Understanding Rankings - Mini FAQ
The site is obviously getting more traffic lately, as evidenced by the recent crash (sorry about that lol). With so many new people starting to stop by I thought it would be a good time to go over a few of the more common questions/complaints. If there is something I miss or something you would like covered more in-depth, please just ask.
As a warning, there’s a lot to cover, so grab a soda, get a pizza, tuck the other half under the desk, whatever works and lets get going…
Have a look around, kick the tires
One of the things that really separates this site from a lot of others is the incredibly high level of transparency. Unlike other sites where you will see people move up and down the lists without even having fought, that never happens here. Every single point can be accounted for and explained. Sure, it’s possible you might not agree with the points (I don’t always agree myself), but at least you can understand it.
Kick the tires, not the dog
Please understand that what I’m about to say isn’t an “excuse” it is, quite simply, an explanation. What I have found is that some people viewing the site have trouble realizing that the ranking system is just one part of a much bigger machine. You are free to look around (kick the tires), but don’t break my cow lamp for something I have no control over.
Let’s take a quick look at some of the other parts invovled that fall outside the ranking system:
Matchmaking
A very wise man once said, “Garbage in, garbage out”. I believe he was talking about politics, but it also applies here. The quality of the match-ups has a big impact on the quality of the results. If one fighter beats someone significantly below them, they hardly move and little is learned. If fighters continue to get matched up against lower ranked fighters then little can be clearly discerned.
On the other side of the coin is the case where a fighter is just thrown right into deep water. To people watching at home they see one big KO or quick Sub and instantly fall in love with a fighter who only has a handful of fights. What they fail to understand is that in sport a single win doesn’t mean everything. It can mean a lot, but it quite simply doesn’t mean everything.
Judging
So, the match has been made, it’s a solid match, and then two of the three judges were clearly eying the ring girls instead of the fighters because even the “winner’s” mom thinks he lost the fight. This happens, we all know it happens, and sadly, there is nothing the system can do.
We can’t allow subjective “Fighter A ‘really’ won the fight” to come into play here. It is our job to make sure our system works as cleanly as it can when used properly and then trust that the other systems (matchmaking, judging, etc.) will be equally fine tuned. To intentionally break our system to compensate for a problem elsewhere is a poor solution and only causes longer term problems.
The commission says
Finally the fight is over, and the “right” person won, but then the commission says otherwise. Maybe they DQ a fighter, maybe they rule it a no contest. Again, we are in a situation where our focused system has to operate on the premise that it is being given the proper information. If you see a case where a fighter is a bit too low, and you see they got no points for a NC for instance, that is *NOT* the ranking systems fault. A no contest quite literally means the fight did not happen. Complain that it should count, look to the commission to overturn their overturning, but sadly we have to accept that technically the fight doesn’t exist.
No preferential treatment
The system is cold, and calculated and completely unbiased. One of the most common things I see is someone having a specific problem with one fighter, but they don’t want the “Fix” to apply to all fighters. Lets look at the difference between:
- Fighter A is ranked too low
and
- Overall there should be additional points awarded for finishes
The first example is simply a human opinion driven by all kinds of bias (often unknown to the person) and doesn’t address an actual issue.
The second example actually addresses a potential sweeping change to the system that would impact all fighters in the same way. Some would go up, some down, but it remains unbiased.
One example I often see mentioned is “leapfrogging”. I’ll talk about it more in-depth in a future rant, but it is basically the idea is that if Fighter A beats Figther B, they *HAVE* to be ranked higher than Fighter B. Here is how that conversation usually plays out:
Them - “Fighter A should be ranked higher than Fighter B, they beat them!”
Me - “So you *ALWAYS* want a fighter to be ranked at least one spot ahead of someone they beat?”
Them - “Yes”
Me - “So Matt Serra should have been ranked ahead of GSP?”
Them - “hrmmmm….”
Me - “Travis Lutter was ‘this’ close to being above Anderson Silva?”
Them - “…..”
Me - “Brett Rogers is now ‘better’ than Arlovski?”
Me - “If Kenneth Allen beat Fedor he’d be ranked higher in your opinion?”
The list goes on and on. Basically what you wind up with is a *CASE* where a rule would make sense, but it simply doesn’t fit across the board. Those are cases that often involve matchmaking or other issues. In theory if two fighters are competing in a match they should be paired up such that both have a similar level of risk/reward (another future rant, don’t ya love the foreshadowing!?), sadly, we as fans know that isn’t always the case.
The point I am really trying to drive home here is do *NOT* look at a list and see someone “out of place” and whip out your jump to conclusions mat. Lets go back to the NC point from above. In one case it might make perfect sense to ignore a NC, at least make perfect sense to some. What happens though is that at some point someone is going to cheat, or an inadvertent headbutt will happen or some other NC will result. At that point the change that made sense in one case simply doesn’t fit in the other. Now we are faced with “selectively” implementing a feature, and that simply cracks the objective armor of the current system.
