The Quizbowl Resource Center

When might we see them?

It's going right now.

http://ratings.aiquizbowl.com/index.php

leftsaidfred wrote:It's going right now.

http://ratings.aiquizbowl.com/index.php

Cool. Thanks.

-Lee

GiveMeBrindleeOrDeath wrote:

leftsaidfred wrote:It's going right now.

http://ratings.aiquizbowl.com/index.php

Cool. Thanks.

-Lee

omg haxx0red

I know you're busy with lots of other stuff, but is there a projected next update?

I believe David did an update yesterday. All the Indiana rankings are updated, I know.

I notice you don't have any Minnesota teams on the list.

Many Minnesota stats can be found here

Of note...Minnesota league play (derived from a series) Note that there are four large divisions of ~30 teams each on that page.

Also, the a-series SOCIALhas been played. GINVIT (regular IS series) is upcoming.

theMoMA wrote:I notice you don't have any Minnesota teams on the list.

Many Minnesota stats can be found here

Of note...Minnesota league play (derived from a series) Note that there are four large divisions of ~30 teams each on that page.

Also, the a-series SOCIALhas been played. GINVIT (regular IS series) is upcoming.

Yes, that's coming soon--hopefully this weekend. I have a lot of catching up to do. It's been something that has gotten a little behind while I've been taking care of things so we can close on our first house by the end of the year.

What about Beltway league? I'm curious if you will add the matches, and if so, all at the end of the year, or after each takes place?
Sorry about my continued pest-iness, Isaac

I was looking at the Indiana rankings and I was bothered by how highly some of the B Teams were ranked (e.g. Brebeuf Jesuit B above Brebeuf Jesuit A, even though the A Team has defeated the A Team counterpart to all the B Teams Brebeuf B has faced... (teams with a low number of games, especially if it doesn't connect to the bigger circuit, obviously mess things up...).

So... my idea was this: Would it make sense to assign one win to each A Team over it's school's lower ranked teams (B, C, D, etc.) and the same for each lower team (B gets one win over C, etc.)? This would get rid of any B Team weirdness in the rankings and would also give some meaning to the A, B, C etc. designation... The A Team should have defeated the B Team at least once in practice, right?

Unrelated, but is it possible to get a display of when things are updated on the main ratings page?

The problem is that some B-teams can defeat their school's A-team. (TJ last year, Eden Prairie this year, etc.)

Yes. B-teams should be treated as independent entities. To make the Indiana rankings smooth out, the teams there should go to more tournaments. The more interconnection of regions and tournaments held, the more accurate the rankings become.

While I agree that going to more tournaments in more places is a good thing, there are possibilities that teams don't have the budget, the interested members, lack of a good coach, and, honestly, a lot of teams in areas dominated by Chip and other poor writers are very reluctant to go to NAQT or other pyramidal (caveat: in this case I don't mean 2 liners with 4 clues in order of difficuty, I mean 4 lines, or at minimum what you find in an A-set) tournaments, especially with those with straight tossup bonus formats (which, like it or not, is how pyramidal questions are most often found). Also, there is a very strong possibility that there are tournaments that aren't being submitted to the results for these teams.

Fair point, although I think the "go to more tournaments" solution was to solve the specific problem of weird-looking team rankings, and not as a catch-all "here's what Indiana needs to do". It is certainly a more valid solution than adding fictional games between A and B teams.

(Also, coaches and players could always encourage TDs to submit their results, if people in a certain area care about these particular rankings to that extent.)

NoahMinkCHS wrote:(Also, coaches and players could always encourage TDs to submit their results, if people in a certain area care about these particular rankings to that extent.)

Not only that, but I've had some teams submit results for their own team for the season. Granted, if they've defeated teams for which I don't have any results at all, it can be of limited value, but still, any information is better than nothing. I try to do what I can, but I know there are tournaments for which the full results aren't posted online, and at this point, I simply don't have the time to e-mail every TD for full results from their tournament (and there are some TDs who wouldn't really be able to provide that anyways).

As for notifying when updates happen, well, it's kind of irregular--depends on how work and other stuff in my life is going. I really don't know how to do it effectively other than to say that, well, check back and see when it happens. I will say this: ratings are recalculated daily at midnight, so the numbers will not change throughout the day; there may be new results added throughout the day, but they will not impact ratings and rankings until the next day. For example, Eden Prairie A right now is listed as 14-0. If you click on their page, they're actually 18-0 because they have 4 wins I added today (MNHSQB League - Southern Division - Meet 2 - 12/6/07) that haven't been factored into the calculations yet.

The real challenge with the imbalance is exactly what has been said: early on, win-loss record tends to dominate strength of schedule, and this is especially true of teams that are isolated from the rest of the network. You'll notice there are some JV teams that are included, which I would ultimately like to move to their own group in some circumstances, but the fact is that it would take some coding and testing to do what I would like to with it, but that isn't really possible right now because of time constraints. The rankings should usually be more accurate on a regional level than a national one, although at this point, with more of the blending between teams all along the east coast, that whole area is probably somewhat more accurate than expected.

