Post by Ginny on Jun 9, 2021 7:16:23 GMT -6
Now that I've started thinking about why FCBA should have a RANKING for JMD & JMD/D fighters (probably just a top ten for each - which is one thing that should definately be agreed upon....how many?) I've given a (very) little bit of thought about HOW the ranking would be done.
First, someone(s) just randomly assign the order based on their opinion. Depending on how good they are, that could suffice. But I'd think most managers would like to see something a bit more "scientific" - or at least a method they can attack to justify a higher rating for THEIR fighter (I know I would love that for mine!)
What you'll see below (if you read down that far) is ONE METHOD I came up with after an exhaustive and extensive (five minutes at the word processor) churning through (my memory) for something I might have read years ago in an unrelated and not-easily-transferable bit of something. (Just explained that so you'll know that there was no scientific methodology or great thought given to this which was written off-the-cuff.)
HERE'S ONE POSSIBILITY followed by a few reasons why it MIGHT work:
1. Assign each JMD and JMD/D fighter "points" (ranking them from 1-10?) with 10 pts being the top.
2. If a fighter beats a higher ranked fighter she adds the point difference between their ratings to hers.
3. While a fighter who loses to a lower rated fighter, loses the difference between their ratings (opposite of #2)
4. Fighters who beat an equally rated fighter add (2?) points, while the loser loses (2?) pts. (more or less?)
5a. Number 5 ONLY APPLIES to "ranked" or "rated" fighters.
5b. A fighter doesn't get rated until after they'd had (5? more? less?) JMD or JMDD fights.
5c. (Maybe) after a fighter does enough to be rated, the results of their "play-in" fights can be added to their starting rating?? or not?
5d. Fighters who never complete their 5 qualification fights will hurt the fighters who beat them (see #2 thru #4) because the winners won't get any points for those wins (since their 'victim' was never qualified?).
After a year (two?) of fights, the cream will/should rise to the top. From there, the ratings can be done just as the other divisions with whatever criteria the rater-in-chief decides to use to move fighters up/down (?) Doing away with the points system will make maintenance easier.
ALTERNATIVELY, we could retroactively go back two/three years and come up with a ranking of all fighters who've done JMD, JMDD fights, assign points based on that ranking and start off fresh from there. The biggest drawback I see to that (my nearsighted BTW) is that - as outlined below - a LOT of fights weren't originally written as JMD or JMD/D fights, although both participants (read below for a fuller explanation) were qualified and the fight could be included.
Look at this....
given the number of JMD & JMD/D fighters, there could be quite a number of bouts generating "retrospective" points.
For example, in 2019 and 2020 (the last two full years):
Kate Upton fought 16 JMD/D bouts - and 9 more with women who also did JMD/D;
Hannah Ferguson fought 6....plus 13 others that were against JMD/D qualified opponents(!)
DiDonato fought 5; (and 10 more COULD have been done as JMD/D)
Tahnee Atkinson 3; (while 15 others COULD have been JMD/D)
McKinney only 1 (but 7 in 2016!). In 2019-20, she had 8 fights that COULD have been JMD/D.
IF there were incentive (and interest) a LOT of the regular fights - including title fights - COULD be included as JMD and JMD/D fights (since the only real difference occurs in the aftermath...as any reading of many fights would make clear. Girls are NOT avoiding the opponents racks when there's "HEY!" to be made there.)
First, someone(s) just randomly assign the order based on their opinion. Depending on how good they are, that could suffice. But I'd think most managers would like to see something a bit more "scientific" - or at least a method they can attack to justify a higher rating for THEIR fighter (I know I would love that for mine!)
What you'll see below (if you read down that far) is ONE METHOD I came up with after an exhaustive and extensive (five minutes at the word processor) churning through (my memory) for something I might have read years ago in an unrelated and not-easily-transferable bit of something. (Just explained that so you'll know that there was no scientific methodology or great thought given to this which was written off-the-cuff.)
HERE'S ONE POSSIBILITY followed by a few reasons why it MIGHT work:
1. Assign each JMD and JMD/D fighter "points" (ranking them from 1-10?) with 10 pts being the top.
2. If a fighter beats a higher ranked fighter she adds the point difference between their ratings to hers.
3. While a fighter who loses to a lower rated fighter, loses the difference between their ratings (opposite of #2)
4. Fighters who beat an equally rated fighter add (2?) points, while the loser loses (2?) pts. (more or less?)
5a. Number 5 ONLY APPLIES to "ranked" or "rated" fighters.
5b. A fighter doesn't get rated until after they'd had (5? more? less?) JMD or JMDD fights.
5c. (Maybe) after a fighter does enough to be rated, the results of their "play-in" fights can be added to their starting rating?? or not?
5d. Fighters who never complete their 5 qualification fights will hurt the fighters who beat them (see #2 thru #4) because the winners won't get any points for those wins (since their 'victim' was never qualified?).
After a year (two?) of fights, the cream will/should rise to the top. From there, the ratings can be done just as the other divisions with whatever criteria the rater-in-chief decides to use to move fighters up/down (?) Doing away with the points system will make maintenance easier.
ALTERNATIVELY, we could retroactively go back two/three years and come up with a ranking of all fighters who've done JMD, JMDD fights, assign points based on that ranking and start off fresh from there. The biggest drawback I see to that (my nearsighted BTW) is that - as outlined below - a LOT of fights weren't originally written as JMD or JMD/D fights, although both participants (read below for a fuller explanation) were qualified and the fight could be included.
Look at this....
given the number of JMD & JMD/D fighters, there could be quite a number of bouts generating "retrospective" points.
For example, in 2019 and 2020 (the last two full years):
Kate Upton fought 16 JMD/D bouts - and 9 more with women who also did JMD/D;
Hannah Ferguson fought 6....plus 13 others that were against JMD/D qualified opponents(!)
DiDonato fought 5; (and 10 more COULD have been done as JMD/D)
Tahnee Atkinson 3; (while 15 others COULD have been JMD/D)
McKinney only 1 (but 7 in 2016!). In 2019-20, she had 8 fights that COULD have been JMD/D.
IF there were incentive (and interest) a LOT of the regular fights - including title fights - COULD be included as JMD and JMD/D fights (since the only real difference occurs in the aftermath...as any reading of many fights would make clear. Girls are NOT avoiding the opponents racks when there's "HEY!" to be made there.)
