We already have Roller Derby ratings? Why do we need more?
Well, when I look at the other rankings (DNN, FTS, WFTDA), I see faults. I'm not saying they're wrong or that their methods are invalid, I just disagree. Originally, my plan was just to bitch and moan every time the rankings were updated but then I had a slow weekend and decided to start on this ever-enlarging project.
On the surface, Derbytron is most similar to Flat Track Stats as they are both computer rankings systems (or mathematical equations). But, FTS uses much more data, dating back a few years. FTS also puts emphasis on tournaments where Derbytron does no such thing. Derbytron is much more of a here and now, who is better at this moment, kind of a rankings system, whereas FTS is ranking who has been better over time.
The obvious difference between the Derby News Network Power Rankings and the Derbytron Rankings is the human element. DNN has no mathematical equation, it's a few experts ranking teams based on what they've seen. The other difference is that non-WFTDA teams are eligible for the DNN rankings. These two rankings systems are similar in that they have the same goals, ranking who is better at the current moment, they're just concacted using completely different methods.
And, obviously, the WFTDA Rankings and Derbytron have almost no similarities other than they are both roller derby rankings systems. WFTDA is a regional human rankings system.
4.30.2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"FTS uses much more data, dating back a few years." They have that data, but they only use the last 12 months' worth.
ReplyDeleteIf that is true, FTS needs to update their website:
ReplyDelete"To keep the rankings relevant, bouts start to fade after so many months, and don't affect a ranking as much. This factor is on hold right now. We're currently not decaying bouts, and all 2007 games are being counted equally. At some point we'll need to start fading bout and tournament influence."