Participation Records & Player Table: 6 September 2009

After a brief attempt by Tom in August 2008 to maintain player stats, I started keeping player stats in September 2008, going back to 1 September 2008.

The player rankings, and now the player tables, are based on the stats, now referred to as participation records.

Although line ups are no longer based on player rankings, I am maintaining a player table for the fun of it.

I’ll take this opportunity to summarize how the player table is worked out.

The player table is updated on Sunday, based on our sessions and games of indoor football from the previous Saturday.   Every session or game organized through the blog is included.

Each player scores points based on the result of the game or session.  Ordinarily, these are as follows:

• 2 points for a win (a “win bonus”).
• 1.5 points for a draw (a “draw bonus”).
• 1 point for a loss (a “participation point”).

There are some exceptions to this:

• If the result is not known and is not reported on the blog, it will be recorded as “no result”.  Currently, this is equivalent to 1.5 points.
• If the losing margin is just one goal, the losing side will get a draw bonus, while the winning side will still get a win bonus.
• If the losing side is seriously disadvantaged by injury or other material factors during the session or game, they may get a draw bonus, while the winning side side may still get a win bonus.  If the winning side had a corresponding material advantage, but the result was still close, the winning side may only get a draw bonus as well.   The final decision will be based on the discussion of the session on the blog.  Hopefully, this will be a rare occurrence.

In a representative game, only the FIOFAFI players will be given points – a flat 1.5 points regardless of the result.   Likewise, only the FIOFAFI players will be included in the poll. 11-a-side games are included as representative games.

Where line ups are skewed, for example, where several participants recently introduced by one person play in a session, and they are all in one team, or by late withdrawals, everyone who plays may get a flat 1.5 points regardless of the result.

In a 4-team mini-league tournament, each team plays against the other.  The points are as follows:

• 2 points for first place.
• 1.67 points for second place.
• 1.33 points for third place.
• 1 point for fourth place.

If we have “A” and “B” sessions instead of a mini-tournament, the points will be as follows:

• For the “A” session:
  • 2 points for a win.
  • 1.67 points for a draw.
  • 1.33 points for a loss.

• For the “B” session:
  • 1.67 points for a win.
  • 1.33 points for a draw.
  • 1 point for a loss (participation point).

In a 4-team mini knock-out tournament, each team plays 2 games, a semifinal and either a final or a third/fourth placing game.  Each game is treated as a half-session, so the team that wins both games (the overall winners) gets 2 points, the two teams that win one and lose one (teams finishing second and third) get 1.5 points and the team that loses both (finishing fourth) get 1 point.

To encourage re-arranging the line ups in a one-sided game, if after half an hour or more, one side is leading by a huge margin, then if the teams are re-done, it will be treated as two half-sessions, in the same way as a 4-team mini knock-out tournament.   Players who are on the winning side on both occasions will score 2 points, those who are on the winning side on one occasion and the losing side on the other occasion will score 1.5 points, and those who are on the losing side on both occasions will score 1 point.

If line ups are not re-arranged at any time during the session, and one side wins by a disproportionately large margin, the winning side will score only 1.5 points, as it would appear that the sides were unbalanced to begin with.  The losing side may score 1 point as usual.  There is thus some incentive to re-arrange line ups in the second half hour when, on the day’s form, the sides are clearly unbalanced.

For line up re-arrangement  to work, everyone should bring both colours for the session.

On the other hand, if line ups are not re-arranged, but the side trailing badly comes back into the game in the second half of the session, they may score 1.5 points even if they lose, so there’s still an incentive to play well even when trailing badly.

Discussion of the session on the blog will determine whether there should be any variation in the points.  Where for any of the reasons set out above, a player is given 1.5 points instead of a win bonus or a participation point, it will be referred to as a “modified bonus”.

The total points earned from sessions or games over a rolling 26-week period are added up to give the total results points.

We are now into week 23 since 1 April 2009.  After week 26, for each new week, the results from the earliest week will be dropped.

Points for votes in the player poll for a rolling 8 week period are then added, 0.2 per vote.  Where the total number of votes from a session is improbable, I will discount the votes.  For each new week, the votes from the earliest week will be dropped.

Up to now, I have included results from the previous Sunday to Saturday, and votes from the previous Saturday to Thursday, to allow more time for voting for the session on the later Saturday.  To allow more time for discussion of the Saturday session (to determine whether there should be any variation in points as described above), and so that the results and votes are treated in the same way, the results included will be from the previous Saturday to Thursday as well.  The later Saturday will be included the following week.

The total points are then divided by the number of sessions or games played over the 26 week period plus 2, to give the average adjusted points (“AAP”).  It is an average, so no matter how many or few sessions or games you play, the average points are comparable.  However, as I’ve said before, “The “plus 2″ is a small weight that favours those who play more games, and prevents those who have only played once or twice from going straight to the top by winning their first couple games.”

Where the AAP of two or more participants is the same, the one with more votes will be placed higher.  From now on, where the AAP and the votes are equal, the participant who has has the greater results points will be placed higher.

The votes are a significant factor in the table, so do vote.

Once the rolling periods are in full effect, there should be more movement in the table.

The table is primarily for fun, although it is still taken into consideration in fixing line ups.

There is a link in the right hand column to “Player Tables”.  The webpage shows approximately the top half of the table.  From that page, you can download an Excel document which shows the full table and the workings, and which provides other details.

Don’t take it all too seriously.  Like most tables, it reflects as much a mixture of luck and form as inherent abilities.  As I said, it’s primarily for fun.

To mark one year of player stats, I have included on the right hand side of Sheet 1 of the Excel document the total number of games/sessions played per quarter and in total since 1 September 2009 (excluding 11-a-side games).  The highest figures for varying periods are shown below:

Since 1 September 2008 (30 or more sessions / games)	Since 1 April 2009 (15 or more sessions / games)	Since 1 July 2009 (10 or more sessions / games)
Participant Number Bobby 81 Sushil 80 Rajiv 76 Gilbert L 65 Shankar 62 Rajseran 57 John J 50 Nick 50 Yaseen 46 Murray 44 Damian Y 42 Neil M 41 Tom 41 John S 40 Edardy 39 Philipp 39 Ron 39 Joel 38 Reza 36 Andy M 34 Melvin L 33 Azmi 32 Imran 31	Participant Number Sushil 47 Ron 39 Neil M 35 Azmi 32 Imran 31 Gilbert L 30 Nick 30 Rajseran 30 Rajiv 28 Shankar 27 Bobby 24 Poh Keng 21 John J 20 Damian Y 19 Yaseen 19 George 18 Julius 17 Lukas 17 Ian 16 Melvin L 16 Philipp 16 Timmy 16 Weeliam 16 Joel 15	Participant Number Ron 37 Sushil 34 Imran 30 Neil M 24 Azmi 24 Rajiv 21 Nick 20 Rajseran 19 Gilbert L 18 Shankar 17 Bobby 16 Yaseen 15 George 14 Ian 14 Poh Keng 13 Timmy 13 Ace 13 Desmond 13 John J 12 Damian Y 12 Weeliam 12 Rizal 11 Anthony 11 John S 10 Melvin L 10 Alex F 10

As I’ve said, you can play as often or as infrequently as you like.