2012-13 Week #16 Rankings Released
The season is back in full swing and in many cases we only have a couple weeks before playoffs start. A few more people have been reviewing their team rating and their team math page to understand why they aren't higher in the rankings (because at this point, most teams have victories over a couple teams that are ranked ahead of them), and I'm repeatedly getting one common message, "It just doesn't seem fair that we beat this team 10-0 and we got negative points because we are rated more than seven (7) points ahead of them."
At this point the email then asks me to comment or to consider changing the system that allows this. To be clear, if your team is rated more than seven points ahead of another team and you play them, there is no way that you can exceed expectations because the maximum goal differential on any given game is 7 goals. Your team could win 20-0 and you'd still fall short of expectations and your rating/ranking could be hurt. This is real and it happens to many teams. My response is always a variety of the following:
"You are not the first to raise this issue. I understand your point. I also have some pretty strong beliefs on this subject and don't plan on changing the system. If you step onto the ice with a team rated 7.0 points or more worse than you, nothing good can come of the game. It should not be played. Winning teams get worse by playing such weak teams and players on losing teams not only don't get better, but typically start considering quitting the game of hockey when it happens repeatedly. Tournaments and leagues need to step up and work to minimize these games as well as individual clubs by being educated about their competition. MYHockey was started as an attempt to promote the game, educate the consumer and eliminate lopsided hockey games that hurt the future of the sport. I don't see stepping away from that goal."
I will acknowledge that there is no "right" answer on this issue. Changes, in theory, could be made to the system so that this would not happen. It would complicate the system and the logic and would take a lot more time, but it is possible. Still, two things stick with me. First, these game harm sport of hockey and the kids that participate. Putting an incentive for them not to be played, as minor as it is, seems like the right thing to me. Second, every time I've been associated with a team that has won one of these games, pretty much everyone thought the team was worse for having played it. So, being assessed some negative point value does not seem unreasonable.
I understand you may disagree, but I felt it was time to let everyone know why the system works the way it does in these cases. Good luck this week(end)!
At this point the email then asks me to comment or to consider changing the system that allows this. To be clear, if your team is rated more than seven points ahead of another team and you play them, there is no way that you can exceed expectations because the maximum goal differential on any given game is 7 goals. Your team could win 20-0 and you'd still fall short of expectations and your rating/ranking could be hurt. This is real and it happens to many teams. My response is always a variety of the following:
"You are not the first to raise this issue. I understand your point. I also have some pretty strong beliefs on this subject and don't plan on changing the system. If you step onto the ice with a team rated 7.0 points or more worse than you, nothing good can come of the game. It should not be played. Winning teams get worse by playing such weak teams and players on losing teams not only don't get better, but typically start considering quitting the game of hockey when it happens repeatedly. Tournaments and leagues need to step up and work to minimize these games as well as individual clubs by being educated about their competition. MYHockey was started as an attempt to promote the game, educate the consumer and eliminate lopsided hockey games that hurt the future of the sport. I don't see stepping away from that goal."
I will acknowledge that there is no "right" answer on this issue. Changes, in theory, could be made to the system so that this would not happen. It would complicate the system and the logic and would take a lot more time, but it is possible. Still, two things stick with me. First, these game harm sport of hockey and the kids that participate. Putting an incentive for them not to be played, as minor as it is, seems like the right thing to me. Second, every time I've been associated with a team that has won one of these games, pretty much everyone thought the team was worse for having played it. So, being assessed some negative point value does not seem unreasonable.
I understand you may disagree, but I felt it was time to let everyone know why the system works the way it does in these cases. Good luck this week(end)!
