Page 1 of 1

The NAF Win-Ratio

Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2017 2:00 pm
by Arioso
I was stumbling upon the actual Formula of the NAF Rankings which values draws into account in a different way I initially thought. As far as I was told this was a decision by the bbrc long ago - I was wondering why the formula is (win+draw/2)/games and not win/games ? What was the reason behind this decision because the wording could actually suggest a different result than it actually is.

If you see Wikipedia for example https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winning_percentage you can see there are different options to calculate "win ratio". Why did the bbrc chose the actual one (taking draws into account that much) which lead to our tier system (and our feelings about the strength of certain races).

Really interested in this, not meaning to criticise the system.

Re: The NAF Win-Ratio

Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2017 4:55 pm
by Gaixo
The NAF system is based on inverse correlation, right? So "marking down" ties wouldn't make much sense.

I'm not a fan of sports leagues that devalue draws either, but it's obviously subjective.

(And apologies for sending this as a PM as well, Arioso. :) )

Re: The NAF Win-Ratio

Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2017 6:12 pm
by Darkson
Bit confused about what you mean - if you mean the NAF tournament ranking points (i.e. what you win/lose when you play another NAF coach) then the BBRC had nothing to do with devising that formula.

Re: The NAF Win-Ratio

Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:48 pm
by Arioso
Well yes i was thinking about that ranking and my information was that this was decided by the bbrc long ago.

Someone must have decided it to weigh a draw with 50% in the ranking formula (in contradiction for example to the ususal 33% in FIFA soccer - see wikipedia link above).
My question was what has the reasoning been behind that, because these ratings define the races which are "tiered" - and do have an influence on some races (orcs and dwarves come into mind)

i don't mind that decision at all i just wanted to know why a draw in BB was weighted that high.

i.e.: stats 7-5-1 are actual naf-winratio 73%.
Regular win-ratio 53% ( 7 wins / 13 games played without draws taken into account)
didn't calculate the "soccer"-win-ratio (will probably somewhere in-between the two above)

@gaixo - i think draws are valued very high in the NAF-ranking with the actual formula

this is a difference when tiering races by looking at the NAF win-ratio for example (and the term "win-ratio" may be misleading too...i remember when i first saw my "win ratio" i thought i won XX% of my games with that race which obviously was bad understanding of statistics on my side back then^^)
Dwarves probably are tiered in t1 because of that formula (and lots of draws they usually do) and wouldn't be a t1-team if another formula was used (blatant exaggeration on my side maybe... :))

sorry as english isn't my native language i am trying to explain it as good as i can :)

Re: The NAF Win-Ratio

Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2017 11:44 pm
by Darkson
I think you'd need to ask those who were on the NAF committee then (15+ years ago), most (all?) of who have seemed to either drop out of Blood Bowl, or at least the forums.

Re: The NAF Win-Ratio

Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2017 4:11 pm
by Gaixo
Toward that, is there a listing of NAF officers through the years? It might be a bit easier to find information if potential sources were catalogued.

Re: The NAF Win-Ratio

Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2017 6:09 pm
by Darkson
Well, I'd think you'd have a better chance of having access to that info.

Re: The NAF Win-Ratio

Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2017 7:24 pm
by Gaixo
But I don't! Maybe we can get Lycos or someone to sketch a history for us.