Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Championship Shield Semi-Final Qualification is a Sham


Recommended Posts

Peterborough's qualification to the Championship Shield Semi-Finals on the basis of them being the "best second place" team is completely unfair. Their claim is based solely on their being part of a smaller group, which gives them a mathematical advantage: 9 points from 4 matches gives them an average points-per-match of 2.25. Sheffield, on the other hand, have 13 points from 6 matches, giving them a points per match average of 2.167, but this lower rating is simply because they have been part of a larger group and have ridden more matches. The second-placed team in the Southern Group - regardless of who it was - was always going to have a mathematical advantage over the second-placed teams in the Northern or Borders Groups.

Peterborough have a 100% home record, plus a 3-point away victory, giving them a points difference of +10. Sheffield also have a 100% home record, plus a 4-point away win and a points difference of +39. This must surely mean that Sheffield have the better record in the competition. 

To give the semi-final to Peterborough, based solely on their intrinsic mathematical advantage, is a travesty. Sheffield have the better record and should qualify. The ruling is shambolic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 4thbender said:

Peterborough's qualification to the Championship Shield Semi-Finals on the basis of them being the "best second place" team is completely unfair. Their claim is based solely on their being part of a smaller group, which gives them a mathematical advantage: 9 points from 4 matches gives them an average points-per-match of 2.25. Sheffield, on the other hand, have 13 points from 6 matches, giving them a points per match average of 2.167, but this lower rating is simply because they have been part of a larger group and have ridden more matches. The second-placed team in the Southern Group - regardless of who it was - was always going to have a mathematical advantage over the second-placed teams in the Northern or Borders Groups.

Peterborough have a 100% home record, plus a 3-point away victory, giving them a points difference of +10. Sheffield also have a 100% home record, plus a 4-point away win and a points difference of +39. This must surely mean that Sheffield have the better record in the competition. 

To give the semi-final to Peterborough, based solely on their intrinsic mathematical advantage, is a travesty. Sheffield have the better record and should qualify. The ruling is shambolic.

That's Speedway for you,nothing simple.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 4thbender said:

Peterborough's qualification to the Championship Shield Semi-Finals on the basis of them being the "best second place" team is completely unfair. Their claim is based solely on their being part of a smaller group, which gives them a mathematical advantage: 9 points from 4 matches gives them an average points-per-match of 2.25. Sheffield, on the other hand, have 13 points from 6 matches, giving them a points per match average of 2.167, but this lower rating is simply because they have been part of a larger group and have ridden more matches. The second-placed team in the Southern Group - regardless of who it was - was always going to have a mathematical advantage over the second-placed teams in the Northern or Borders Groups.

Peterborough have a 100% home record, plus a 3-point away victory, giving them a points difference of +10. Sheffield also have a 100% home record, plus a 4-point away win and a points difference of +39. This must surely mean that Sheffield have the better record in the competition. 

To give the semi-final to Peterborough, based solely on their intrinsic mathematical advantage, is a travesty. Sheffield have the better record and should qualify. The ruling is shambolic.

How come you only mention this now that your team has been knocked out ,no one heard you shouting from the rooftops before all the results unfolded about how wrong and unjust it  is  on Sheffield , the rules were set before the competition started and have to be adhered to but for what it is worth it would have bee better with 2 groups with winners and runners up to the semi's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, New era Panthers said:

How come you only mention this now that your team has been knocked out ,no one heard you shouting from the rooftops before all the results unfolded about how wrong and unjust it  is  on Sheffield , the rules were set before the competition started and have to be adhered to but for what it is worth it would have bee better with 2 groups with winners and runners up to the semi's.

Where is the rule which says that the second-placed team with an inferior record of performance will qualify? I haven't noticed any such rule, but if I had I would have mentioned it earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 4thbender said:

Where is the rule which says that the second-placed team with an inferior record of performance will qualify? I haven't noticed any such rule, but if I had I would have mentioned it earlier.

I take it maths is not your strong point  :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, New era Panthers said:

How come you only mention this now that your team has been knocked out ,no one heard you shouting from the rooftops before all the results unfolded about how wrong and unjust it  is  on Sheffield , the rules were set before the competition started and have to be adhered to but for what it is worth it would have bee better with 2 groups with winners and runners up to the semi's.

To be fair, 4thbender can only grumble about the outcome when all the results are in and the mathematics takes over, it's been decided on pts difference per no of matches so with Peterborough not finishing til yesterday you couldn't have known how that would affect the qualification!!

