golfaddict1 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Ken Massey... Preseason Ratings Preseason ratings are typically derived as a weighted average of previous years' final ratings. As the current season progresses, their effect gets damped out completely. The only purpose preseason ratings serve is to provide a reasonable starting point for the computer. Mathematically, they guarantee a unique solution to the equations early in the season when not enough data is available yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
golfaddict1 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 https://www.masseyratings.com/theory/massey97.pdf Page One from Ken Massey, At this point, it is appropriate to discuss some terminology. First we make the distinction between a rating and a ranking. A ranking refers only to the ordering of the teams (first, second, third, ...). However, a rating comes from a continuous scale such that the relative strength of a team is directly reflected in the value of its rating (Stern 1995). Hence it is possible to determine the actual separation in ability for teams that may be adjacent in the rankings. A rating system assigns each team a single numerical value to represent that team’s strength relative to the rest of the league on some predetermined scale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
golfaddict1 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Thus, when a national scale is used... a predetermined state scale is used folks. It's not the bogeyman, it's reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 49 minutes ago, Sportsnut said: They all belong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bones Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Someone hit me with the lanktion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 1 minute ago, ECHS05 said: Haha ... It was important enough for him to create a new page called "State Scaling" on his website (after I spoke on it for years)... Explaining what it means, and how he tried to add it. Idiot. I guess he felt there were people out there that didn’t already know that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECHS05 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Just now, Pops said: I guess he felt there were people out there that didn’t already know that Like you. And for some reason you still dont get it. Not really surprised its YOU though, that doesnt understand it after all this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 1 hour ago, golfaddict1 said: https://www.masseyratings.com/theory/massey97.pdf Page One from Ken Massey, At this point, it is appropriate to discuss some terminology. First we make the distinction between a rating and a ranking. A ranking refers only to the ordering of the teams (first, second, third, ...). However, a rating comes from a continuous scale such that the relative strength of a team is directly reflected in the value of its rating (Stern 1995). Hence it is possible to determine the actual separation in ability for teams that may be adjacent in the rankings. A rating system assigns each team a single numerical value to represent that team’s strength relative to the rest of the league on some predetermined scale. I fail to see the relevance for it being a point worthy for you, much less to use 36 point font wouldnt any algorithm, by definition, use a predetmined scale? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECHS05 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 1 hour ago, Wosinc said: I appreciate that you get exasperated, but it’s unnecesary postscripts like this that put you in the Canes/los Hurricanés/Carlos Danger/LOSer/Guccifer/Goldmember/and now Guccifer again category. That is: not to be taken seriously. It’s solid enough to state your case and let the facts make your arguement. You don’t need gratuitous insults. That might be true if I called everyone an Idiot. I dont. If you go back through my last 1000 posts.... 99% of insults like that are to Pops and Pops only. The guy simply doesnt deserve, not has he earned, respect. He lies and exaggerates nonstop... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECHS05 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, Pops said: I fail to see the relevance for it being a point worthy for you, much less to use 36 point font wouldnt any algorithm, by definition, use a predetmined scale? Seriously ... You are lost. Its like watching 2 retards try to play chess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 1 hour ago, golfaddict1 said: Thus, when a national scale is used... a predetermined state scale is used folks. It's not the bogeyman, it's reality. Seems like echs and you feel there’s been a smoking gun exposed i feel like you guys just discovered that algorithms have formulas and are screaming “AHA!!!” Seems like it’s called math, and was self apparent to everyone already Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 1 hour ago, golfaddict1 said: Ken Massey... Preseason Ratings Preseason ratings are typically derived as a weighted average of previous years' final ratings. As the current season progresses, their effect gets damped out completely. The only purpose preseason ratings serve is to provide a reasonable starting point for the computer. Mathematically, they guarantee a unique solution to the equations early in the season when not enough data is available yet. Again..... point? ive been a clear advocate of any preseason poll but especially an algorithm being garbage i wouldn’t put any stock in them until October when they pass any human effort to rank 100 teams much less 14,000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
golfaddict1 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 1 minute ago, Pops said: Seems like echs and you feel there’s been a smoking gun exposed i feel like you guys just discovered that algorithms have formulas and are screaming “AHA!!!” Seems like it’s called math, and was self apparent to everyone already Seems like I forgot that @15yds4gibberishis my go to person for a quality discussion on the Freeman Ratings. My mistake. Yup all through the years you were right there with astute comments about the workings of Freeman. Echs and I were off base lol. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
golfaddict1 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 14 minutes ago, Pops said: I fail to see the relevance for it being a point worthy for you, much less to use 36 point font wouldnt any algorithm, by definition, use a predetmined scale? I see, now you are an expert on Algorithms... where was your outspoken stance on state scaling prior when Echs was receiving ridicule? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
