[Gauss]

Rank	Poster	Points		Score	Total error	Spread error
1.	martyup	40		45-28	3	+3
2.	OutsiderFan	39		38-23	9	+1
3.	CochinoJanks	38		34-27	9	-7
4.	Card Fan in OR	37		36-24	10	-2
5.	pefloresjr	36		34-24	12	-4
6.	JeffInCorvallis	35		30-27	13	-11
7.	Mick	34		31-30	13	-13
8.	Renaissance Man	33		36-20	14	+2
9.	pcgoode	32		35-20	15	+1
10.	Kathy	31		31-24	15	-7
---	--------------	----		-----	------	------
11.	Griffin78	30		34-20	16	0
12.	97fan	29		34-20	16	0
13.	FarmBoy	28		34-20	16	0
14.	washingtonismoney	27		31-21	18	-4
15.	SUBuddha	26		28-24	18	-10
16.	dabigv	25		34-17	19	+3
17.	Hank 91	23		34-17	19	+3
17.	Rando90	23		34-17	19	+3
19.	Treebound	22		31-20	19	-3
20.	jeboody	21		34-16	20	+4
21.	fullmetal	20		37-13	20	+10
22.	oman	19		48-13	21	+21
23.	PrinceLightfoot	18		31-17	22	0
24.	godfire	17		27-21	22	-8
25.	socalstanfan1	16		34-13	23	+7
26.	Publius	15		27-20	23	-7
27.	needle	14		45-7	24	+24
28.	CrazedZooChimp	13		28-17	25	-3
29.	NYCCardinalFan	12		24-21	25	-11
30.	CompSci87	10		31-13	26	+4
30.	Farm93	10		31-13	26	+4
32.	stupac2	7		27-17	26	-4
32.	Extra Point	7		27-17	26	-4
32.	81alum	7		27-17	26	-4
35.	garvin	6		24-17	29	-7
36.	2 for 2028	5		24-16	30	-6
37.	GoodGrief	4		27-10	33	+3
38.	Leftcoast	3		24-13	33	-3
39.	Gauss	2		17-14	39	-11
40.	Big Brother	1		16-13	41	-11

[Gauss]

Rank	Poster	Points		Score	Total error	Spread error
1.	martyup	40		45-28	3	+3
2.	OutsiderFan	39		38-23	9	+1
3.	CochinoJanks	38		34-27	9	-7
4.	Card Fan in OR	37		36-24	10	-2
5.	pefloresjr	36		34-24	12	-4
6.	JeffInCorvallis	35		30-27	13	-11
7.	Mick	34		31-30	13	-13
8.	Renaissance Man	33		36-20	14	+2
9.	pcgoode	32		35-20	15	+1
10.	Kathy	31		31-24	15	-7
---	--------------	----		-----	------	------
11.	Griffin78	30		34-20	16	0
12.	97fan	29		34-20	16	0
13.	FarmBoy	28		34-20	16	0
14.	washingtonismoney	27		31-21	18	-4
15.	SUBuddha	26		28-24	18	-10
16.	dabigv	25		34-17	19	+3
17.	Hank 91	23		34-17	19	+3
17.	Rando90	23		34-17	19	+3
19.	Treebound	22		31-20	19	-3
20.	jeboody	21		34-16	20	+4
21.	fullmetal	20		37-13	20	+10
22.	oman	19		48-13	21	+21
23.	PrinceLightfoot	18		31-17	22	0
24.	godfire	17		27-21	22	-8
25.	socalstanfan1	16		34-13	23	+7
26.	Publius	15		27-20	23	-7
27.	needle	14		45-7	24	+24
28.	CrazedZooChimp	13		28-17	25	-3
29.	NYCCardinalFan	12		24-21	25	-11
30.	CompSci87	10		31-13	26	+4
30.	Farm93	10		31-13	26	+4
32.	stupac2	7		27-17	26	-4
32.	Extra Point	7		27-17	26	-4
32.	81alum	7		27-17	26	-4
35.	garvin	6		24-17	29	-7
36.	2 for 2028	5		24-16	30	-6
37.	GoodGrief	4		27-10	33	+3
38.	Leftcoast	3		24-13	33	-3
39.	Gauss	2		17-14	39	-11
40.	Big Brother	1		16-13	41	-11

[Kathy]

[quote author=martyup link=topic=8426.msg68689#msg68689 date=1379841421]
Man, this contest sucks.  I predicted a final score of 45 - 28.  The final score was 42 - 28, but I only place 9th?  The winners were off by a total of 16 points and I was off by 3.  I could have predicted a final score of 114 - 100 and still placed first.  :(