As always, if there are results that you don't see posted (or worse, if you see mistakes), e-mail me and I'll include them as I can. Next week I may have some extra time--this whole buying-a-house thing has taken a lot of time the last couple months.

The Indiana rankings will likely smooth themselves out once I get all the scores from the Brownsburg tournament to submit to David. There were about 30 teams there, of which about half were B-teams. Few of the B-teams did well, and none did better than their A-teams.

You have the GDS tourney, but none of the games or records.

Er, just wondering if you knew that.

NeverHitTina wrote:You have the GDS tourney, but none of the games or records.

Er, just wondering if you knew that.

Yeah, I do. Closing on a house yesterday kind of took priority over the ratings.

Seriously, it's all coming. If you've e-mailed me with statistics that aren't included yet, I probably got them, and I'll try to get caught up on everything by the end of the calendar year. Plus I have everything I need (I think) from these tournaments that I still need to enter:

Minnesota
Georgetown Day
Rock Valley CC
New Trier

So I'm close. Just give me a little more time.

Maybe you need a link to let you know which statistics you have received but have not entered in addition to a list of tournaments included.

I was thinking, can't you delegate some of the stat-input responsibility to some people? It seems like an operation that doesn't really require you to be on a particular computer . . .

Can we get any volunteers? (Of course, I'm sure it has something to do with data input into the spreadsheet...).

I mentioned this in another thread, but if you give me some parameters for what stats you want to develop, I should be able to make you a program that will at least be able to get teams from SQBS html output and add them to some database of yours.

Bentley Like Beckham wrote:I mentioned this in another thread, but if you give me some parameters for what stats you want to develop, I should be able to make you a program that will at least be able to get teams from SQBS html output and add them to some database of yours.

Part of the problem there, though, is that the teams in SQBS have to match how they are accounted for in the database. For example, since there are multiple Auburn High Schools in the country, there's Auburn A (VA), Auburn A (Auburn IL), and Auburn A (Rockford IL). Do I expect everyone else out there to match my protocol? No--for them, it's not necessary, and it's unrealistic for me to expect everyone else to change for me. That's one of the biggest challenges: I could set something up to take an output file from SQBS and ingest it straight up, but if the teams aren't called what I call them, it won't work without some more effort. (Then again, that's not as much work as I had previously thought, so that might be a worthwhile effort--something I can think about when I have more time).

It's a relatively easy (I think) system to use, so I'm certainly not opposed to having other people do data entry into it--I'm close to having an actual login system for admin access for data entry anyways. So it's possible that could happen, but again, it'll take a little time. Good ideas, though.

Well the idea would be to at the beginning of the season (and throughout the season) create some large database of teams in the country. Then, when you're importing data from SQBS, it goes through each of the teams and asks you to compare the team name on the SQBS page to the "official" team name in your database. While this would require you to validate for each team in a tournament, it would be considerably less work than manually entering in the data for each team.

Of course it wouldn't work for teams that just haphazardly post data in their own formats, but I imagine it would save you at least like 25% of your work.

Hey Dave,
On the page for our team, it shows us at 27-5, but it doesn't show that on the page for Ohio... whats up with that?

BobGHHS wrote:Hey Dave,
On the page for our team, it shows us at 27-5, but it doesn't show that on the page for Ohio... whats up with that?

It probably means your record has been updated to 27-5 but the ranking hasn't run since the update. I seem to remember Byko mentioning something about that. Check and see if it's still that way tomorrow.

Howard wrote:

BobGHHS wrote:Hey Dave,
On the page for our team, it shows us at 27-5, but it doesn't show that on the page for Ohio... whats up with that?

It probably means your record has been updated to 27-5 but the ranking hasn't run since the update. I seem to remember Byko mentioning something about that. Check and see if it's still that way tomorrow.

You got it. Since the server isn't completely in my control (as in, I don't own it personally), the best I can do is have the ratings get recalculated nightly, particularly at a time when there isn't much or any traffic, so it happens right now at 1:00 or so.

One more note for those interested: because I have other priorities (such as redoing my kitchen and making sure we put together our regular season PACE set that will be used in February along with a trip out of town for about 5 days), I will likely not be making any updates to the ratings between tomorrow and mid-February. It's possible this might change if time opens up in my schedule. I apologize for the inconvenience. Next season, I don't anticipate something like this coming up since I will likely have a better data entry interface that I will feel more comfortable letting other people use to help with inputting data (among other changes I'm considering working on during the offseason).

That's too bad. I was hoping to print off the rankings prior to the IHSA seeding meeting in early Feb. where I plan to attend as proxy for the BHS varsity coach to help me gauge the strength of the 20-odd teams BHS never plays. I guess it's back to my original plan of actually listening to coaches argue why they deserve to be ranked ahead of certain others.

Would those coaches who tend to argue actually listen, or would they just disregard those ratings anyway?

You could bring the last version anyway, just to see what people think. Basically the argument would be, "who have you played," and "how often have you played them"?

