Rankings: Second Quarter 2009
With the start of a new quarter, the rankings will be based on the results from 1 January 2009 onwards (the preceding quarter and the current quarter).
From this quarter onwards, the votes from the player polls will be taken into account, backdated to 1 January 2009.
The formula can be now more simply put as:
(P/WK + (W1 x 3) + (W2 x 2) + D + L2 + V/5)/(P+S/WK) + (P/(S x 2))
where:• P is the number of sessions played by the participant in the current participation period (both regular and non-regular sessions.
• WK is the total number of weeks to date in the current participation period.
• W1 is the number of regular games won by the participant in the current participation period.
• W2 is the number of non-regular games won by the participant in the current participation period.
• D is the number of draws in the current participation period.
• L2 is the number of losses in non-regular games in the current participation period.
• V is the total number of votes garnered in all player polls in the current participation period.
• S is the total number of sessions played to date in the current participation period.
• The current participation period comprises the current and preceding quarters.
Essentially, you get 1 point for participating in a non-regular session. You get a bonus point if you’re on the winning side. This is to promote participation over competition.
Regular sessions are more competitive – 3 points for a win, 1 point for a draw and 0 points for a loss. You still pick up some points for playing from the rest of the formula, but it’s far less than 1.
The rankings are updated at the end of the week, and applied for all regular sessions the following week. From now on, to allow time for those playing on Thursday to vote, the rankings will only be updated over the weekend (instead of Friday, as had been the case to date).
However, I’ve had a look at how the top 25 would have changed at the start of a new quarter, before the votes from the player polls are taken into account. This is set out below:
Current Ranking Participants Games Played Regular Wins / 1st Non- regular Wins / Contested Wins / 2nd Draws/ Contested Draws / Non- regular Losses / No Results / 3rd Regular Losses / 4th Adjusted Win / Loss Ratio 1 John J 20 12 1 2 5 1.905 2 Boris 14 7 2 5 0 1.841 3 Adam 8 6 0 2 0 1.770 4 Nick C 19 8 2 6 3 1.707 5 Sushil 20 9 2 3 6 1.657 6 Wade 9 5 2 1 1 1.656 7 Lukas 9 6 0 1 2 1.580 8 Murray 16 7 1 4 4 1.549 9 Rajseran 17 5 4 5 3 1.543 10 Philipp 8 5 0 3 1 1.523 11 Yaseen 15 5 3 3 4 1.452 12 Bobby 25 8 2 5 10 1.429 13 Luke 10 4 1 4 1 1.419 14 Dirk 8 4 1 1 2 1.359 15 Clive 10 4 2 1 3 1.348 16 Damian 11 5 1 1 4 1.346 17 Alan 6 3 1 1 1 1.283 18 Tom 7 4 0 1 2 1.279 19 Andy N 9 4 0 3 2 1.276 20 Neil 8 4 0 1 3 1.194 21 Yuchi 14 4 1 4 5 1.180 22 Geoff 4 3 0 0 1 1.179 23 Gilbert 16 5 1 2 8 1.152 24 Shankar 15 4 2 2 7 1.139 25 Andy M 11 3 1 3 4 1.082
I’ve included this week’s sessions, and the first 11-a-side game, the only non-regular session in the first quarter that had previously been omitted.
The top 10 is very different from last week.
Everyone who hasn’t played since the start of the preceding quarter (1 January 2009) drops out of the rankings – Andy C, Collin, Darius, Desmond, George, Glenn, Ian, Joe, Juha, Julius D, Kenneth, Ladi, Llion, Marc, Mike A, Pawan, Raj/Santi, Simon H, Sriram, Steve DuP, Swee Hoe and Yu Teik. However, they remain on the Participant List according to the separate criteria there.
The actual rankings (including the votes from the player polls) will be up over the weekend.
Cool.. Quite a few changes.. Rajseran you are in the top 10 above Yaseen!
I am gonna take over you soon
Dai Mapillai, you got 2 games in hand.. If i win my 2 games, different scenario..
Wasted.. i thought Rajiv would have worked out a formula so that small fry could stay up till his forties as Boris has a proclivity of being up always 
Dai Macha
That two games gonna be like Man u loss 4-1 and followed by 2-0 to Fulham . How Duh
Probably by the time you realise i probably be on the 6th position and cant see you even i scroll all the way down 
HA ha
Dont forget there’s another united fan above you.. And he probably be there for a long time unless you wins your remaining fixture.. The fan is Boris Fernando Di Santiago Di Stefano al Mahjub.. Thats his full name
Hahah what the? Nah being in the top 10 without playing ain’t no fun. I can get 2 games on Tuesday and Wednesday this week.. that’s a bout it..
As the formula involves an average, the difference between the number of wins and number of losses is more significant than the number of sessions played.
It also means more movement in the rankings over time.
Tats cool man.. i can be the lowest ranked player next week at PP !
Very few of the player polls in the first quarter saw a full turn out (10 for the usual 5 v 5).
For most of the player polls, the number of votes cast was between 4 and 7.
Those who garnered the most number of votes since 1 January 2009 are:
• Boris - 25
• John J – 21
• Nick C – 19
• Gilbert – 19
• Rajseran – 16
• Yaseen – 13
• Lukas – 12
• Luke – 10
• Tom – 9
• Andy M – 7
How the votes impact upon the rankings is shown here.
To iron out the differences in the points per game between the first quarter and the second quarter, and to reduce the overall weight given to the results in the first quarter, for this quarter, I’ll re-classify all wins in the first quarter as 2-point wins, and all other results (whether draws or losses) as earning one participation point.
For this quarter:
• In a 3-point session: A win earns 3 ranking points, a draw earns 2 ranking points, and a loss earns a participation point.
• In a 2-point session: A win earns 2 ranking points, a draw earns 1.5 ranking points, and a loss earns a participation point.
• In a 4-team mini-tournament: Finishing first earns 3 ranking points, finishing second earns 2.33 finishing third earns 1.67 points, finishing fourth earns a participation point.
Since everyone who plays will get at least a participation point, the weight given to the separate parts of the formula relating to participation per se will be reduced.