golfaddict1 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 19 minutes ago, Pops said: I guess he felt there were people out there that didn’t already know that Like most... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 6 minutes ago, ECHS05 said: Seriously ... You are lost. Its like watching 2 retards try to play chess. How bout we do an IQ test for money? are you good for it? Heck, I’d be willing to do loser takes a pemaband if you want me gone that much Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 8 minutes ago, golfaddict1 said: Seems like I forgot that @15yds4gibberishis my go to person for a quality discussion on the Freeman Ratings. My mistake. Yup all through the years you were right there with astute comments about the workings of Freeman. Echs and I were off base lol. You seem upset that I’m not crediting you with the discovery of water Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, golfaddict1 said: Like most... Like the formula for water Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 6 minutes ago, golfaddict1 said: I see, now you are an expert on Algorithms... where was your outspoken stance on state scaling prior when Echs was receiving ridicule? Echs was presenting flawed statistical analysis (for lots of reasons) — many of us for a long time pointed out flaws and he ignored us all until you got to your aha moment that apparently impressed you two more than the rest of us Eeveryone stopped reading his epistles years ago — they were a waste of time and the comedy value of them declined due to overexposure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
golfaddict1 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Human bias never leaves the building with algorithms. Not October, Not December. Massey even uses a 2 year rolling data set point for scaling states. How accurate will that be... two separate years combined used for the sole purpose of adding still a limited correlation of OOS games results to set a state scale rating system. He used 2 years because one year was too few games. Freeman uses one year, so less data and one game in state can essentially determine a state scale adjustment? The majority of the ratings are based on in-state games and certainly in-state playoff boosts. The more OOS opponents, the more unchained the school is to being rated based on a majority of in-state scaled numbers (most in state teams don’t play OOS). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORabidOne Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 7 hours ago, Sammyswordsman said: 1. Three BNU teams ranked in Top 50. 2. Nine (9) Ga teams ranked 3. #24 I defer to the peanut gallery for the balance. Shouldn't need my help HEY DUMB DUMB Sambo, THIS was actually a disappointment to ME! In 2015, we had four of the TOP FORTY, and they were ALL in the GHSA big school semis! And six of the top seventy five! CONVERSELY, having two Cali clowns in the top FOUR is a FARCE! If it weren't for massive transfers, you clown ass Left Wing whackados would be TOTALLY IRRELEVANT! But it all goes back to the mindset that you girls have ALWAYS possessed! That of thinking that EVERYTING in Cali is the BEST there IS! HELL in REALITY, you buffoons are too stupid to even purify your own water supply! You may go back and place your hayd up your ass once again! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECHS05 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 14 minutes ago, golfaddict1 said: Human bias never leaves the building with algorithms. Not October, Not December. Massey even uses a 2 year rolling data set point for scaling states. How accurate will that be... two separate years combined used for the sole purpose of adding still a limited correlation of OOS games results to set a state scale rating system. He used 2 years because one year was too few games. Freeman uses one year, so less data and one game in state can essentially determine a state scale adjustment? The majority of the ratings are based on in-state games and certainly in-state playoff boosts. The more OOS opponents, the more unchained the school is to being rated based on a majority of in-state scaled numbers (most in state teams don’t play OOS). On point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECHS05 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 51 minutes ago, Pops said: Echs was presenting flawed statistical analysis (for lots of reasons) — many of us for a long time pointed out flaws and he ignored us all until you got to your aha moment that apparently impressed you two more than the rest of us Eeveryone stopped reading his epistles years ago — they were a waste of time and the comedy value of them declined due to overexposure Go back and read the "aha" thread. Most people got it. You still downplay it because you were made to look stupid. You still think YOU saying its flawed, makes it flawed. Except EVERY THING I said, lined up with what Ned Freeman himself said. Give it up Pops. Youre a fool. Every single solitary sentence you type is a LIE. You are either a sociopath, or a hibitual liar. You constantly use the word EVERYONE to make your stance sound more credible than it is... Its not fooling anyone. Somebody with actual confidence in what their saying doesnt need to lump "everyone"s opinion on their side to justify themselves.... Especially when its a straight up lie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLien12x Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 7 hours ago, Pops said: I just believe that #3 is too high i think there’s about 5 teams that clearly ought to be ranked higher and Grayson can be anywhere in the 6-15 range I know Grayson has athletes but they always do and sondoes Stephenson for that matter — you yourself have expressed a lot of reservations about the quality of the coaching staff further, I know most of you GA guys support the non-metro teams more, but no one in GA seems overly excited or impressed by Grayson — #3 would be as high of a finish for a GA team in last decade — is this Grayson team THAT team? Seems like none of you guys think so MD, SJB, IMG on a different level; STA seems like they should be in this group every year; BG, SJC.... If Grayson really is the #3 team I would think they’d be a stronger consensus #1 in GA because I’m fairly confident GA doesn’t have more than one team on Tier One Agree with a lot of this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORabidOne Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 30 minutes ago, golfaddict1 said: Human bias never leaves the building with algorithms. Not October, Not December. Massey even uses a 2 year rolling data set point for scaling states. How accurate will that be... two separate years combined used for the sole purpose of adding still a limited correlation of OOS games results to set a state scale rating system. He used 2 years because one year was too few games. Freeman uses one year, so less data and one game in state can essentially determine a state scale adjustment? The majority of the ratings are based on in-state games and certainly in-state playoff boosts. The more OOS opponents, the more unchained the school is to being rated based on a majority of in-state scaled numbers (most in state teams don’t play OOS). ACTUALLY, algorithms are FAR more accurate than HUMANS, who play to their BASE! How ELSE do you quantify having top twenty five powers from clown states like MEEECHIGAN, Color RADO, Indiana, NEW Jersey, and the like! And 20% of the entire top 100, from FRICKIN TEXAS, who has the SAME four or five big schools in the mix EVERY season! DITTO for Californication! Computer offerings take into account dozens of aspects of a given team! While humans rely upon hearsay and how purdy a team is on the hoof! There are BUNCHES of PURDY teams in the Colquitt County Packer cemetery! As an aside, combining two years in succession for Georgia would REALLY be a mistake! Since the bad asses of THIS season, were JUNIOR dominated in 2017! And Texas plays virtually NO meaningful OOS competition, EVER! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.