Is it possible to high score?

Imported from Yahoo
1

Art says

"For the record, there is an even fairer way to implement "no bias

based

on fleet size." You do simple high point scoring for each race and

then

at the end of the series you divide each boat's total points by the

number of points she would have gotten if she had won every race she

sailed in. Each boat's score is essentially a percentage

representing

her "efficiency,
  " meaning the extent to which she

approached perfection.

  If you win every race your percentage will be 100%. If you are

last in

  every race then your percentage will be really low (it would vary

based

  on fleet size)."

  that's close to what a properly implemented Cox-Sprague does. a

lot of the examples I’ve seen fail to complete this step.

  I inserted an extra bracket, which should have meant the whole

expression was unbalanced & should not have worked.

  unless Sailwave's operator precedence is 'odd' (i.e. not like

normal programming languages)

  20-(15 * ((p-1)/(s-1))) should evaluate to the same as

20-((p-1)/(s-1))*15

  multiplication and division are 'usually' higher precedence than

addition and subtraction. unless dear old Sailwave does it left to
right. but I got the brackets wrong anyway.

  and lastly, I'm trying to write something about the high scoring

systems, but it’s such a minority interest that the enthusiasm
sometimes ebbs. Maybe Art’s useful observations (or comments) will
give me some stimulus.

2

Thanks for the clarification. Based on that, I think I need to modify my comments concerning Cox-Sprague.

Cox-Sprague does indeed use an "efficiency" type calculation (dividing a boat's points for all her races by the total she would have gotten had she won all such races). I had forgotten that (I've never sailed under Cox-Sprague nor been at an event that used it so my experiences with the system are very limited). I believe that step pretty much eliminates bias based on fleet size.

Of course, Cox-Sprague still is one of the "bonus" type systems, which I think are less popular today than in the past. Personally, I would do well under such a system but I don't think such systems are generally considered "fair" today.

The comments re Cox-Sprague prompted me to double-check my conclusions re CHIPS and I see that CHIPS has been changed. The original CHIPS seemed to have a bias toward larger fleets. The most recent revision (CHIPS 3) now seems to have a bias toward smaller fleets (which makes more sense to me). But, I think it will take a much more thorough and careful analysis before I would want to state any definite conclusions. Suffice it to say CHIPS 3 and Rinderle B seem to have a bias based on fleet size and you probably want to fully understand what those biases are before you decide whether one of those systems would be "fair" for your purposes.

Art

···

On 3/11/2011 4:00 AM, malcolm clark wrote:

Art says
"For the record, there is an even fairer way to implement "no bias based
on fleet size." You do simple high point scoring for each race and then
at the end of the series you divide each boat's total points by the
number of points she would have gotten if she had won every race she
sailed in. Each boat's score is essentially a percentage representing
her "efficiency,
" meaning the extent to which she approached perfection.
If you win every race your percentage will be 100%. If you are last in
every race then your percentage will be really low (it would vary based
on fleet size)."

that's close to what a properly implemented Cox-Sprague does. a lot of
the examples I've seen fail to complete this step.