Considering we are predicting the score of the game, using the error from the each teams' score prediction creates a better rank ordering. The current methodology only tracks the predictions of the final spread; not the final score. Here is how the top10 would look like using both score predictions:

Stanford ASU
Final Score 42 28

                                                    Error
Rank Poster           Prediction Stanford ASU Total
1 martyup              45 28           3         0     3
2 OutsiderFan        38 23           4         5    9
3 ChochinoJanks    34 27           8         1    9
4 Card Fan in OR   36  24             6         4     10
5 pefloresjr            34  24           8         4     12
6 JeffInCorvalis      30 27         12         1    13
7 Mick                      31 30         11         2     13
8 Renaissance Man 36 20           6         8    14
9 pcgoode              35 20           7         8    15
10 Kathy                31 24         11          4     15
[/quote]

Works for me ... I like 10th place a lot better than 27th.  ;D

[Kathy]

[quote author=martyup link=topic=8426.msg68689#msg68689 date=1379841421]
Man, this contest sucks.  I predicted a final score of 45 - 28.  The final score was 42 - 28, but I only place 9th?  The winners were off by a total of 16 points and I was off by 3.  I could have predicted a final score of 114 - 100 and still placed first.  :(

Considering we are predicting the score of the game, using the error from the each teams' score prediction creates a better rank ordering. The current methodology only tracks the predictions of the final spread; not the final score. Here is how the top10 would look like using both score predictions:

Stanford ASU
Final Score 42 28

                                                    Error
Rank Poster           Prediction Stanford ASU Total
1 martyup              45 28           3         0     3
2 OutsiderFan        38 23           4         5    9
3 ChochinoJanks    34 27           8         1    9
4 Card Fan in OR   36  24             6         4     10
5 pefloresjr            34  24           8         4     12
6 JeffInCorvalis      30 27         12         1    13
7 Mick                      31 30         11         2     13
8 Renaissance Man 36 20           6         8    14
9 pcgoode              35 20           7         8    15
10 Kathy                31 24         11          4     15
[/quote]

Works for me ... I like 10th place a lot better than 27th.  ;D

[SUBuddha]

wow this measure makes me look not quite so much of an idiot. I was way too conservative.

[SUBuddha]

wow this measure makes me look not quite so much of an idiot. I was way too conservative.

[martyup]

:) Now that's more like it.  This is the metric that should be used.  I'm not just saying that because I did place first, but it seems to be a better scoring system for judging who can most closely predict a score.

[martyup]

:) Now that's more like it.  This is the metric that should be used.  I'm not just saying that because I did place first, but it seems to be a better scoring system for judging who can most closely predict a score.

[martyup]

I agree with martyup Guessing the winning margin isn't as good a measure as guessing the final score(s).

Should we calculate the difference between the predicted and actual Stanford score and add the difference between the predicted and actual opponents score?

Thanks Griffin78.  Considering you are in the lead under the "margin predicting" metric, it means a lot that you agree that a "score predicting" metric would be better.  BTW, we did a student straw poll at LSJU in 1982 and the "Griffin" won as the preferred mascot. 

[martyup]

I agree with martyup Guessing the winning margin isn't as good a measure as guessing the final score(s).

Should we calculate the difference between the predicted and actual Stanford score and add the difference between the predicted and actual opponents score?

Thanks Griffin78.  Considering you are in the lead under the "margin predicting" metric, it means a lot that you agree that a "score predicting" metric would be better.  BTW, we did a student straw poll at LSJU in 1982 and the "Griffin" won as the preferred mascot. 

[Mick]

[quote author=martyup link=topic=8426.msg68689#msg68689 date=1379841421]
Man, this contest sucks.  I predicted a final score of 45 - 28.  The final score was 42 - 28, but I only place 9th?  The winners were off by a total of 16 points and I was off by 3.  I could have predicted a final score of 114 - 100 and still placed first.  :(

Considering we are predicting the score of the game, using the error from the each teams' score prediction creates a better rank ordering. The current methodology only tracks the predictions of the final spread; not the final score. Here is how the top10 would look like using both score predictions:

Stanford ASU
Final Score 42 28

                                                    Error
Rank Poster           Prediction Stanford ASU Total
1 martyup              45 28           3         0     3
2 OutsiderFan        38 23           4         5    9
3 ChochinoJanks    34 27           8         1    9
4 Card Fan in OR   36  24             6         4     10
5 pefloresjr            34  24           8         4     12
6 JeffInCorvalis      30 27         12         1    13
7 Mick                      31 30         11         2     13
8 Renaissance Man 36 20           6         8    14
9 pcgoode              35 20           7         8    15
10 Kathy                31 24         11          4     15
[/quote]