If a human has to make the choice when a rule should be applied on a case by case basis, then we are left with at best a slightly less subjective opinion than all the other places. As soon as we ignore one bad decision that 99% of people know is bad, we will have another decision that 90% think was bad, another that 40% think is bad, another that 10% think is bad, etc.
The thing to keep in mind is that we always know *WHY* on this site. If someone is out of place don’t just come up with ways to “fix” them, but really look hard at why. Is the “change” you want for one fighter really something you want for all fighters? Also consider this next point…
Timing is everything
The ratings/rankings are usually updated once a week (sometimes more, yeah yeah sometimes less). What can happen is someone will check the rankings right after Fighter A has a big win and before Fighter B has their next fight. Suddenly they see Fighter A at #1 and their fighter at #2 and, “Oh good god Evil Pooh schit in their cheerios”.
The way I look at it is just like any other sport. If one team wins a double header on friday and your team doesn’t play until sunday, then yeah, they can fall from first place temporarily. If Adrian Peterson doesn’t play until Monday night then maybe someone will have a 160+ yards on sunday and be “ahead” of him in rushing for a bit.
Right now we are about two days away from fighters like Kongo, AxeSilva and Rich ‘these black eyes prove I had a training camp’ Franklin. All of those fighters are about to change. Anyone ranked above them might get passed if they win, and anyone below them might move up if they lose.
When looking at the rankings always keep in mind when a fighter has last fought, and when they will next fight. As long as all fighters are competing a reasonable number of times it will balance out. However, there will be days, weeks, or even months where things look different. I’ve actually had times where a fighter was ranked #1 for 6 hours between a saturday update and a sunday update. We’ve had other times where fighters stay ranked high due to scheduling and other factors. The information is there, look it over, ask some questions, etc.
Now you and the nice numbers go make friends
As I’ve said I work hard to provide a very high level of transparency here. Please, look at all the information, ponder it, swish it around a bit and let it breath. In the last example we talked about timing of fights playing a role, but lets also consider the actual *rating* of the fighters.
One of the biggest benefits of this site is that we have a calculated stat that is being used to help measure fighter position. If you see:
1) Your sworn mortal enemy - 1947
2) Your favorite fighter - 1946
Don’t freak out. Look at the rating. A single point is quite literally nothing. The above isn’t saying your favorite fighter is trash, and it isn’t saying that your SME is king schit of turd mountain. It’s saying *BOTH* fighters are amazing. Instead of immediately freaking out at the ranking number on the left, take a minute to look at the rating number on the right.
Another classic example is this:
5) Your favorite fighter - Max rating 2108 Current rating 1944
Ok, so your favorite fighter just lost (once, twice, thrice, whatever). Yeah, he went down, that is what happens. Once they win some more they will go back up. Instead of freaking out because they are sitting at number five currently look a bit deeper. Think about:
- Who did they lose to
- When is their next fight
- Did others ranked near them win/lose recently
- Do we really want *ALL* fighters to not go down when they lose?
If something still doesn’t make sense, then ask. Remember, unlike other sites where all you can do is yell “Fighter A should be higher, Fighter B should be lower”, there is a lot more to it here.
Favorite doesn’t mean best
First, take a second to celebrate the fact that I’m almost done. Secondly, get a firm hold on the concept that “best” doesn’t mean favorite. Just because you like someone doesn’t mean they should be ranked high. If you like a fighter because they are ranked high, then just jump bandwagons to someone currently ranked high and keep jumping as needed.
I’m not here to tell you who to like and what should matte most to you. If a fighter has a style you like, or comes from your home town, or is just crazy sexy (Yeah, I’m talking about you sexyama) then cheer for them. Cheer for them when they win, and cheer even harder for them to get back up when they lose. Don’t yell at an unbiased system that simply says, “yeah Fighter A lost”. It doesn’t mean they are a can, it doesn’t mean you have to rip down their poster, it just means they lost, that’s it.
Not really done
Ok, so I kinda sorta fibbed a bit back there. I am “almost done”, but what I’m almost done with is the intro. Yeah, this was the intro. Welcome to how I felt in 8th grade when I collapsed across the finish line on the track and coach told me I had *THREE* more laps to go. /boggle
Having proofed over this I do think I’ll take a little intermission here though. In the next part I’m going to cover specific examples that highlight some of the points mentioned above. I’m also going to discuss specific fighters I see brought up frequently and attempt to offer some clarity. If there are specific questions you have ask them now and I’ll try to include them in the next rant. (I’ll probably post it up friday or saturday)
Tags: FAQ