FBR06G 9-22-15 REVISED

This week I reached out to Gophers to have him review my database and my tiers.     Below is what he sent back and I was going to incorporate some of his suggestions next week as a means to improve the FBR.   However, after a recent post by ATP about this being a DTS FBR I felt compelled to post this as a response and validation that it isn't a DTS FBR.       Moving forward I will keep this database as a baseline.    Thank you Gophers for taking the time to review the 06 FBR.    

This FBR is also from April 17 to Sunday Sept 20th.    

And for all you AP05s in the current 06 group I know FBR may be a little muddy for you right now knowing that half your future age group of Jan to July 05s are in select.    Don't forget to check out the LH standings every now and then.  

http://events.gotsport.com/events/results.aspx?EventID=46601&Gender=Girls&Age=11

I think it would be interesting throughout the year to see some Human Rankings for 05AP.........how many of those Jan - July 05s will be staying back on each team?   How will that affect qualifying...........hard to say.   Human Rankings might be interesting!!!

I think this is the right Tier 1. Is it a lot of work to utilize more tiers? Tier 2 looks like it could be split.

1. Gophers would at times routinely defend my work on FBR, because I actually would ask him to look at it and make suggestions as I got started with it. I didn't just say that.

2. Now that GOPHERS has weighed in its rhe closest to right as it has ever been. It's still wrong though.
A. Tier assignments for a GOOD number of squads is still. incorrect.
B. just at quick glance you don't have all games captured for teams listed. Which is significant, especially considering you say you are going back to April with this. You have teams in the same tier that have played each other within that time period, yet the records don't reflect that.... hhmmmm. Data integrity issue.

3. It's a DTS FBR... you can't deny that.

Which games am I missing?

Nah, you figure it out. I can tell by just looking at it. And no its not just the squad you think it is.

Well if I am missing games I am sure open to that. I will say I am not perfect so if there is something missing I am definitely willing to fix it. There was a lot of rain in the Spring. I was constantly going back and checking for scores or checking to see if a game was cancelled.

How bout tournaments, how about league games played within the last two weeks.

FBR takes time and effort to do. I told you to let it die when you asked me for it, remember.

ATP clearly isn't going to tell me which games I am missing. So if anyone else knows of games I am missing let me know. Will be happy to fix.

AtThePitch wrote:1.  Gophers would at times routinely defend my work on FBR, because I actually would ask him to look at it and make suggestions as I got started with it. I didn't just say that.

2. Now that GOPHERS has weighed in its rhe closest to right as it has ever been.  It's still wrong though.
   A. Tier assignments for a GOOD number of squads is still.    incorrect.
    B.  just at quick glance you don't have all games captured for teams listed.  Which is significant, especially considering you say you are going back to April with this. You have teams in the same tier that have played each other within that time period, yet the records don't reflect that.... hhmmmm.  Data integrity issue.
   
3.  It's a DTS FBR... you can't deny that.

O.K. Rather than just jump in here and take pot-shots, how about you give us some specifics on exactly what data you believe is missing, or what you believe is wrong, so that FBR06 and/or myself can either fix it, or defend it?

Or... send me yours for comparison and let a neutral 3rd party work to reconcile the two databases.

Or... post your own for all of us to see the gross error of our ways.

Actually, this one is a Sting FBR.

Out of respect to you Gophers and the help you provided me over the years I will send you some data this week to look at.

I'm done posting on this here. I've said it was wrong all along, she validated that today with this.

AtThePitch wrote:Out of respect to you Gophers and the help you provided me over the years I will send you some data this week to look at.

I'm done posting on this here.  I've said it was wrong all along, she validated that today with this.

Well, it was so wrong that 60% of the top 30 teams changed ranking position by 0 or 1 spot between FBR06 and mine, and 83% of the top 30 teams changed ranking position by 3 spots or less.

If that is "wrong", I wish anyone and everyone good luck in coming up with something that is "right".

And the other 40% in the top 30?

And does missing games not significantly impact all that even more?

AtThePitch wrote:Out of respect to you Gophers and the help you provided me over the years I will send you some data this week to look at.

I'm done posting on this here.  I've said it was wrong all along, she validated that today with this.

When you said you were done posting on this, what you really meant was, you are not done posting on this.

I'm no mathematician but I believe you are looking for the other 17% and not the other 40%.

AtThePitch wrote:And the other 40% in the top 30?

And does missing games not significantly impact all that even more?

23% (7 teams) changed +/- 2 or 3 ranking spots.  That's a water cooler argument.
17% (5 teams) changed +/- 4-6 ranking spots.  That's clear correction in the rankings, but in my opinion, not evidence of a gross problem.

While I always strived to put out the most "accurate" ranking possible, I think people that get all worked up and pissy over a few spot difference in FBR are really missing the point of the rankings in the first place.

It sure looks like a DTS FBR when after the revisions... DTS moves up 2 spots lol (even after a 4-1 loss this last weekend)

PDXsoccer13 wrote:It sure looks like a DTS FBR when after the revisions... DTS moves up 2 spots lol (even after a 4-1 loss this last weekend)

Well, I certainly see your point, and it's valid to point that out.

Any FBR ranking is essentially a "snapshot" of the current ranking database, which covers a specific period of time.  The "snapshot" can be influenced by how the Tiers are set up.  Under normal conditions, tiers change only slightly from week-week, so comparing last weeks "snapshot" to this weeks "snapshot" should lead to generally logical behavior in the ranking movement  based on the most recent weeks results.  This isn't always the case, because each week, we are typically dropping some old results (that most people have long since forgotten), while adding new ones.  Unfortunately, FBR does not allow for a sliding weight scale on older games vs newer ones, so the old ones that drop off count just as much towards the rankings as the new ones that are added on.  So now you have to look at the relative strength of the results that were dropped vs. added to get a real picture of how a team should've moved.  Add to that, the fact that this newest ranking also included a significant overhaul to the "snapshot" settings because I came in and made some pretty significant changes to the Tiers.

O.K.  So what's the net out of all of this?

I took a pretty close look at the top 30 when I put this together (My apologies to those outside the top 30, just didn't have the time to run through that with a fine toothed comb.  PM FBR06 or myself if you have a big problem with any of that).  

1-3 are pretty solid and obvious.  Based on exactly what you want to emphasis in any of these teams records, you could make a logical argument for any order of these 3, but there's not much arguing that these 3 teams have established themselves at the top right now.

Similar things can be said regarding teams 4-9.  Depending on what you want to emphasize (recent results, total "body of work" over the ranking period, strength of opponents, etc.) you can make an argument for just about any order of these teams.  It just so happens, that the current FBR "snapshot" using the ranking tiers displayed above, and based on "body of work", places DTS at #4, even with the loss to Kicks JM last weekend.  If both Kicks JM and DTS continue to post results that are consistent with this past weekend, eventually as old data falls off, Kicks JM would be expected to move ahead of DTS.

By my assessment, 10-20ish is pretty muddy right now.  All of those teams have some kind of "warts" in their current results history.  Some of the teams closer to #10 are being buoyed by some older results from the Spring, while some of the teams closer to #20 are being dragged down by some older results.  Again, if these teams continue to post results that are consistent with their recent fall results, as the older results drop from the database, I predict you'll see a tightening up of the ranking points between 10-20, and likely some significant shuffling.  HOWEVER, while the current order of #10-20 in this version of FBR may be in question a bit based on recent results, I do feel pretty confident that the overall group of teams that make up #10-20 today is pretty accurate.

As data from the Spring continues to drop off over the next few weeks, you will see FBR fall in line with the fall league and tournament results.

Good FBR for what it is. Age true is the real thing that matters at this time.

BW, FBR06 or who ever does it will always be scrutinized. It's good enough to see who you need to go visit when looking for a team. Thanks for doing it for the parents that need it.

Just remember that it's the whole package that matters. Parents, Kids, Coaching, Pactice Location and then Club for me. There is no FBR that judges all 5 things that matter for my DD. The FBR covers 1 or maybe 2 of the 5 reasons why I would have my DD join a team. Make your decision is based with all 5 points of reference. That's my 2 cents.