JRsec
Super Moderator
Posts: 38,168
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7897
I Root For: SEC
Location:
|
RE: OT: using machine learning to rank teams each year 1950 to present (25 year average)
(01-03-2019 10:36 PM)bullet Wrote: (01-03-2019 06:03 PM)JRsec Wrote: (01-03-2019 03:16 PM)bullet Wrote: (01-03-2019 03:14 PM)JRsec Wrote: (01-03-2019 02:17 PM)jhasting Wrote: Auburn is #40 in 1957. The program does show a dominant 1957 season for Auburn and they improved almost 100pts in ELO, but again this method is NOT ranking single seasons, looking at Auburn from 1932-1957 shows many good seasons (they are #20 in 1938) but also many bad seasons until they begin consistently winning in the 70s. This is evident because they go from #61 in 1950, to the 30s through the 1960, then the teens in the 70s where they remained until this season.
ELO,Auburn,1978.90464209402,WON,Auburn,7,@,<8> Tennessee,0,Sep 28 1957,
ELO,Auburn,1981.56926717746,WON,<7> Auburn,40,vs,Chattanooga,7,Oct 5 1957,
ELO,Auburn,1997.64373173413,WON,<9> Auburn,6,vs,Kentucky,0,Oct 12 1957,
ELO,Auburn,2020.71670062014,WON,<9> Auburn,3,@,Georgia Tech,0,Oct 19 1957,
ELO,Auburn,2029.31965089445,WON,<5> Auburn,48,@,Houston,7,Oct 26 1957,
ELO,Auburn,2040.87783551551,WON,<4> Auburn,13,vs,<19> Florida,0,Nov 2 1957,
ELO,Auburn,2049.75700820969,WON,<3> Auburn,15,vs,<17> Mississippi State,7,Nov 9 1957,
ELO,Auburn,2055.42171200981,WON,<3> Auburn,6,vs,Georgia,0,Nov 16 1957,
ELO,Auburn,2057.63910744007,WON,<2> Auburn,29,@,Florida State,7,Nov 23 1957,
ELO,Auburn,2062.20257652763,WON,<1> Auburn,40,vs,Alabama,0,Nov 30 1957,
This system may be fine for tracking a long range trend, but for rating schools by season it is beyond absurd and worthless.
Read the OP JR!!! That is what he is doing. He is tracking long range trends and not saying anything about season by season.
I play chess, play it well, and have never heard of an ELO outside of Jeff Lynne and the Electric Light Orchestra. Any system that is not self explanatory fails. And quite frankly old fading blue bloods will not want to be tracked and rated. New and rising programs will take a couple of decades to be recognized so they will skip it for quick publicity.
I grasped the concept in just looking at the data. It's probably good for a grad project in statistics but as far as having a broad application? Not so much.
Electric Light Orchestra? You may not be as old as you claim!
ELO is the system they use in rating players in chess. And its the system Sagarin uses in one of his rating systems (the one the BCS used). The basic ELO system is pretty simple. Before computers made the formula more complex, for your initial rating, you simply took your opponents rating and added 500 points if you won, 0 if you drew and subtracted 500 points if you lost. Then you averaged those results of all your games. So if you played a 1500 and won, a 1500 and lost a 1700 and drew and a 1300 and won, your rating would be (1500+500+1500-500+1700+0+1300+500)/4=1625.
Thanks for the explanation. Chess was always a gentlemen's game. I never joined a chess club but I probably didn't need to. My best buddies' dad was a chess master from Europe and if we just played him close it was a great game. Imported beer, or a good cognac was the reward of the game. Well that and a great exercise of the gray matter. I hate computer chess. Once you beat the program it's virtually worthless because of the overwhelming temptation to beat the thing again by exploiting the same blind spot in the programming.
As to age determination by music, I love 30's jazz, 40's Big Band, 50's - 80's rock, and not very much after that other than folk. I particularly loved Joan Baez, Peter, Paul & Mary, Joni Mitchel, and Nanci Griffith's music! I love folk music period, pretty much no matter the era, and that includes Bluegrass. I liked ELO because it was the best synergy between orchestra and rock that I had heard. And yes I love classical music as well. I'm particularly fond of adagios since I find them very relaxing.
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2019 01:09 AM by JRsec.)
|
|