SLSA Rankings

Discuss racing matters here. Note that race results and past rules cases have their own sections.

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby Lynn » Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:26 am

Well, how do I say this and remain gracious and politically correct?

Rankings are, by their definition, competitive. Yet, the conversations and the emphasis in this discussion have focused more on giving people rankings based on their need to be motivated and their enthusiasm in participating, rather than based on setting a rugged and accurate scale to create a ranking of the most skillful skippers actively racing in each class of boat.

Although I only numbered two in my earlier post, I actually pointed out three weaknesses in the rankings *as a determination of most skillful active skippers*. They are:

(1) A high score can be accumulated by posting a large number of low place finishes, when those posting high finishes may not be able to race as frequently. I proposed a "rationing" system where sailors post their best 15 races over the past 6 months.

(2) The quality factor with a maximum value of 1.5 is too watered down to give adequate scaling to wins against higher ranked sailors as opposed to wins against the lower ranked sailors. I get more points winning two races against the 40th ranked sailor than I do for winning one race over the top ranked sailor in SL. That really doesn't properly reflect the ranking implications of those results. I proposed a stronger Q factor that at least helps remedy this. The true solution that we are trying to model is the round-robin, which is unfeasible for graded rankings.

(3) Points accumulated should be timely. This is necessary to keep the competition meaningful in the short time frames of SL. Think of the rapid changes in technology illustrated by the introduction of ACA V3.0. Instead of using yet another factor, I proposed an aging system where one chooses their best 5 scores from the last 2 months, the best 5 from the the remaining races in the last 4 months, and the best 5 from the remaining races in the last 6 months. This creates a very modest currency requirement. The implication is that someone will race in the ranked boat class at least once every other week on average, and will have participated at that level during the past two months to get the best scores. Those who race more often just get to throw out more low scores. Hey, that solves the problem of currency as well as the inequality of available SL time among racers.

Each of these weaknesses and proposed remedies goes to the heart of determining who is the more skillful active sailor in SL sailing.

If, however, we are trying to determine who is the most enthusiastic sailor, or the most highly motivated, or who is contributing the most to the community, or any one of these other equally important aspects of being a part of SL sailing, then we should probably not call them "graded race rankings".

If I know that there are 24 active sailors who can beat me soundly in a certain boat in a fair, well-refereed race, I don't want to see a 13 or a 7 ranking by my name, and I wouldn't think anyone else would want that either.

I love the idea of "feel good" rankings, but unless we use standards that fairly measure comparable race results, then graded race rankings will gradually lose meaning and become viewed as a "ho hum" list of people who buy boats.
User avatar
Lynn
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:45 pm

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby SLSA Rankings » Tue Aug 24, 2010 4:40 am

Lynn wrote:Well, how do I say this and remain gracious and politically correct?

Feel free to say it as it comes. I prefer straight and well-argued talk with a constructive approach rather than flattering words and innuendo.

Lynn wrote:Rankings are, by their definition, competitive. Yet, the conversations and the emphasis in this discussion have focused more on giving people rankings based on their need to be motivated and their enthusiasm in participating, rather than based on setting a rugged and accurate scale to create a ranking of the most skillful skippers actively racing in each class of boat.

I agree on the target, not with that analyse of conversations.

Lynn wrote:(1) A high score can be accumulated by posting a large number of low place finishes, when those posting high finishes may not be able to race as frequently.

Not sure. I believe it is a bit more subtitle than that.

Lynn wrote:(2) The quality factor with a maximum value of 1.5 is too watered down to give adequate scaling to wins against higher ranked sailors as opposed to wins against the lower ranked sailors. I get more points winning two races against the 40th ranked sailor than I do for winning one race over the top ranked sailor in SL. That really doesn't properly reflect the ranking implications of those results. I proposed a stronger Q factor that at least helps remedy this.

