computerrank wrote:jujigatame wrote:
You are not answering my question. I know what the launching system is. What I want to know is how you came up with it.
The basic idea behind is to ensure, that opponents defeated are good enough.
The launched boxer will have defeated boxers, who defeated boxers, who defeated boxers etc. up to a certain level.
So it will never be enough
- to defeat winless boxers
- or to defeat boxers, who only defeated winless boxers
- or to defeat boxers, who defeated boxers, who defeated winless boxers
It proved, that the maximum grade (15) now used in the launching system, is only reached by few boxers. Most good boxers defeat an already launched boxer before reaching the maximum grade and are so launched too.
Martin,
The launching system protects against complete abuse of the system. However I think jugi's point, and that of most observers, is that it doesn't protect against the Shannon Briggs, Tony Thompson and many of the world.
I think this is an example Martin, of where you allowed other considerations other than the predictive statistic to affect the appearance of the rankings. If you left people who beat up on 0-1 fighters or people who beat up on people that beat up on 0-2 fighters in the mix, then you would have a better prediction statistic.
However, you, John or whoever, didn't want to do that, you didn't want to comprimise your credability that far. You implemented the launching system because you didn't want your rankings to appear manipulated by people who had been beating up on nobodies. It is therefore not much of a mental leap to make the next jump i.e. people dont want Shannon Briggs profitting from the algorithm by beating up on "next to nobodies".
You see, if there is a precedent for where you sacrificed predictability for credability, then you have to be able to answer the question "What conditions must arise, for me to make that sacrifice again". Currently the predictability rankings are in such a state, that they are simply not taken seriously by the majority of posters here. An editor published on this thread, that Shannon Briggs manager was proudly boasting that he has the #6 heavy in the world now, though every man and dog know its not true.
The question you and John have to ask yourself is, has it reached such a point in time, where predictability needs to be sacrificed for credability?
conan