Which would move me up from #37 to #7.  We certainly can't have that... :D

[Mick]

[quote author=martyup link=topic=8426.msg68689#msg68689 date=1379841421]
Man, this contest sucks.  I predicted a final score of 45 - 28.  The final score was 42 - 28, but I only place 9th?  The winners were off by a total of 16 points and I was off by 3.  I could have predicted a final score of 114 - 100 and still placed first.  :(

Considering we are predicting the score of the game, using the error from the each teams' score prediction creates a better rank ordering. The current methodology only tracks the predictions of the final spread; not the final score. Here is how the top10 would look like using both score predictions:

Stanford ASU
Final Score 42 28

                                                    Error
Rank Poster           Prediction Stanford ASU Total
1 martyup              45 28           3         0     3
2 OutsiderFan        38 23           4         5    9
3 ChochinoJanks    34 27           8         1    9
4 Card Fan in OR   36  24             6         4     10
5 pefloresjr            34  24           8         4     12
6 JeffInCorvalis      30 27         12         1    13
7 Mick                      31 30         11         2     13
8 Renaissance Man 36 20           6         8    14
9 pcgoode              35 20           7         8    15
10 Kathy                31 24         11          4     15
[/quote]

Which would move me up from #37 to #7.  We certainly can't have that... :D

[pefloresjr]

I believed our brilliant members would come up with the best system that was easily tracked so I ddin't pay attention to the original discussion.  I just put in my predictions and focused on Stanford's performance.  The new system with a penalty for picking the wrong winner was the system that I thought had been adopted.  If it hadn't, I vote for the new system. 

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

I believed our brilliant members would come up with the best system that was easily tracked so I ddin't pay attention to the original discussion.  I just put in my predictions and focused on Stanford's performance.  The new system with a penalty for picking the wrong winner was the system that I thought had been adopted.  If it hadn't, I vote for the new system. 

Cheers,
Pete F.

[CompSci87]

[quote author=Griffin78 link=topic=8426.msg68728#msg68728 date=1379867337]
I agree with martyup Guessing the winning margin isn't as good a measure as guessing the final score(s).

Should we calculate the difference between the predicted and actual Stanford score and add the difference between the predicted and actual opponents score?

I agree as well.
When I have time, I'll put up new rankings using |PredStanford-RealStanford| + |PredRival-RealRival| to order the list instead, and people can decide which metric they like best.
[/quote]

I think this formula is the right idea, and the penalty for wrong winner is good too. When I think of predicting a game score, I think of predicting who will win and the number of points each team will score -- not predicting the spread and throwing in the over/under as a tiebreaker.

I gather that in addition to the above, you're using the spread as a tiebreaker, right? That seems good too.  For example, if the true final is 13-10, a prediction of 16-13 feels closer to correct than 16-7.

[CompSci87]

[quote author=Griffin78 link=topic=8426.msg68728#msg68728 date=1379867337]
I agree with martyup Guessing the winning margin isn't as good a measure as guessing the final score(s).

Should we calculate the difference between the predicted and actual Stanford score and add the difference between the predicted and actual opponents score?

I agree as well.
When I have time, I'll put up new rankings using |PredStanford-RealStanford| + |PredRival-RealRival| to order the list instead, and people can decide which metric they like best.
[/quote]

I think this formula is the right idea, and the penalty for wrong winner is good too. When I think of predicting a game score, I think of predicting who will win and the number of points each team will score -- not predicting the spread and throwing in the over/under as a tiebreaker.

I gather that in addition to the above, you're using the spread as a tiebreaker, right? That seems good too.  For example, if the true final is 13-10, a prediction of 16-13 feels closer to correct than 16-7.

[Leftcoast]

The new system looks like a winner - even if it moves me from near the top to 38th place.  :P  If selected I'll somehow deal with the pain.

Given the old systems focus on point spread I was considering submitting my next score as a set of negative numbers as a lark. 

I'm enjoying this either way - thanks guys for putting it together.

[Leftcoast]

The new system looks like a winner - even if it moves me from near the top to 38th place.  :P  If selected I'll somehow deal with the pain.

Given the old systems focus on point spread I was considering submitting my next score as a set of negative numbers as a lark. 

I'm enjoying this either way - thanks guys for putting it together.