Last season I had toyed with the idea of a weighted score. This way, a player who always played against strong opponents would have their score increased, but I couldn’t get it to work.
This time, though, I think I may have cracked it. I took last season’s points ratio from everyone, and got an average of that (4.1411).
I then divided each person’s points ratio by that, so that Adam got 4.84/4.14=1.16 while Jonny got 3.1/4.14=0.74 etc.
Then I took each player's score from each game and divided it by this new number. This mean strong players’ score went down while weak players got a boost. For the most part, nothing changes, except in the first game, when Jonny came second. By this method, he actually won! Similarly, my close third in our game of Notre Dame was enough to nudge me into first! What a great system, I thought.
I can’t make it work properly for games where you have to score the least to win, but for the other games the leader board would look like this...
The weighted leaderboard...
| Played | Points | Ratio | |
| Adam | 4 | 19 | 4.75 |
| Andrew | 4 | 16 | 4 |
| Sam | 3 | 14 | 4.66 |
| Joe | 4 | 12 | 3 |
| Johnny | 2 | 10 | 5 |
| Quentin | 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Steve | 1 | 2 | 2 |
I don’t know how long I’ll keep this method up, but it is interesting so I might. I’m not sure that Joe will approve, though.
I’m currently considering a different guest-scoring-system once a month. Just to keep things interesting.
Very good Andrew. Can you now work on a number of different systems, one for each of us regulars, which gives us each a pole position. Mine could be somehow based on number of games owned . . .
ReplyDeleteAnd, you know, I still haven't added in the variable for length of game.
ReplyDeleteMmmm, statistics...
I'd like a system that I can actually understand. For instance: length of game divided by amount of players multiplied by reverse position (so if you came first out of four you'd get x4, if you were fourth you'd get x1). Take that number and subtract the average age difference between the competing players, then multiply by how many alcohol units the person had on the night. This could be construed as a reward for drinking but I see it as a balancing of those who choose to stay sober - an advantage - and those who don't. Take this final number and add on the amount of children they have and finally subtract the number on the door (-12 for me, minus 280 or so for Andrew)
ReplyDeleteDo we have to consider what people think about board gamers is actually true because I've been really getting into all this statistical geekery!
ReplyDeleteWhat if the value of a 4 player game was the sum of the ratios of the players involved instead of 4 points?
ReplyDeleteCan I request we keep the Q system going alongside whatever crazy variant is in vogue?
ReplyDelete