. What about this: http://www.premierleague.com/ I'm not alone at least. -- PEZ
Hmmm... indeed. But look at the logo, it says "Barclaycard Premiership". It looks like it is called both... -- Tango
Ok, to settle the discussion the name is impacted by the sponsors. It used to be called "The FA Carling Premier League" then about 2-3 years ago, the sponsorshhip deal with carling was lost, and it became known as "The FA Barclaycard Premiership" why the need for the change?? i have no idea... --Brainfade
Is that so? OK. I'll take your word for it, not being a football fan really. -- Tango
OK, I just thougth that since we have a delimited number of rounds we can have a fixed interval for tieds (We calculate it once) using the methods described there (I didn't meant Complicating the rating). -- Synnalagma
Then I misunderstood you. That would certainly work, but I still like Albert's idea of really making it "winner takes all" and think we should move in that direction instead. -- PEZ
It seems like the hockey mentality where it's 2 points for a win, 1 point for a tie and no points for a loss might make more sense than 3 points for a win and no points for ties or losses (and if the only points are for wins, why make it 3 points? That's bordering on Tennis scoring). -- Kawigi
I don't agree with your first point, but your second is a very good point. I suggest simply 1 point for a win, with a win being defined as more than 50%. If the score is EXACTLY 50% then give 1/2 a point each, but that should never actually happen. -- Tango
...which is what my first point was (awarding half as much in case of a tie). -- Kawigi
Why, if you don't win against a bot you could as well have 0 points. 3 points for a win and zero for other outcomes might be a bit weird though, so make it 1 point for the win instead. -- PEZ
Of course, if you go with the hockey mentality, then you should award a bot points for an overtime loss. Personally, I like the 3-1-0 pattern because it makes a win much more pronounced than a loss and doesn't completely punish a bot for losing by 1%. Also, it seems like more pro sports leagues use that system if they are scoring by points. -- Alcatraz
I've never looked especially vigilantly, but i've never actually seen a draw. I've seen instances where a bot got 50.0% of the score (yet the bot had no draws), but i just assumed that due to rounding errors. --Brainfade
It looks like this topic has been dead for quite some time, but I have some thoughts on rankings that I couldn't find a better place to put. I think of this game more like boxing, or MMA than other sports (as there is a complete battle, made up of rounds), though there is no possibility of knock-out... Although all I've really thought about was OneOnOne battles... but for those, it seems like you could "judge" each round, if the round was close (like 51%-49%), you could assign the 10-9 score, but if the round was decisive (like 60%-40%), you could assign a 10-8 score, or (this is a departure from boxing) if the round was a domination (like 75%-25%), you could even do a 10-7... but that would only account for a particular battle, not for overall ranking. And boxing is a terrible example for overall ranking, as that is where all the subjectivity and corruption comes into it. --BenHorner
![[Home]](/images/RoboWiki.png)