Of realistic statistics, standing, and proper interpetation of detail

We have all come to enjoy the gentlemens game of Croquet. Few other sports hold truth, self-control, and humility in such high regard. Truly, the sport of Croquet holds many of the virtues important to human civilization. And as any sport, there are winners and losers, and obviously there must be a way to determine who wins and who loses. What our current system does in fact is this, it determines the winners, and rewards there actions with formal victory. Our system as well acknowledges those whose performance has been less than excellent.

So we currently apply the availible points to the winner to lose in a descending fashion, this only makes sense. To determine the character of a players performance, lest memorizing ones entire history, we in turn find the percentage of availible points to a player against how many he has acquired. How is the system for our infant league more barbaric than scoring and ranking systems on the collegiate and professional levels? In football, no matter how much one team beats another, each team gets a win and lose respectively. When ranking collegiate teams, the basic rule of thumb is one's record. This is the similar way other sports teams, or players are ranked.

Let look at the month of November, where Morris and Cassie both recieved a 66.7% as their percentage ranking. Is it really a problem two players tied? Which player is better: the one who consistently gets average scores, or the one who bounces between first and sixth? Either way, the percentage reflects on average how they performed.

The argument that we dont know the details is simply false. The records are displayed of the finished games merely a few inches below this very post. Im not sure what scoring system that exists that not only tells how well a player or team has done, AND tells how well they performed. The Eagles are 6-2, but that doesnt say anything if the six wins were at the last minute, or the two losses came when a star quarterback was injured.

The only solution I can think of is somehow stratify the placing further, and have a second performance score, but that would still be an average of how a player normally would do. The point is, is that without a player reciting a series of numbers, each ranking areas of their play, the current system we have is fine.

The real question is: Do we need to solve the 75% problem? Bring everyone up to 100%? Or leave them as is? Just becuase a player played more or less games than another (within reason) does not mean those extra or missing games would have/are the good/bad games they (would) have played.

On statistics, relative standing, and attention to detail

If croquet is a game founded upon gentlemanly sportsmanship and etiquete, then an equitable and accurate scoring system is at once its foundation, and its rococo frou-frou. It should both inspire fair play and provide a recognition for achievement. In the realization of these twin goals inhere the scoring system's robustness for acknowledging each of each player's performances on the field and for accurately reporting the relative standing of each player at a given time.

The current scoring system is relatively straight-forward. At each game, a total of six points are possible. The winner of a game recieves six points; the runner up, five; the second runner up, four. Remaining points are allotted in descending order relative to the players' wicket-distances from the post. A player's score is the reported as the proportion of points won to played-game-points possible.

As an example, for the month of November there were 8 games played, of which Cassie played 3. This gave her a total of 18 points possible. She won 12 of those 18 points, or 66.7% of them. Maybe that means she placed first, second, and last. Maybe second, second, and fifth. Or third, third, and third. We don't know the details. Only that she earned a D's worth of points.

Now consider Morris's November performance. Morris played 8 of the 8 games played, giving him a total of 42 points possible. He won 32 of those points, or (again) 66.7% of them. He could have won five of those games, placed fifth for one, and bollux'd up the rest of them. Maybe he played consistently, placing third for each game (not bad). The point is, again, that we don't know the details. Was Morris a consistent contender? Or was Morris taking artistic liscence, using croquet as his medium for a sardonic and sarcastic satire of Todd's penchant for peak-and-pit performance?

The only way we could possibly know the difference between Cassie's performance and Morris's (we know) is if we had recorded (we have) the order in which each posted for each game. Without that information, we don't know if it is the case that Cassie performed better than Morris overall, consistently improving her game and rising in the ranks (she did). We don't know if Morris was on-again off-again (he was).

The point is, gentlemen, that the current scoring system does not give an accurate snapshot of a player's play.

It is for these reasons that I cordially solicit alternative scoring system proposals. Proposals should be posted here. Please describe the system in detail, and argue the relative merits of the proposed system over the current one.

For Honor and For Victory!

Current Stats! (theres some shifting by the way)

I decided to take a break before I plunge myself at my last, horrible final. So I ran the current numbers for December, and then ran those into the current overall stats.

December:
Cassie: 15/18= 83.3% (75%)
Jake: 13/18= 72.2% (75%)
Jumpy: 18/18= 100% (75%)***
Morris: 17/24= 70.8% (100%)
Todd: 11/24= 45.8% (100%)***

***Not misprints

And overall, take a peek down and compare how people have moved up and down-

Cassie: 39/54= 72.2% (45%)
Jake: 71/84= 84.5% (70%)
Jumpy: 74/90= 82.2% (75%)
Morris: 77/120= 64.2% (100%)
Todd: 79/114= 69.3% (95%)

So there is where everyone is at right now. One issue is if we have 4 players you are garanteed to get 3 points. So if we have 5 or 6 players these next few games it should get really interesting. Clearly, no one has a commanding lead, so the games should get interesting.

Also, I was talking to Todd about standing and what not, what if we did something like calculate everyone's score against 75% or something to just make a flat score. Would this warp the numbers or would it make the scores more defined? Let me know what you guys think.

p.s. I also decided Im going to make a trophy (it'll look nice i promise) for the winner. Does anyone have any ideas on prizes, or what we could do for a end-of-season-start-of new-season event?

Emancipation

Im posting preemptively about when people can play in the following week. I for one will end my two-pots-of-coffee-per-day marathon officially at 5:00 pm on Thursday. So when is good for everyone else? Plus, theres the possibility of paintball?
Post when you can so I dont have to call everyone, then be crushed when one person says the best time for everyone else is the official cuddle time with their girlfriend they've penciled in.

Is it only Tuesday? The worst is yet to come......

More December!

The two games in the wreckage of the planned day playing weekend....

12-11-05
Game 1- Morris, Jake, Todd, Cassie (1 ball, 4 players)
winner: Cassie, Morris, Jake, Todd

Game 2- Morris, Todd, Cassie, Jumpy (1 ball, 4 players)
winner: Jumpy, Morris, Cassie, Todd

there.

Saturday: Battle of the Bulge

From the heading you are probably wondering: what do you ever mean-saturday is what? My esteemed colleagues, the movement of this past Thursday's play to Saturday day presents us with several firsts and other important items. First off, Saturday will be the first time we will play during the daylight. Now I know what many of you are thinking, day-what? As we have traditionally been creatures of the night, nocturnal obsessive-complusives that wander in shadow with colored mallets, Saturday will be the first time in the new season (longer than that actually) that you will see your rival without firelight illuminating his face. Think of it, for the first time, you will be able to see all the balls and wickets in their true colors.

Another equally important point, Saturday will probably be one of the last meetings of play for the season. Here, push comes to shove. Saturday is to our croquet season as to Napoleons Waterloo, the Allies D-Day, Germany's Battle of the Bulge, and yes, the Greeks Battle of Thermopylae. If I have lost you, Saturday is important for each player to secure their victory. So Morris, doesnt really have the points to do that, but he will be their as the rogue agent. For Todd, Jake, and Jumpy, the games (atleast 2-maybe 3 or 4!?) coming are going to make or break you.

And finally, Saturday presents a flaw in the season. If we could have been playing Saturday or Sunday in the day before why didn't we? Those missing weekend games would have definately made the stats more conclusive. Really, we could have nearly doubled the play, just meeting for an hour on either or both days. Having numbers from 28 games rather than 16 would have shown far more depth for each players ability.

See you around 1:30-ish (for Todd that means trying to get there at 11:00 am)

Its cold

After a serious discussion, we have decided to suspend play Thursday night for Saturday day. Trying to play in 10 degree weather would only produce a very cold (and probably poorly played) one game. See you on Sat, let me know a good time for everyone.

The Breakdown

Here I calculated what the percentages are. They are broken down into monthly and total winners.

October
Morris- 21/36= 58.3%
Todd- 32/36= 88.9%
Jake- 32/36= 88.9%
Jumpy- 10/12= 83.3%***
Cassie- 07/12= 58.3%***

***played 2 of 6 games

November

Morris- 32/48= 66.7%
Loftin- 31/42= 73.8%
Jake- 17/18= 94.4%***
Jumpy- 34/48= 70.8%
Cassie- 12/18= 66.7%***
J-Doh- 21/42= 50%

***played 3 of 8 games

Totals

Cassie***- 24/36= 66.7% (37.5% play standing)
J-Doh***- 21/42= 50% (43.8%)
Todd- 68/90= 75.6% (93.8%)
Morris- 60/96= 62.5% (100%)
Jumpy- 56/72= 77.8% (75%)
Jake***- 58/66= 87.8% (68.8%)

*has not played 75% of games

So there is the calculated percentages. Go crazy on the speculation. If anyone wants to rerun the numbers to double check me, go for it.

December

yup.

12-01-05
Game 1- Morris, Jake, Jumpy, Todd (1 ball, 4 players)
winner: Jumpy, Jake, Morris, Todd

Game 2- Morris, Jake, Jumpy, Todd, Cassie (1 ball, 5 players)
winner: Jumpy, Cassie, Jake, Morris, Todd

November Stat's

Here is the Thanksgiving month of November.

11-03-05
Game 1- Morris, Todd, Jumpy, Jake, J-Doh (1 ball, 5 players)
winner: Jake, Todd, J-Doh, Morris, Jumpy

Game 2- Morris, Jake, Jumpy, J-Doh (1 ball, 4 players)
winner: J-Doh, Jake, Jumpy, Morris

11-10-05
Game1- Morris, Jake, Todd, Jumpy, Jenny, Leah, Mark (1 ball, 7 players)
winner: Jake, Jumpy, Morris, Jenny, Leah, Todd

Game 2- Morris, Todd, Jumpy, J-Doh (1 ball, 4 players)
winner: Morris, Jumpy, Todd, J-Doh

11-17-05
Game 1- Morris, Jumpy, Todd, Leah, J-Doh, Shaq, Zack (1 ball, 7 players)
winner: Todd, Jumpy, Morris, Leah, J-Doh, Zack

Game 2- Morris, Jumpy, Todd, Cassie, J-Doh (1 ball, 5 players)
winner: Todd, Cassie, J-Doh, Jumpy, Morris

11-22-05
Game 1- Morris, Jumpy, Todd, Cassie, J-Doh, Jeremy (1 ball, 6 players)
winner: Jumpy, Morris, Cassie, Todd, Jeremy, J-Doh

Game 2- Morris, Todd, Jumpy, Cassie, J-Doh, Jeremy (1 ball, 6 players)
winner: Todd, Morris, Jumpy, Cassie, Jeremy, J-Doh

October Stat's

I couldnt wait for Jumpy to post these. And Im doing everything I can not to study or read. Heres the seasons stats. i decided to post them broken up into months. If anything to make it more complicated to look at.

October

10-15-05
Game 1- Morris, Leah, Jake, Todd (1 ball, 4 players)
winner: Jake, Todd, Morris, Leah

Game 2- Morris, Leah, Jake, Todd (1 ball, 4 players)
winner: Todd, Jake, Leah, Morris

10-17-05
Game 1- Morris, Todd, Cassie, Jake (1ball, 4 players)
winner: Todd, Jake, Morris, Cassie

Game 2- Morris, Todd, Cassie, Jake (1 ball, 4 players)
winner: Jake, Todd, Cassie, Morris

10-27-05
Game 1- Morris, Todd, Jake, Jumpy (1ball, 4 players)
winner: Jake, Todd, Jumpy, Morris

Game 2- Morris, Todd, Jake, Jumpy (1ball, 4 players)
winner: Jumpy, Todd, Morris, Jake

Never Missing an Opportunity to Miss an Opportunity- Todd Loftin

If you look back at the stats you'll see the disgusting oligarchical trade-off Jake and Todd made for the number 1 and 2 spots. With Jakes small sabatical over last night it was going to be interesting to see if the game would return to the exclusive dance for two we had earlier seen. After all, on Nov 17 Todd scored a coveted double win while Jake was gone. So it wasnt too big of a stretch to assume seeing Loftin and Jake on the field together again last night would turn into a recreation of the Battle of the Somme. Slowly (we're dealing with Todd here), all the players assembled and the games began. But something happened, the battle that was supposed to happen didnt. For Todd, it was his chance to prove his superiority in the standings. For Jake, it was to reclaim a title almost lost to negligence.


But none of that happened. What did happen was Jumpy basically had invited everyone to come watch him roll over the course. There wasnt a battle, as so much as a exposition on Jumpy teaching everyone how you play croquet. By the end of the night Jumpy would get a pretigious double victory title added to his name (Jumpy, victorious doublus), and Todd would do a great impersonation of J-Doh or Kathleen playing after staying up the night before and shot-gunning Old English's. What last night did was several things:

1. Morris' play is very forgettable

2. Todd is like the Arabs, as Dennis Ross said about Arafat "He never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity". Todd had the chance to establish a dominance over the game, and instead did more than blow it. Looking at the numbers, despite Todd's DV, the rest of the time he hasnt been doing to good to begin with. The opportunity that Todd has to take next time is the one where he doesnt become a unimportant player.

3. Look at Jumpys stats. What tricks you is you see Todd's and Jakes name all over the place, but thats becuase Jumpy has played near as many games. When Jumpy does play however, he nearly always scores at 1 or 2. What last night proved is what no one saw before. The game doesnt belong to Todd or Jake, becuase Jumpy has already bought it.

So in conclusion, when you get the opportunity, croquet the hell out of Jumpy whenever you get the chance from now on.

The Kindling (for the fire that needs lighting)

Morris sent me the stats for the season so far. At first glance it looks like the standings put Jake in the lead, followed by Todd, then Morris. Apparently I lead the pack of runners up to third place. I'll post these stats later, but one important thing that I noticed: Jake is in danger of losing his standing. If he doesn't show up for games, he's going to invoke the 75% rule all over himself.

Todd could take Jake's overall season standing. Is Jake going down in a blaze of "glory"?

Chicks Cheat

Everyone knows that dudes have stronger moral character than chicks. Just ask Todd, if you don't believe me. This Article explains it all. But we can't put all the blame on chicks. Its not really their fault. They cheat because they have no croquet ability. They cheat because its the only way to get by. We all feel sorry for cheaters who cheat for this reason. We have plays about it. We develop government programs to asauge it.

Dudes and chicks don't have the same reverence for rules. Dudes love rules. That's why Congress is mostly dudes. Chicks can dig rules, they can even follow them. But for dudes, rules are hallowed. Except for dudes that are criminals.

You've got to admire chicks, though. They look for the expediant way to win. "Sure, I shirked that wicket. But it was a 'gimme'."

You gotta watch chicks, man.

Does anyone see my mallet?

The Sooner Croquet Blog, or whatever we're gonna call it, is alive.

Morris has some pictures. Whenever he checks his gmail, he'll sign himself up and I can add him as an administrator. That should shake things up a bit.