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!