Grimmas Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 Just in case there is a tie in points, what should we do? There is none right now, but some spots are very close. Including the number one spot. Figured this should be up for discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 New option: Higher BIGLAV Score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 I bet Bill Apter would return an e-mail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El McKell Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 I think that it should be whoever appears on the most ballots largely because we have opted for a system that potentially undervalues simply appearing on a ballot, because there are so few points for being at the bottom of a ballot despite the fact that it means a wrestler is being ranked ahead of more than 500 other nominees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 I voted for higher average vote. I am not crazy about the most ballots for simple reason as I feel that has natural advantages for mostly U S workers. In the other areas (joshi, lucha, WOS, etc), numerous people have announced they are refraining from voting for one group of candidates or another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woof Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 I prefer "highest average vote".I discount the "highest single vote" because that means just person's opinion carries a lot of weight. The problem I have with "most ballots appeared on" is that there lots of candidates who are being left off of ballots not because they aren't worthy but rather due of a lack of familiarity with the particular voter. "Highest Average Vote" works for me because it says, "of all the people that managed to rank them, this one is the more highly thought of by those people". It's not perfect, but it feels like the most accurate way to separate two contenders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedEagle Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 Definitely not highest single vote. No one ballot should be determinative. I'd lean towards higher average vote with leaving it a tie next best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingus Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 Just call it a tie. The whole "number of ballots, highest vote" data will be included with the list anyway, won't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted March 17, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 Just call it a tie. The whole "number of ballots, highest vote" data will be included with the list anyway, won't it? 2006 vote, low vote, high vote, # of ballots, and average vote will all be included. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luchaundead Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 Would the average vote be out of all ballots or only out of the ballots in which they are ranked? Because if you made it highest average vote out of all turned in ballots (ballots they don't appear in are considered giving them 0 points) then that would actually account for both appearing on the most ballots and the average ranking at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted March 17, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 Would the average vote be out of all ballots or only out of the ballots in which they are ranked? Because if you made it highest average vote out of all turned in ballots (ballots they don't appear in are considered giving them 0 points) then that would actually account for both appearing on the most ballots and the average ranking at the same time. calculated as average of the ones voted for. By the way I am geeking out on results right now. It's so fascinating! We are sitting at 34 ballots with lots of pledged voters who have not turned them in (dylan, will, chad, tim, matt d, myself, etc...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted March 18, 2016 Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 I say just call it a tie. Keep it simple stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted March 18, 2016 Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 Ties seem okay in theory until you have eight and nine-way ties. I agree with higher average vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted March 18, 2016 Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 Needs to be some balancing mechanism, let's say one guy has 10+ ballots in 50-60 range and another guy has only two votes at 1 and 2 and the sums come to a tied score, the average for the second guy will be higher but based on only two people. I'd suggest a baseline frequency of 3 or 4 voters and after that average. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted March 18, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 For the record there is 33 single ballots in and there are ties at the 33 spot, the 71 spot and the 99 spot. Just two-way ties, no more than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedEagle Posted March 18, 2016 Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 I'll definitely be submitting before the deadline. Do you have a sense of whether most folks who are committed have already turned theirs in or are waiting until closer to deadline? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted March 18, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 I'll definitely be submitting before the deadline. Do you have a sense of whether most folks who are committed have already turned theirs in or are waiting until closer to deadline? I'd say at minimum ten more are coming. Hopefully more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luchaundead Posted March 18, 2016 Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 Needs to be some balancing mechanism, let's say one guy has 10+ ballots in 50-60 range and another guy has only two votes at 1 and 2 and the sums come to a tied score, the average for the second guy will be higher but based on only two people. I'd suggest a baseline frequency of 3 or 4 voters and after that average. This was exactly my point I think using the average score out of all ballots turned in not just ballots each wrestler appear on would be the best way it accounts for no only the wrestlers average ranking but also their overall standing with all voters sure it may be unfair to some wrestlers from underrepresented regions but, the voting in general isn't set up to protect for that as is because balloting isn't segregated into voting regions/blocks ala WON HOF voting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El McKell Posted March 18, 2016 Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 Needs to be some balancing mechanism, let's say one guy has 10+ ballots in 50-60 range and another guy has only two votes at 1 and 2 and the sums come to a tied score, the average for the second guy will be higher but based on only two people. I'd suggest a baseline frequency of 3 or 4 voters and after that average. This was exactly my point I think using the average score out of all ballots turned in not just ballots each wrestler appear on would be the best way it accounts for no only the wrestlers average ranking but also their overall standing with all voters sure it may be unfair to some wrestlers from underrepresented regions but, the voting in general isn't set up to protect for that as is because balloting isn't segregated into voting regions/blocks ala WON HOF voting. If you use average score of all ballots you will end up with a tie again. if both wrestlers got say 200 points and you divide that by the total number of ballots the tie will not be broken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luchaundead Posted March 18, 2016 Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 Needs to be some balancing mechanism, let's say one guy has 10+ ballots in 50-60 range and another guy has only two votes at 1 and 2 and the sums come to a tied score, the average for the second guy will be higher but based on only two people. I'd suggest a baseline frequency of 3 or 4 voters and after that average. This was exactly my point I think using the average score out of all ballots turned in not just ballots each wrestler appear on would be the best way it accounts for no only the wrestlers average ranking but also their overall standing with all voters sure it may be unfair to some wrestlers from underrepresented regions but, the voting in general isn't set up to protect for that as is because balloting isn't segregated into voting regions/blocks ala WON HOF voting. If you use average score of all ballots you will end up with a tie again. if both wrestlers got say 200 points and you divide that by the total number of ballots the tie will not be broken Yeah I'm saying to not use the weighted point system for the tie breaker so a #1 rank = 100 points and a #100 rank = 1 point and so on then a non-rank = 0 points then average based on all ballots Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El McKell Posted March 18, 2016 Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 Needs to be some balancing mechanism, let's say one guy has 10+ ballots in 50-60 range and another guy has only two votes at 1 and 2 and the sums come to a tied score, the average for the second guy will be higher but based on only two people. I'd suggest a baseline frequency of 3 or 4 voters and after that average. This was exactly my point I think using the average score out of all ballots turned in not just ballots each wrestler appear on would be the best way it accounts for no only the wrestlers average ranking but also their overall standing with all voters sure it may be unfair to some wrestlers from underrepresented regions but, the voting in general isn't set up to protect for that as is because balloting isn't segregated into voting regions/blocks ala WON HOF voting. If you use average score of all ballots you will end up with a tie again. if both wrestlers got say 200 points and you divide that by the total number of ballots the tie will not be broken Yeah I'm saying to not use the weighted point system for the tie breaker so a #1 rank = 100 points and a #100 rank = 1 point and so on then a non-rank = 0 points then average based on all ballots Oh ok sorry my bad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted March 18, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 I like the idea of ties, unless it's for number one or something. Currently 3 times spread out through the list is no biggie to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luchaundead Posted March 18, 2016 Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 I like the idea of ties, unless it's for number one or something. Currently 3 times spread out through the list is no biggie to me.I'm fine with that too but how will you deal with accounting for the fact that ties will make it so in the end it's not a listen of 100 names? Like will a tie take up 2 places or in the end will it just be 104 people are the 100 greatest wrestlers ever? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR Ackermann Posted March 18, 2016 Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 It will still be 100 names, just possibly a few more of there are ties in the back end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted March 18, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 It will still be 100 names, just possibly a few more of there are ties in the back end. Exactly. Say there is a tie for number 50. Then it would go: 49) 50) 50) 52) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.00c68798e2502c92a7da65280cf7def4.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.