I am open to discuss about Q factor value. About your example: Yes and No. We may suppose that other competitors race too. So, while you get lot of points winning against the 40th ranked sailor, will the top ranked sailor just watch you, or will they try to maintain their rank? I believe they will race with each others, and thus gain more points than you, thanks to the Quality factor. The solution for you then, is to race with and to win over the top ranked sailors:
You will thus gain 150 pts (x Q factor), while the 2nd will get only 100 pts, and thus maybe that race won’t be even kept as a good results in his/her top 12.
In fact, with the time, much more important than a win in a race, will be the gap between competitors in a given race. It will become more and more important to race against and beat the top-ranked sailors, than to win low-weighted races. Also, don’t forget the competition spirit of top-ranked sailors: as soon as you will go up in rankings, I am very confident they will challenge you in order to “re-establish” the truth. Already, some understood this, and they carefully choose the race they enter: some for gaining easy points, and some others to increase the gap with “dangerous” competitors. In other words, racing with their skills and their brains :).
It is what I find when running simulation with the spreadsheet: the key at term is racing with top ranked sailors.

Lynn wrote:The true solution that we are trying to model is the round-robin, which is unfeasible for graded rankings.

The true solution we are trying to model, is the one in use by ISAF for years for fleet regatta rankings. But with the effect as described above, yes there is also a "round-robin" like effect (gap).

Lynn wrote:(3) Points accumulated should be timely. This is necessary to keep the competition meaningful in the short time frames of SL. Think of the rapid changes in technology illustrated by the introduction of ACA V3.0. Instead of using yet another factor, I proposed an aging system where one chooses their best 5 scores from the last 2 months, the best 5 from the the remaining races in the last 4 months, and the best 5 from the remaining races in the last 6 months. This creates a very modest currency requirement. The implication is that someone will race in the ranked boat class at least once every other week on average, and will have participated at that level during the past two months to get the best scores. Those who race more often just get to throw out more low scores. Hey, that solves the problem of currency as well as the inequality of available SL time among racers.

In (3), you detail with “best 5 scores from the last 2 months, the best 5 from the the remaining races in the last 4 months, and the best 5 from the remaining races in the last 6 months”. My understanding is that to be well ranked, a sailor will have to wait 12 months (or at least 8 or 9), as you suggest to keep only best 7 (2+5) during the last 6 (2+4) months. Isn’t it a bit discouraging to new incomers in the competition? Also, isn’t there a risk a sailor remain in top 1 to 10 even if he/she stop racing for 3 months? As you said, “This is necessary to keep the competition meaningful in the short time frames of SL. Think of the rapid changes in ...”. I agree, that’s why the competition may give a quick challenge to new incomers too.

Lynn wrote:If, however, we are trying to determine who is the most enthusiastic sailor, or the most highly motivated, or who is contributing the most to the community, or any one of these other equally important aspects of being a part of SL sailing, then we should probably not call them "graded race rankings".
If I know that there are 24 active sailors who can beat me soundly in a certain boat in a fair, well-refereed race, I don't want to see a 13 or a 7 ranking by my name, and I wouldn't think anyone else would want that either.
I love the idea of "feel good" rankings, but unless we use standards that fairly measure comparable race results, then graded race rankings will gradually lose meaning and become viewed as a "ho hum" list of people who buy boats.

Interesting. I’d be interested by a spreadsheet to run few simulations with the datas we accumulated so far. Trying to apply some of your suggestions in the current spreadsheets, more weaknesses appear to me, but maybe I did something wrong. You suggest in (1) to use “best 15 races over the past 6 months”, in order to favor more the skills than participation. I agree, actually, we use best 12 races over 12 months, but you are right, with more weight for best 12 over last 4 months (an average of 3 participation a month). So, you are correct, a sailor with 12 good results in last 4 months will get a better ranking, on purpose. Also, you will agree, this may happen only in most active class, in which enough racing opportunities are proposed, with a high frequency, such as ACA or FIZZ. Looking in depth in actual rankings, the problem doesn’t really exist: quite none of the sailors has his/her best 12 results within last 3 or 4 months actually.

I'll try to work on more simulation and another spreadsheet with some of your suggestions.
More points of views are welcome.
Bea Woodget on behalf of SLSA Rankings - Web site
User avatar
SLSA Rankings
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 5:46 am

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby Dahral Huet » Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:48 pm

As i posted before, in my opinion a 4 month "QW" factor makes more sense than a 3 month "QW" factor (4 months 1.5, 4 month 1.0, 4 month 0.5)

Concerning the Q Factor:
Bea wrote:

In fact, with the time, much more important than a win in a race, will be the gap between competitors in a given race. It will become more and more important to race against and beat the top-ranked sailors, than to win low-weighted races. Also, don’t forget the competition spirit of top-ranked sailors: as soon as you will go up in rankings, I am very confident they will challenge you in order to “re-establish” the truth.


With the current Q factor i do not agree with you Bea, ATM its way better to race against 2 or 3 newbies and get 157.5 points (when you are the only one who is in top 10)
than to sail in a race with the 4 best sailors of a class and be 2nd and get only 135 points.
(75 x 1.5 x 1.2 = 135)

So in my opinion it would make sense to increase the Q Factor too. But we should really do the changes step by step and look if the changes applied made any sense.
User avatar
Dahral Huet
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:01 am

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby Bea Woodget » Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:32 am

Dahral Huet wrote:As i posted before, in my opinion a 4 month "QW" factor makes more sense than a 3 month "QW" factor (4 months 1.5, 4 month 1.0, 4 month 0.5)
Concerning the Q Factor:
Bea wrote:
In fact, with the time, much more important than a win in a race, will be the gap between competitors in a given race. It will become more and more important to race against and beat the top-ranked sailors, than to win low-weighted races. Also, don’t forget the competition spirit of top-ranked sailors: as soon as you will go up in rankings, I am very confident they will challenge you in order to “re-establish” the truth.

With the current Q factor i do not agree with you Bea, ATM its way better to race against 2 or 3 newbies and get 157.5 points (when you are the only one who is in top 10)
than to sail in a race with the 4 best sailors of a class and be 2nd and get only 135 points.
(75 x 1.5 x 1.2 = 135)
So in my opinion it would make sense to increase the Q Factor too.


Your calculation is correct Dahral. But another effect is not to forget. I underlined what is the most important for me in the text above. As I wrote in a previous post: "Already, some understood this, and they carefully choose the race they enter: some for gaining easy points, and some others to increase the gap with “dangerous” competitors. In other words, racing with their skills and their brains "
So, to complete your example:
- race against 2 or 3 newbies and get 157.5 points - Correct! (and go up in rankings)
- sail in a race with the 4 best sailors of a class and be 2nd and get only 135 points - Correct! but... the winner gets 180 pts and thus increase the gap.

An increased value of Q could (perhaps, but to be tested by simulation) make the gap too important, and thus, make top-sailors quickly not "accessible" for a long time.

For me, it adds an interesting challenge, adds to competitiveness, and allows a human factor to play, not only math.

But open to think about it. Another idea also could be to increase the range of Q to take in account not only the top 10, but the top 20. Like lot of rankings, it seems it make sense for the top of the table, while the low part of the table has less sense so far, because competitors have not enough results yet. So, at term, Q could change from n/20 to eg n/30 (with n=number of competitors who feature in the top 20, thus max Q=1.66).

Dahral Huet wrote:But we should really do the changes step by step and look if the changes applied made any sense.

Absolutly.
The first change to come (and the only one) will certainly be (for end of August): QW = 4 months (instead of 3) or to be precise:
- < 120 days old -> x 1.5
- <121 to 240> days old -> x 1.0
- <241 to 360> days old -> x 0.5
- older than 361 days -> discarded (x0)

Then, as you said, we ll see. But I already run some tests with differents values and ideas. It is very important to be consistent, so to introduce only slights changes step by steps if necessary.
And what if I tell you that some of my posts, doesn't reflect a critical side, but a perfectionist side, that I can not stand mediocrity when one could do great things even easier. Do I deserve a spanking? Do not say "yes!" or assume...
User avatar
Bea Woodget
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 10:09 am

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby SLSA Rankings » Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:47 am

SLSA Rankings are 6 months old:
:arrow: A new ranking table for ACA V3
:arrow: QW will change from 3 to 4 months
:arrow: All rankings to be updated before September 2nd
:arrow: Rankings to be published in a Collector's Edition of dotCOM
Bea Woodget on behalf of SLSA Rankings - Web site
User avatar
SLSA Rankings
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 5:46 am

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby SLSA Rankings » Wed Sep 01, 2010 7:13 am

SLSA Rankings have been updated August 31st, and will be published very soon.
Meanwhile, here are the lists of sailors (alphabetical) in the top-10 for ACA and FIZZ (Q factor in use)

ACA:
    Amythest Wingtips
    Armano Xaris
    Astro Marksman
    Colin Nemeth
    don Berithos
    elMegro Magic
    Glorfindel Arrow
    LDeWell Hawker
    Silber Sands
    Trapez Breen


FIZZ: (Edited 09/03)
    Bea Woodget
    Dahral Huet
    joro Aya
    Krysha Lundquist
    Liv Leigh
    Maiko Taurog
    Miwha Masala
    sash Hudson
    Silber Sands
    ziz Kidd
Last edited by SLSA Rankings on Sat Sep 04, 2010 1:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bea Woodget on behalf of SLSA Rankings - Web site
User avatar
SLSA Rankings
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 5:46 am

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby Liv Leigh » Wed Sep 01, 2010 7:19 am

Funny to see how only 1 person (Silber Sands) is in the top 10 of both the ACA and Fizz rankings. Specialisation seems to have gone a long way in SL Sailing.
User avatar
Liv Leigh
 
Posts: 1993
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 1:21 pm
Location: Sala-Y-Gomez

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby Bea Woodget » Wed Sep 01, 2010 8:33 am

Liv Leigh wrote:Funny to see how only 1 person (Silber Sands) is in the top 10 of both the ACA and Fizz rankings. Specialisation seems to have gone a long way in SL Sailing.

Yes, and also Trapez Breen, ranked in Patchogue (1), RCJ44 (1), Shelly (4) :)
And what if I tell you that some of my posts, doesn't reflect a critical side, but a perfectionist side, that I can not stand mediocrity when one could do great things even easier. Do I deserve a spanking? Do not say "yes!" or assume...
User avatar
Bea Woodget
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 10:09 am

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby Liv Leigh » Wed Sep 01, 2010 10:30 am

Trapez and Armano being in several rankings at the top I knew, but what strikes me in those 2 lists here is the low number of racers that actually appear in both top-10's. This seems very different to how things must have been in 2006-2007 or so..
User avatar
Liv Leigh
 
Posts: 1993
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 1:21 pm
Location: Sala-Y-Gomez

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby Silber Sands » Wed Sep 01, 2010 1:45 pm

I love the Shelly too :wink:
Silber Sands
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 9:20 pm
Location: Germany

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby Naeve Rossini » Thu Sep 02, 2010 3:37 pm

Liv Leigh wrote:Funny to see how only 1 person (Silber Sands) is in the top 10 of both the ACA and Fizz rankings. Specialisation seems to have gone a long way in SL Sailing.


I think event timing is more indicative of the results than what sailors are actually sailing.

For example, none of the graded events run on weekdays are at a time when I can race. I can make it to some weekend events, which is reflected by my scant appearance in the ACA and RCJ-44 rankings.

Does my ranking here accurately reflect my ability to sail? Not at all. I can find a fair number of people above me, including some in the top 10, that I can beat on a fairly consistent basis.

In many respects, until you hit the threshold (12?) where your races completed exceeds those counted in the rankings, your results are pretty much moot.
Naeve Rossini
Cute. Real cute.
User avatar
Naeve Rossini
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Rossini Reef, Currant

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby Bea Woodget » Thu Sep 02, 2010 4:25 pm

Naeve Rossini wrote:I think event timing is more indicative of the results than what sailors are actually sailing.
For example, none of the graded events run on weekdays are at a time when I can race. I can make it to some weekend events, which is reflected by my scant appearance in the ACA and RCJ-44 rankings.
Does my ranking here accurately reflect my ability to sail? Not at all. I can find a fair number of people above me, including some in the top 10, that I can beat on a fairly consistent basis.
In many respects, until you hit the threshold (12?) where your races completed exceeds those counted in the rankings, your results are pretty much moot.

Agreed Naeve.
As you said, until you complete 12 races, the rankings make less sense. That's why we added a column (average points) which may help you to evaluate your results by comparing to others. With time, this shouldn't be an issue, but it is true that for some class of boat (the less active), it will take time...

SLSA Rankings system has been defined in order graded events are under YCs responsabilities, without adding too much new events in the calendar, without additionnal tasks for RDs.
The Ranking Committee is in charge of overall rankings results once results have been published for each regatta (about 30 events a month), and of publication of monthly rankings. (and of course of the system itself and tweaking). Talking in term of workload, it is about 15 to 20 hours each month. It is one of the reason why I don't sail anymore or very few, until we may have an automated system and spreadsheet, but this is my choice.
The other big part of the job is made by, and shared between YCs/RDs (not an additional task, but their usual weekly events):
Most YCs do their best to participate in rankings, which is supposed to provide an incentive, thus bring more traffic. Some host only 1 monthly event, some other up to 3 weekly graded events. Some YCs have announced graded events, and are in the calendar, but for different reasons, their event didn't occured for months, and I never been informed.
Finally, some others YC do not participate at all in rankings, even if they host weekly events. I respect their choice.

So far, it works pretty well, and finally, all is in the hands of the YCs. For my own part of the job, when I am not RD, it is only a background administrative task.
So I hope more YCs (and new) will join. I hope also independent volunteer RDs will come, not affiliated to a particular YC. Start Lines are free to use by anybody.
To be an independent RD, the only issue is the new aggregated calendar, as only YCs may add new entries. But we have a solution for that.

sigh.... tl;dr right? :)
And what if I tell you that some of my posts, doesn't reflect a critical side, but a perfectionist side, that I can not stand mediocrity when one could do great things even easier. Do I deserve a spanking? Do not say "yes!" or assume...
User avatar
Bea Woodget
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 10:09 am

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby Naeve Rossini » Fri Sep 03, 2010 11:50 am

Bea Woodget wrote:As you said, until you complete 12 races, the rankings make less sense. That's why we added a column (average points) which may help you to evaluate your results by comparing to others. With time, this shouldn't be an issue, but it is true that for some class of boat (the less active), it will take time...


Bea, the results on dotCOM are static, right? Is there any way to make them realtime and interactive? Might be cool to be able to sort and stuff. That may be more trouble than it's worth, but it was just a thought I had while glancing at the results to see how my average ranked. ;)

Bea Woodget wrote:To be an independent RD, the only issue is the new aggregated calendar, as only YCs may add new entries. But we have a solution for that.


Is there a calendar for independent events? If so, where?
Naeve Rossini
Cute. Real cute.
User avatar
Naeve Rossini
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Rossini Reef, Currant

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby SLSA Rankings » Fri Sep 03, 2010 2:07 pm

Naeve Rossini wrote:Bea, the results on dotCOM are static, right? Is there any way to make them realtime and interactive? Might be cool to be able to sort and stuff. That may be more trouble than it's worth, but it was just a thought I had while glancing at the results to see how my average ranked. ;)

Right, they are static, updated monthly.
Realtime and interactive... :) I'd love it. I just spent 3 hours today to update all tables, links and pages for this month.
All ideas/suggestions/help for that are welcome!
So far:
- all daily results posted by RDs (mostly copy/paste startline results) for a graded event are computed with sailwave SW to get regatta ranking, saved as jpg, and posted again to confirm/acknowledge it has been taken in account. They are then entered into a spreadsheet (one per class) ~15 min/event (30 events each month)
- once a month, all spreadsheets are printed page by page (pdf then converted in jpg for tables and graphs), pdf uploaded to google doc, jpg to wordpress/dotCOM, all pages on dotCOM are then edited to update links. ~3 to 4 hours once a month
So, is there is a way to automatize few tasks, I am for at 1 billion %! :) But I have really any clue how to do that. :(

Bea Woodget wrote:Is there a calendar for independent events? If so, where?

:). In the aggregated calendar, I think only calendars managed by YCs are aggregated. However, there is already one that is not really owned by a Yacht Club, not populated yet (no event), and it could be renamed, shared and open to volunteers independent RD.
Bea Woodget on behalf of SLSA Rankings - Web site
User avatar
SLSA Rankings
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 5:46 am

Re: SLSA Rankings

Postby Jane Fossett » Fri Sep 03, 2010 2:40 pm

SLSA Rankings wrote:... In the aggregated calendar, I think only calendars managed by YCs are aggregated. However, there is already one that is not really owned by a Yacht Club, not populated yet (no event), and it could be renamed, shared and open to volunteers independent RD.

And the new calendar is owned by...
(insert drum roll here)...
:-)
User avatar
Jane Fossett
 
Posts: 2717
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:36 am

PreviousNext

Return to Racing

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests