To slightly further this discussion:

fiercey said:

“A “predictor” and a “ranking” are whole different animals…

What I want to see are Sagarin’s weekly rankings… why hide them?”

MJruffalo replied:

I hear this argument from others and respectfully it is nonsense.  The main points of contention is usually the venue and MOV factors which Sagarin is able to account for with his algorythm but other systems using less sophisticated math are not.  So since they are unable to deal with that very important factor they attempt to simply discount it.  Because other systems simply do not account for those factors their ranking are flawed when it comes to determing how strong a team truly is.  So when the 2 systems disagree on which team is ranked higher ie better and should win, it is usually the team ranked higher in the Sagarin system that is victorious.  Another thing I hear from people who simply do not understand the system is that it is biased towards PAC-10 teams, which again is utter ridiculousness.

——————————————————————

Well, that’s an opinion (on your part).  If I were putting together a predictor, I would consider Team A’s rushing offense vs. Team B’s rushing defense, Team A’s passing offense vs. Team B’s passing defense, and vice versa… and these factors would get the most weight with respect to and in the microcosm of “Team A vs. Team B”.  That’s a very simplistic way to say it, because I have further ideas on how to do it appropriately that I’m not going to get into the discussion of sharing.  But, again, that’s an opinion (on my part).

That said, my rankings will be published each week starting post-week 4, and they will remain on my site indefinitely (www.jwagoner.com/football.html).  You’re welcome to do the footwork and compare them, as long as you put in the context that one is a ranking and one is a predictor in any published results.  But a more apples-to-apples comparison would be my rankings vs. Sagarin’s BCS rankings.  In the context of “rankings”, I would posit that mine did better than Sagarin’s for 2009 (again, opinion).

-f

fiercey - 02 September 2010 02:33 PM

To slightly further this discussion:

fiercey said:

“A “predictor” and a “ranking” are whole different animals…

Team A might be ranked higher than Teams B, C, D, and E because of on-field accomplishments, yet Team E might be tagged by a predictor as likely to win a game vs. Team A but not vs. Teams B, C, and D.

I’m considering tooling around with a predictor behind the scenes this year, though.  My rankings are set up to be BCS-computer compliant (no margin of victory, etc.)… although a predictor could use whatever data I want.  But it’s a lot of work, which is the big downer.

What I want to see are Sagarin’s weekly rankings… why hide them?”

MJruffalo replied:

I hear this argument from others and respectfully it is nonsense.  The main points of contention is usually the venue and MOV factors which Sagarin is able to account for with his algorythm but other systems using less sophisticated math are not.  So since they are unable to deal with that very important factor they attempt to simply discount it.  Because other systems simply do not account for those factors their ranking are flawed when it comes to determing how strong a team truly is.  So when the 2 systems disagree on which team is ranked higher ie better and should win, it is usually the team ranked higher in the Sagarin system that is victorious.  Another thing I hear from people who simply do not understand the system is that it is biased towards PAC-10 teams, which again is utter ridiculousness.

——————————————————————

Well, that’s an opinion (on your part).  If I were putting together a predictor, I would consider Team A’s rushing offense vs. Team B’s rushing defense, Team A’s passing offense vs. Team B’s passing defense, and vice versa… and these factors would get the most weight with respect to and in the microcosm of “Team A vs. Team B”.  That’s a very simplistic way to say it, because I have further ideas on how to do it appropriately that I’m not going to get into the discussion of sharing.  But, again, that’s an opinion (on my part).

That said, my rankings will be published each week starting post-week 4, and they will remain on my site indefinitely (www.jwagoner.com/football.html).  You’re welcome to do the footwork and compare them, as long as you put in the context that one is a ranking and one is a predictor in any published results.  But a more apples-to-apples comparison would be my rankings vs. Sagarin’s BCS rankings.  In the context of “rankings”, I would posit that mine did better than Sagarin’s for 2009 (again, opinion).

-f

    What you are talking about is breaking down an individual matchup.  That has never been part of the discussion at hand, though of course that is a different animal all together.  The Sagarin “predictor” does not do this, but simply ranks teams on their true strength based upon a formula of record, SOS, and MOV.  Venue is part of the SOS equation, as we all know it is easier to win at home than it is on the road.  MOV is used to show how competitive a team was, were they simply a play or 2 away from winning, or were they outclassed completely?  Of course this method is not without it’s inherent flaws, but over time, in looking at populations it is a very good indicator.

  Sagarin’s week by week rankings are not hidden, they are just not saved as far as I know.  You can see his up to date week by week rankings, and if you want to save them I guess you could just print them out every week as they are published.  Only thing he hides is his algorythm.  Understandable as to why.  Vegas uses his data in part to set the betting lines.

You want to make money bet Sagarin’s predictor.