SOS - What it does and doesn't tell us

[Triticum aestivum L.]

SOS - What it does and doesn't tell us

This conversation was started in the games of interest thread, but I felt that it would be better to move it into its own thread instead.

Original question:

Team A is 2-0. Beat a team ranked in the top 10 and a terrible 300+ team.
Team B is 2-0. Beat Vermont and Louisiana Lafayette, who are a couple of mediocre teams each ranked in the mid 100s and each with 11-10 records.

You know nothing else about either team. Based on admittedly very limited information, which team do you rank higher?

I've already seen some complaints that the premise isn't valid. I think the premise is very valid. If I take the next step in my logical progression and you feel my logic doesn't hold, then call me out on it. However, for now, I think this is a very valid starting point.

Ok, I'll play. I would rank Team A higher in this scenario and think most pollsters would too. Why? Because Team A has shown the ability to beat a highly ranked team. Since you have no more information (i.e., name of school, scores, home/away, injuries, etc.), one would then assume that Team A also has the ability to beat all teams below that level. The 300 level team is immaterial.

Team B may very well have the ability to beat a Top 10 team, but they haven't been given a chance to prove that on the court. Therefore humans would tend to rank them lower despite what the computers might say.

[ShockerFever]

Uh oh. Somebody's bored today.

[ShockTalk]

Ok, I'll play. I would rank Team A higher in this scenario and think most pollsters would too. Why? Because Team A has shown the ability to beat a highly ranked team. Since you have no more information (i.e., name of school, scores, home/away, injuries, etc.), one would then assume that Team A also has the ability to beat all teams below that level. The 300 level team is immaterial.

Team B may very well have the ability to beat a Top 10 team, but they haven't been given a chance to prove that on the court. Therefore humans would tend to rank them lower despite what the computers might say.

[/INDENT]

I'll go with this.

JH4P, I'm not trying to create rabbit trails, but since you said that the teams that were beaten were "ranked" teams with a number attached and I accept that we do not know the "ranking" of teams A and B, is it fair to ask whether the rankings of the other teams are based on individual perception or pre-season perception of others (ranking services)? I think you either start out with a "clean slate", no one ranked, any ranking based simply on Ws and Ls to who to date, and any ranking would be extremely unreliable until a much higher number of games are played. The other is to accept some pre-season expectations based on the previous year performance and players, coaches returning. Perhaps, who I choose may be different based on this. I'm not asking for additional information of the unknown, simply more information regarding what is already given (the ranking). If you feel it's not needed, I'm OK with that, but I still think it makes a difference.

[ShockTalk]

Uh oh. Somebody's bored today.

Actually, JH4P picked a bad day for me. I hope I can check in from time to time. Not bored, just curious.

[WstateU]

JH4P - I give up!

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I'll go with this.

JH4P, I'm not trying to create rabbit trails, but since you said that the teams that were beaten were "ranked" teams with a number attached and I accept that we do not know the "ranking" of teams A and B, is it fair to ask whether the rankings of the other teams are based on individual perception or pre-season perception of others (ranking services)? I think you either start out with a "clean slate", no one ranked, any ranking based simply on Ws and Ls to who to date, and any ranking would be extremely unreliable until a much higher number of games are played. The other is to accept some pre-season expectations based on the previous year performance and players, coaches returning. Perhaps, who I choose may be different based on this. I'm not asking for additional information of the unknown, simply more information regarding what is already given (the ranking). If you feel it's not needed, I'm OK with that, but I still think it makes a difference.

I appreciate the comments ShockTalk, but you (and many others) are overthinking this.

In my hypothetical, Team A is top 10. They deserve to be top 10. Humans rank them top 10. Computers rank them top 10. There is no questioning their top 10 status. The benefit of doing this as a hypothetical is that we can get away from the disagreements we have about specific teams in the real world and can use an pretend example where Team A beat a team that we all unanimously agree is a top 10 team. This simplifies things greatly and allows the discussion to start from a point of agreement.

Does that help?

[im4wsu]

I appreciate the comments ShockTalk, but you (and many others) are overthinking this.

In my hypothetical, Team A is top 10. They deserve to be top 10. Humans rank them top 10. Computers rank them top 10. There is no questioning their top 10 status. The benefit of doing this as a hypothetical is that we can get away from the disagreements we have about specific teams in the real world and can use an pretend example where Team A beat a team that we all unanimously agree is a top 10 team. This simplifies things greatly and allows the discussion to start from a point of agreement.

Does that help?

This is new information. Original post Original question:

Team A is 2-0. Beat a team ranked in the top 10 and a terrible 300+ team.
Team B is 2-0. Beat Vermont and Louisiana Lafayette, who are a couple of mediocre teams each ranked in the mid 100s and each with 11-10 records.

[SHOXAAC]

It had been about 2 days since the last activity on this thread. You resurrected it by spending many words and paragraphs slapping the hands of those that derailed what your original intent was. You throw around terms like "some don't see," etc...

What I don't thing you see is the attention span on a fan board is small at best. Your analytical thinking and planning for how you want this discussion to go isn't set up for a forum like this. You had enough of a sample size very early on Friday to go to the next step. For those that weren't fortunate enough to get in on the convo, in real time, could have caught up very easily and still contributed. But your stubbornness to recognize the situation became annoying to the great majority and therefore 4 days later you are no further along than the second you created the thread.

I truly enjoy much of what you bring here, but this is an example of you not recognizing when your audience is getting bored, annoyed and frustrated. The sooner you learn this and make the proper adjustments, much like a good basketball coach does during a game, you will find the joy in accomplishing your intended goal of great discussion.

[Triticum aestivum L.]

Since the thread title is about SOS and not rankings, I have a serious question for JH4P or anyone else that knows. If Team A beats the #1 and #299 team (average 150) and Team B beats the #149 and #151 team (average 150), do they in fact have the same SOS?

[ShockTalk]

I appreciate the comments ShockTalk, but you (and many others) are overthinking this.

In my hypothetical, Team A is top 10. They deserve to be top 10. Humans rank them top 10. Computers rank them top 10. There is no questioning their top 10 status. The benefit of doing this as a hypothetical is that we can get away from the disagreements we have about specific teams in the real world and can use an pretend example where Team A beat a team that we all unanimously agree is a top 10 team. This simplifies things greatly and allows the discussion to start from a point of agreement.

Does that help?

Yup.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Since the thread title is about SOS and not rankings, I have a serious question for JH4P or anyone else that knows. If Team A beats the #1 and #299 team (average 150) and Team B beats the #149 and #151 team (average 150), do they in fact have the same SOS?

Good question. I hadn't posed the question yet, but maybe now is a good time.

Does anyone disagree that Team's A & B would have very similar, if not exact, SOS's? I would seem to think that generally speaking, their SOS's would be nearly identical.

[im4wsu]

Good question. I hadn't posed the question yet, but maybe now is a good time.

Does anyone disagree that Team's A & B would have very similar, if not exact, SOS's? I would seem to think that generally speaking, their SOS's would be nearly identical.

Agree, wholeheartedly. So what does that tell us or not tell us? That was your question.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

It had been about 2 days since the last activity on this thread. You resurrected it by spending many words and paragraphs slapping the hands of those that derailed what your original intent was. You throw around terms like "some don't see," etc...

What I don't thing you see is the attention span on a fan board is small at best. Your analytical thinking and planning for how you want this discussion to go isn't set up for a forum like this. You had enough of a sample size very early on Friday to go to the next step. For those that weren't fortunate enough to get in on the convo, in real time, could have caught up very easily and still contributed. But your stubbornness to recognize the situation became annoying to the great majority and therefore 4 days later you are no further along than the second you created the thread.

I truly enjoy much of what you bring here, but this is an example of you not recognizing when your audience is getting bored, annoyed and frustrated. The sooner you learn this and make the proper adjustments, much like a good basketball coach does during a game, you will find the joy in accomplishing your intended goal of great discussion.

If you have a small attention span and don't enjoy this thread, you are free to leave it and stop posting. Nobody is being forced to partake in this conversation.

If there are only 4-5 posters left reading and contributing, that is fine by me.

[SHOXAAC]

If you have a small attention span and don't enjoy this thread, you are free to leave it and stop posting. Nobody is being forced to partake in this conversation.

If there are only 4-5 posters left reading and contributing, that is fine by me.

Good point...enjoy the sand in your ears.

[SB Shock]

Good question. I hadn't posed the question yet, but maybe now is a good time.

Does anyone disagree that Team's A & B would have very similar, if not exact, SOS's? I would seem to think that generally speaking, their SOS's would be nearly identical.

No they wouldn't be similar. SOS profile is not linear.