Abram Jones
Debutant
- Jun 18, 2016
- 91
- 12
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- I don't even support N Melbourne!
Ranks from 1872-2017 available (including All Time): http://internationalsports.nfshost.com/index.php/home/load_sports/5/2017
This ranking system is, by far, the best rating system in representing the true skill of a nation in any particular sport (to date). However, there is still plenty of room for improvement. Mathematicians, ranking/rating experts, and international sports buffs are encouraged to either assist me or take what I have started and improve upon it. This project is not meant as a replacement for my Regions Proposal (having regional teams of similar size regarding population and wealth), however, it could be used in conjunction with such a scenario for maximum accuracy in rankings and ratings.
BASICS
*a nation's wealth and population is defined by Economic Determinant (e-determinant)
*the e-determinant is decided by population amount and gdp per capita amount, this is recalculated every decade (i would have preferred to use national wealth instead of gdp per capita, but such historic data is not easy, or even possible, to come by)
*final scores are adjusted depending on difference in e-determinant
*this causes mathematical problems for certain sports with poor scoring systems, therefore decreasing their accuracy compared to sports with better scoring systems. examples of poor systems: soccer football and ice hockey (severely limited scoring opportunities, too easy for defense), baseball (too much randomization in scoring opportunities, too easy for pitcher).
*certain regions in larger countries could potentially perform better or worse than the actual rating. the rating used for large countries is not an average (this would put large nations at a disadvantage because it would require an exponentially greater amount of upkeep), nor is it necessarily the representation of the best region within the country (this would put small nations at a disadvantage because it would require less upkeep for the larger nations).
*for now the regular Elo Rating system is used, this could change in the future
*the biggest enemy of any ranking system is lack of games played. when observers see an inconsistency in a result from a rating system they often blame it and not the true culprit. this is something to keep in mind when analyzing any such system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_large_numbers
RANKING: nations with at least 11 matches (if they have less than 30 the nation name is in Italic).
PROVISIONAL RATINGS: nations with 6-10 matches
ACTIVE & UNRATED: nations with 1-5 matches
OTHER SPORTS COMPLETED
This ranking system is, by far, the best rating system in representing the true skill of a nation in any particular sport (to date). However, there is still plenty of room for improvement. Mathematicians, ranking/rating experts, and international sports buffs are encouraged to either assist me or take what I have started and improve upon it. This project is not meant as a replacement for my Regions Proposal (having regional teams of similar size regarding population and wealth), however, it could be used in conjunction with such a scenario for maximum accuracy in rankings and ratings.
BASICS
*a nation's wealth and population is defined by Economic Determinant (e-determinant)
*the e-determinant is decided by population amount and gdp per capita amount, this is recalculated every decade (i would have preferred to use national wealth instead of gdp per capita, but such historic data is not easy, or even possible, to come by)
*final scores are adjusted depending on difference in e-determinant
*this causes mathematical problems for certain sports with poor scoring systems, therefore decreasing their accuracy compared to sports with better scoring systems. examples of poor systems: soccer football and ice hockey (severely limited scoring opportunities, too easy for defense), baseball (too much randomization in scoring opportunities, too easy for pitcher).
*certain regions in larger countries could potentially perform better or worse than the actual rating. the rating used for large countries is not an average (this would put large nations at a disadvantage because it would require an exponentially greater amount of upkeep), nor is it necessarily the representation of the best region within the country (this would put small nations at a disadvantage because it would require less upkeep for the larger nations).
*for now the regular Elo Rating system is used, this could change in the future
*the biggest enemy of any ranking system is lack of games played. when observers see an inconsistency in a result from a rating system they often blame it and not the true culprit. this is something to keep in mind when analyzing any such system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_large_numbers
RANKING: nations with at least 11 matches (if they have less than 30 the nation name is in Italic).
PROVISIONAL RATINGS: nations with 6-10 matches
ACTIVE & UNRATED: nations with 1-5 matches
OTHER SPORTS COMPLETED
- American Football (appears to be quite accurate, but it looks to me as Austria is overrated due to lack of games played. they should be in between Japan and Germany. This problem will resolve itself when more games are played).
- Australian Rules Football (this is looking pretty good, but Nauru should be above Samoa in All Time, this is the result of a technicality (Samoa stopped playing internationally regularly). however, this problem should be resolved after the intercontinental cup this year.
- Circle Kabaddi
- International Rules Football
- Standard Kabaddi
Yes, I'm aware of what types of flags these are. So how about the ratings? I can't believe you left out Mali's flag.