Agreed about your last paragraph, two groups would have been better and given a few more meetings!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, blupanther said:

I take it maths is not your strong point  :rolleyes:

When I went to school +4 would always trump +3, and +39 would always trump +10. Unless my maths teacher was a complete dumbo I don't believe my maths to be that bad actually!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 4thbender said:

When I went to school +4 would always trump +3, and +39 would always trump +10. Unless my maths teacher was a complete dumbo I don't believe my maths to be that bad actually!

Yes and 2.25 trumps 2.167 and that’s the one that matters so stop acting like such a child.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 4thbender said:

When I went to school +4 would always trump +3, and +39 would always trump +10. Unless my maths teacher was a complete dumbo I don't believe my maths to be that bad actually!

You fail to take any account for the 2 defeats that Sheffield had whilst Peterborough only had 1

Pboro won half their away meetings and Sheff a third - when I went to school a half was larger than a third :P

Even 1 losing point in either of those wouldve given the Tigers a better match point average and they didnt manage it

You talk of mathmatical advantage of a smaller group when the larger group had the advantage of an extra chance to gain an all important losing point

That team didnt even have to win or draw to gain an advantage only lose by less!

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

You fail to take any account for the 2 defeats that Sheffield had whilst Peterborough only had 1

Pboro won half their away meetings and Sheff a third - when I went to school a half was larger than a third :P

Even 1 losing point in either of those wouldve given the Tigers a better match point average and they didnt manage it

You talk of mathmatical advantage of a smaller group when the larger group had the advantage of an extra chance to gain an all important losing point

That team didnt even have to win or draw to gain an advantage only lose by less!

Whichever way you cut it, Sheffield have the better results performance overall:

  • Sheffield have 13 points compared to Peterborough's 9
  • Sheffield have +4 "away points won minus home points lost" compared to Peterborough's +3
  • Sheffield have +39 points difference compared to Peterborough's +10

How could anyone with any sense suggest that Peterborough's is the better performance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 4thbender said:

Whichever way you cut it, Sheffield have the better results performance overall:

  • Sheffield have 13 points compared to Peterborough's 9
  • Sheffield have +4 "away points won minus home points lost" compared to Peterborough's +3
  • Sheffield have +39 points difference compared to Peterborough's +10

How could anyone with any sense suggest that Peterborough's is the better performance?

You yet again ignore the defeats

Pboro 3 pts per home meeting

Sheffeiled 3 pts per home meeting

Identical records

Pboro 3 pts from 2 away ave 1.5

Sheff 4 pts from 3 away ave 1.33°

Now which is the better away record??

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

You yet again ignore the defeats

Pboro 3 pts per home meeting

Sheffeiled 3 pts per home meeting

Identical records

Pboro 3 pts from 2 away ave 1.5

Sheff 4 pts from 3 away ave 1.33°

Now which is the better away record??

This is precisely the point that proves my argument: the team taking part in fewer matches is always going to have an unfair mathematical advantage. Teams should be judged on the results of matches that HAVE taken place and NOT the averages skewed by the number of matches that HAVEN'T taken place!

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, 4thbender said:

Whichever way you cut it, Sheffield have the better results performance overall:

  • Sheffield have 13 points compared to Peterborough's 9
  • Sheffield have +4 "away points won minus home points lost" compared to Peterborough's +3
  • Sheffield have +39 points difference compared to Peterborough's +10

How could anyone with any sense suggest that Peterborough's is the better performance?

You could also say teams from the southern group were denied the chance to have equal amount of matches to be able to compete with the other 2 groups and to say all this is news to you about the percentages used to calculate best second place is utter nonsense , it been banded about on here 5/6 weeks but you never heard about it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 4thbender said:

This is precisely the point that proves my argument: the team taking part in fewer matches is always going to have an unfair mathematical advantage. Teams should be judged on the results of matches that HAVE taken place and NOT the averages skewed by the number of matches that HAVEN'T taken place!

I would suggest you move on you are going to get precisely nowhere , best thing for you to do is have a word with your promoter who is part of the management committee and explain you grievance as they are the ones who suggest and make the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 4thbender said:

This is precisely the point that proves my argument: the team taking part in fewer matches is always going to have an unfair mathematical advantage. Teams should be judged on the results of matches that HAVE taken place and NOT the averages skewed by the number of matches that HAVEN'T taken place!

But the away matches HAVE taken place ..... me thinks you are tying yourself in knots!!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, New era Panthers said:

I would suggest you move on you are going to get precisely nowhere , best thing for you to do is have a word with your promoter who is part of the management committee and explain you grievance as they are the ones who suggest and make the rules.

Already have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy