How come we use percentage instead of point difference?

[Ron The Bear]

Can anyone be bothered to see how the ladder would look right now with points difference instead of %? Would it have significantly impacted any seasons historically?

Right now it'd reverse the Bulldogs and GWS in 4th and 5th.

Historically it would've swapped the following:

Year|Round|Pos|Club|Pts|%|PDiff|Pos|Club|Pts|%|PDiff
\1907|SR3|5th|Fi|28|85.46|-147|6th|Ge|28|85.34|-145
\1915|18|6th|Ri|20|77.84|-258|7th|St|20|75.93|-247
\1927|18|2nd|Ri|56|134.57|+381|3rd|Ge|56|131.95|+386
\1946|19|10th|Ge|16|70.86|-619|11th|St|16|70.03|-570
\1953|18|3rd|WB|52|136.50|+350|4th|Es|52|129.91|+352
\1967|18|11th|Fi|16|72.08|-462|12th|WB|16|71.57|-421
\1969|20|9th|Sy|28|82.48|-383|10th|Fi|28|82.39|-373
\1990|22|11th|Ri|28|78.58|-542|12th|Fi|28|78.44|-515
\1998|22|7th|WC|48|109.42|+167|8th|Es|48|108.64|+179
\2014|23|1st|Sy|68|142.88|+638|2nd|Ha|68|140.78|+712

The Dogs would have one less wooden spoon.

 

[Hobbes]

INB4 Croweaters claim their percentage system is better.

It's trivial to prove that the two systems are functionally identical - the numbers are different but the order will always be the same.

 

[Maddo11]

Because half the victorian teams play half their games under a roof.
#vicbias
#equalisation

 

[Spook]

Why is percentage not calculated out of 100?
If you win round 1 with a score of 80-20, shouldn't your % be 80%, instead of 400%?

Because it's the percentage of the for against the against

That'll fu<k him

 

[Spook]

A bit of (related) history.

Scottish Football used Goal average (same formula as our percentage) as their 'tiebreaker) up until 1971-72. In all those seasons, there was only one time when the champion would have been different had they used Goal Difference. In 1965, Kilmarnock defeated Hearts on Goal Average. If It had been Goal Difference, Hearts would have been champions.

In 1971-72, they changed to Goal Difference. Since then, in all those seasons, there was only one time when the champion would have been different had they used Goal Average. In 1986, Celtic won the Championship on Goal Difference. If they had used Goal Average, the Champions would have been....................Hearts.

Hearts last won the Championship in 1960. If you ever want to get beaten to death in an Edinburgh pub, you know what conversation to start.

Some great trivia, cheers.

I bet that broke their Hearts.

I can't see how the heartless administrors could do that.

 

[Percel]

Why is percentage not calculated out of 100?
If you win round 1 with a score of 80-20, shouldn't your % be 80%, instead of 400%?

Percel you know wat to do

 

[The Slitherin' Snake]

80/20x100

Oh dear.

View attachment 243535

Yes i understand the current system and how to calculate it - what i don't understand is why it is that way.

Because 4X your opponents score is 400%

Probably the closest to an explanation compared to the other answers above.

 

[FootyJunkie]

Why is percentage not calculated out of 100?
If you win round 1 with a score of 80-20, shouldn't your % be 80%, instead of 400%?

I would like to see a side keep an opposing team scoreless in a Round 1 game just to see the ladder break.

Or maybe the AFL awards the opposing side a sympathy point just to avoid the apocalypse for everyone.

Gill is named "Australian of the Year" for saving everyone.

 

[Chuckie357]

I know they give the same result, but how come we use percentage while almost every other sport uses point difference?

Because we are not soccer! If I was prime minister referring to any other code apart from AFL as football, would be a jailable offence

 

[Percel]

Yes i understand the current system and how to calculate it - what i don't understand is why it is that way.

.

 

[frenchfri12]

I would like to see a side keep an opposing team scoreless in a Round 1 game just to see the ladder break.

Did it in an AFL PC game, was 8th with 0%

 

[frenchfri12]

You obviously missed every day at school after grade 2

It was just confirmed 2 posts up it's exactly the same.

 

[gothecrows]

It was just confirmed 2 posts up it's exactly the same.

No it wasn't. The AFL and SANFL systems for percentage, are functionally the same, but different systems. They will always give the same ladder order.
Percentage and points differential are functionally different, and (as posted above by Ron The Bear), can result in different ladder orders.

 

[eth-dog]

Because in a high scoring sport like AFL percentage is more viable than points difference.

 

[Seeds]

They actually don't give the same result. For example, a team that wins 100-50 and a team that wins 150-75 will have the same % but different points difference.

I think points difference should be used as it's more intuitive.

Trust a collingwood fan to prefer points difference. Way to live up to the stereotype.

 

[Seeds]

We should change our system to calculate average percentage so that each game is given equal weight. Our current system is still not good enough despite it being better than points differential.

 

[kaypee]

Percentage also rewards defensive efforts

 

[Seeds]

i think % is the best indicator of how good a team is. at the end of the season it seems to be a better reflection of the quality of a team that W-L

That's an interesting point. Why even bother with wins and loses and just have percentage determine ladder positions. It is fairer. It does however take away the theater of a close game.

 

[JHF1870]

We should allocate 1000 pts for a win. Looks better

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

That's an interesting point. Why even bother with wins and loses and just have percentage determine ladder positions. It is fairer. It does however take away the theater of a close game.

well the second we stop playing for wins and losses is the day competitive sport dies.

but when evaluating teams sometimes w-l don't tell the whole story. eg fremantle compared to west coast and hawthorn last year...

 

[gothecrows]

We should change our system to calculate average percentage so that each game is given equal weight. Our current system is still not good enough despite it being better than points differential.

How is each game not given equal weight?

Effectively what you're arguing for is that low-scoring games be given more weight. Again - there's no real benefit to that other than personal preference.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Ok so then why do we use percentage then?

More appropriate measure in a high scoring game.

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

I like the percentage system. It makes it difficult for idiots to work out exactly how much their team needs to win by to make the top 4 or 8 in the final round.

 

[DrEvil_]

We should change our system to calculate average percentage so that each game is given equal weight. Our current system is still not good enough despite it being better than points differential.

Yes. I'll go further and say we should use the geometric average percentage. That way when Freo score 0 points in a game their percentage will be zero for the entire year.

 

[Seeds]

How is each game not given equal weight?

Effectively what you're arguing for is that low-scoring games be given more weight. Again - there's no real benefit to that other than personal preference.

If you double the oppositions score in a wet weather game where scoring is low then you should get the same contribution to the end of season percentage as doubling the oppositions score in a high scoring game at Etihad. Current system doesn't allow for this. It gives greater weight to the win on the dry high scoring deck. If a team needs a percentage booster in the last round and are playing in a howling gale then its unfair to them.