Yeah but Barrington's strength (or lack thereof) is COMPLETELY predicated on how good Fremd, Hoffman Estates, and Buffalo Grove look as they played outside of conference this season and Barrington hasn't. PLUS, only 3 conference games were played prior to Christmas, so the record is pretty sparse as far as the byko ratings are concerned.
These are arguments that cn be made verbally but it's nice to have the argument quantified for you.

There are quite a few results on NAQT's results page that haven't been added yet.

I will likely not be making any updates to the ratings between tomorrow and mid-February.

Any updates coming soon?

It does appear that some new tournaments and school names have recently gone in (about 100+ new teams in fact since yesterday I think is was like 2150 and is now is 2276). But I suspect that Mr. Bykowski has a ways to go to catch up.

Stat74 wrote:But I suspect that Mr. Bykowski has a ways to go to catch up.

QFT

Seriously, though, if things continue to go well, I may be caught up completely in early March.

Dave,
I know I sent you some recent results, but did you receive the Solon results from last Saturday and Sunday?

BobGHHS wrote:Dave,
I know I sent you some recent results, but did you receive the Solon results from last Saturday and Sunday?

I have. I'm hoping that I'll be able to get those included sometime this week. The stack of results in the e-mail inbox is a lot smaller right now, so that increases the chances.

Byko wrote:

BobGHHS wrote:Dave,
I know I sent you some recent results, but did you receive the Solon results from last Saturday and Sunday?

I have. I'm hoping that I'll be able to get those included sometime this week. The stack of results in the e-mail inbox is a lot smaller right now, so that increases the chances.

I have sent you the results from a few tournaments. Have you gotten them?

-Lee

GiveMeBrindleeOrDeath wrote:

Byko wrote:

BobGHHS wrote:Dave,
I know I sent you some recent results, but did you receive the Solon results from last Saturday and Sunday?

I have. I'm hoping that I'll be able to get those included sometime this week. The stack of results in the e-mail inbox is a lot smaller right now, so that increases the chances.

I have sent you the results from a few tournaments. Have you gotten them?

-Lee

I got what you sent me from LBW CC (and that'll take a while to figure out what the devil the deal is with that spreadsheet). That's the only thing that jumps out at me from you recently, though.

Did you get the ones I have sent to you also?
I sent you the one for Northeast Alabama Community College Mustang Bowl and Scottsboro's TIN Man

Matthew D wrote:Did you get the ones I have sent to you also?
I sent you the one for Northeast Alabama Community College Mustang Bowl and Scottsboro's TIN Man

The Scottsboro TMI results just got entered today. I don't recall seeing anything from NE Alabama CC--I think there was a brief post online somewhere, but that's it, I think.

I was asked to post the results from the Sixth Annual Rube Invitational here for rankings. They can be found at http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Ch ... ults6.html and should be up on the NAQT website soon.

mishra1111 wrote:I was asked to post the results from the Sixth Annual Rube Invitational here for rankings. They can be found at http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Ch ... ults6.html and should be up on the NAQT website soon.

Judging from those stats (although a SQBS page would be more helpful) it looks like Grosse Pointe North could be a playoff caliber team (not necessarily championship caliber) if they actually decide to attend NAQT and PACE.

mishra1111 wrote:I was asked to post the results from the Sixth Annual Rube Invitational here for rankings. They can be found at http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Ch ... ults6.html and should be up on the NAQT website soon.

Excellent--thank you. I'm lacking data in Michigan on the whole, so that's very helpful indeed. Although I'm mostly caught up (don't worry, Minnesota--I haven't forgotten you all, just give me another week or maybe less), I still don't really have the time to send a lot of unsolicited e-mails for results, but I'll be happy to accept any that come my way--I've gotten a couple good ones from teams in the last 24 hours, so feel free to do e-mail me at dbykowski AT aiquizbowl DOT com.

Hey, Byko. I just sent you stats from the ASCA Small School Tournament.

When Magoo Flew wrote:Hey, Byko. I just sent you stats from the ASCA Small School Tournament.

Saw it this morning--thanks!

RTO results are at http://www.raleighcharterhs.org/ncata/rto. They are in a modified SQBS html format. If you need something different, we can work on that.

Eric

I don't mean to nitpick, but I was just checking our stats, and Whitman's 205-285 loss to Stuyvesant in round 4 of the DACQ Saturday Tournament isn't the right result from that round (I can't remember what happened in that round, but we went 5-1 with the loss to Charter in round 6).

Stat Boy wrote:I don't mean to nitpick, but I was just checking our stats, and Whitman's 205-285 loss to Stuyvesant in round 4 of the DACQ Saturday Tournament isn't the right result from that round (I can't remember what happened in that round, but we went 5-1 with the loss to Charter in round 6).

Yeah, looks I just had a typo while entering those between rounds yesterday--I don't have any result for Walter Johnson in round 3, so that must be it. Thanks for pointing it out--I've corrected it now.

Byko,

I just posted the Kaysinger (MO) Conference results. I would have emailed them to you, but I couldn't find your address.