MM Update 1/15/10

[Unregistered]

Kind of interesting looking at the latest MM ratings and how dominant R4 is, how R2 barely exists and how R1 and R3 are about even when looking at the Top 25. Seems to me that R2 was stronger in the past and all we ever heard of was Eclipse, Eclipse, Eclipse, but they're not even in the top 50 at U16. Another example of a club that got too big for their britches.

[Unregistered]

Kind of interesting looking at the latest MM ratings and how dominant R4 is, how R2 barely exists and how R1 and R3 are about even when looking at the Top 25. Seems to me that R2 was stronger in the past and all we ever heard of was Eclipse, Eclipse, Eclipse, but they're not even in the top 50 at U16. Another example of a club that got too big for their britches.

Does Math Man use goal differential as part of the equation? 1-0 win over a weaker opponent is not as good as a 3-0 win?

[mathman]

Does Math Man use goal differential as part of the equation? 1-0 win over a weaker opponent is not as good as a 3-0 win?

The bigger the goal differential, the bigger the rating point exchange, up to 6 goals. However, each additional goal is worth less. If a 1-0 score is worth 16 points, 2-0 is worth 24, and 3-0 is worth 28. 6-0 or more would be worth 32 points.

[Unregistered]

The bigger the goal differential, the bigger the rating point exchange, up to 6 goals. However, each additional goal is worth less. If a 1-0 score is worth 16 points, 2-0 is worth 24, and 3-0 is worth 28. 6-0 or more would be worth 32 points.

Thanks for the explanation MM and thanks for being an active part of Talking soccer but I really don't think goal differential has no place in anything other than seedings for tournaments. The rankings should be determined by wins and losses not who can score goals at a greater clip. All game long you have hit the post or shot wide or high and came away with a respectable 2-0 win. While a team who has been outplayed but got lucky with a few shots and came away with a 4-1 win get more points. They both should get the exact points for their victory.

[Unregistered]

The bigger the goal differential, the bigger the rating point exchange, up to 6 goals. However, each additional goal is worth less. If a 1-0 score is worth 16 points, 2-0 is worth 24, and 3-0 is worth 28. 6-0 or more would be worth 32 points.

Hey MM, I am a loyal visitor to your site and I love the work you do. Thank you. Could you please clarify for me how long the rated games last for. For instance, Penn Strikers has been abysmal of late and are not in my opinion a top 13 team.

Thanks in advance for your response, and thanks again for what I feel are the most accurate ratings out there. Now, do you do taxes too?

[Unregistered]

Mathman I also follow your site very closely, I think it is the most accurate ranking site out there. I heard rumors that you were thinking about doing the current girls U15 age group. just wondering if that is true? If it is approximately how long till those are up? Thanks

[Unregistered]

Thanks for the explanation MM and thanks for being an active part of Talking soccer but I really don't think goal differential has no place in anything other than seedings for tournaments. The rankings should be determined by wins and losses not who can score goals at a greater clip. All game long you have hit the post or shot wide or high and came away with a respectable 2-0 win. While a team who has been outplayed but got lucky with a few shots and came away with a 4-1 win get more points. They both should get the exact points for their victory.

How many games have you seen where the "lesser" team gets a single lucky goal and the dominating team hits the bar and post multiple times. The goal differential is probably more accurate than the win and loss.

[mathman]

Could you please clarify for me how long the rated games last for. For instance, Penn Strikers has been abysmal of late and are not in my opinion a top 13 team.

(snip)

There is no fixed period of time, nor is there a fixed number of games. Without getting too technical about it, the effect of a particular game has a large effect for a few games, and less and less of an effect as the team plays more games. [To *get* technical about it, the effect of a particular game on a team's rating is an exponentially decreasing function of how many games ago that game was.]

Let's say a team has played 15 games. The result of game #1 had a big effect on the team's rating for the first 5 games or so. But by game #15, you could change the result of game #1 from a 6-0 win to a 6-0 loss without affecting the present rating of the team by more than a few points. So game #1 might as well not have taken place and it is, in a sense, removed from the team's history. So the result of a particular game is essentially irrelevant after 12-15 games.

What is always most important for a team is their last 5-8 rated games.

The only time that games more than 12-15 games ago still have an effect on the team's rating is when the team has improved or weakened tremendously (by 200 or more points). For such teams, it can take 20 games for a game to be essentially irrelevant.

As for Penn Strikers, their rating has decreased by 80 or so points since Aug 1 (10 games). That's a significant decrease, and their rating may continue to decrease (or it may increase...). But there is always a problem with early year ratings of teams from states that play HS soccer in the fall for reasons that are probably apparent to everyone. So, personally, I would not draw any big conclusions about such teams at this point.

To the other poster who asked about GU15, yes, I am working on them. I have about 50,000 rated games, but have not yet had time to run the Fall leagues. I have no estimate of when I will get these out.

[Unregistered]

There is no fixed period of time, nor is there a fixed number of games. Without getting too technical about it, the effect of a particular game has a large effect for a few games, and less and less of an effect as the team plays more games. [To *get* technical about it, the effect of a particular game on a team's rating is an exponentially decreasing function of how many games ago that game was.]

Let's say a team has played 15 games. The result of game #1 had a big effect on the team's rating for the first 5 games or so. But by game #15, you could change the result of game #1 from a 6-0 win to a 6-0 loss without affecting the present rating of the team by more than a few points. So game #1 might as well not have taken place and it is, in a sense, removed from the team's history. So the result of a particular game is essentially irrelevant after 12-15 games.

What is always most important for a team is their last 5-8 rated games.

The only time that games more than 12-15 games ago still have an effect on the team's rating is when the team has improved or weakened tremendously (by 200 or more points). For such teams, it can take 20 games for a game to be essentially irrelevant.

As for Penn Strikers, their rating has decreased by 80 or so points since Aug 1 (10 games). That's a significant decrease, and their rating may continue to decrease (or it may increase...). But there is always a problem with early year ratings of teams from states that play HS soccer in the fall for reasons that are probably apparent to everyone. So, personally, I would not draw any big conclusions about such teams at this point.

To the other poster who asked about GU15, yes, I am working on them. I have about 50,000 rated games, but have not yet had time to run the Fall leagues. I have no estimate of when I will get these out.

That is a perfect answer for me, thanks.