|
Post by Sickman on Aug 25, 2019 17:12:41 GMT -5
This is what I came up with last night in a couple hours.
Offense: Lvl 2 moves - +1 a piece Lvl 3 moves - +2 a piece Finishers - 1 pt for a 0 finisher, +1 each number from there.
In my mock up from last night, I originally gave 1 pt for a lvl 1 move, but changed it because lvl 1 moves are largely insignificant. When we first look at a card, the first thing we look at are how many lvl 3 moves and the strength of the finisher(s). As for the finisher, I originally gave a 0 finisher a 0, which doesn't make sense because the finisher leads to a pin check. So I gave it a +1 instead.
Defense: Hurt - +1 each Dazed - +2 each Reversals - +1 or +2 Pin Rating - Subtract the number in ()
Charts: A - +2 B - +1 C - 0
Str and Ag: This is where it gets tricky. The only time Str or Ag come into play is when a move is rolled that causes a check of those scores. For instance, Barry Windham rolls a 3 on Level One Offense and hits "elbow smash - 2 (ag)" His success at that point is based on the opponent. If we were to include these in the ratings, my suggestion would be to subtract any rating below a 0. Chances are that a wrestler with a number less than 0 will almost always lose the check. Or, could just add any rating above a 0. Serves the same purpose. The third option for this would be to take away a move from the wrestlers score in light of a bad score. For Instance, Blackjack Mulligan has a +2 ag. "Elbow to neck - 2 (ag)", normally a move that would give Mulligan 1 pt towards his rating, would not count.
Barry Windham: Offense: 19 Defense: 20 Charts: 7
Total: 46
Brad Armstrong: Offense: 17 Defense: 16 Charts: 6
Total: 39
Edited to change the values for Dazed and Hurt
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 17:45:50 GMT -5
Back in the day, I calculated the wrestlers’ relative strength by assigning everything a standardized normal (“Z” score). I then calculated offense, defense, ring intelligence, and so on by adding, subtracting, and sometimes multiplying the individual Z scores. For example, I multiplied a wrestler’s Z-score for his Level 2 Offense by the Z-score for his number of REVERSAL-2 results on his card. That way, if a wrestler had a negative (that is, less than average) Z-score for L2O and a positive (above average) number of REVERSAL-2’s, his Ring Intelligence score would be reduced because he is reversing into a Level of Offense where he is weaker than average.
The math is a lot simpler than it sounds. All you have to do is enter the value for a rating (L2O, PIN, Ropes, etc.) and the formula automatically adjusted. It was really elegant, too. You could approximate the estimated value of a ch move by taking the average success rate (based on the entire universe’s mean Power or Agility Rating) tines the offensive level (2 or 3).
I know it sounds overly complex, but once the data entry is done, you’re pretty much finished and just need to add new wrestlers as they arrive to automatically update the ratings.
I may go back to that one of these days for my Chikara, and ultimately Shimmer, feds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 17:54:43 GMT -5
This is what I came up with last night in a couple hours. Offense: Lvl 2 moves - +1 a piece Lvl 3 moves - +2 a piece Finishers - 1 pt for a 0 finisher, +1 each number from there. In my mock up from last night, I originally gave 1 pt for a lvl 1 move, but changed it because lvl 1 moves are largely insignificant. When we first look at a card, the first thing we look at are how many lvl 3 moves and the strength of the finisher(s). As for the finisher, I originally gave a 0 finisher a 0, which doesn't make sense because the finisher leads to a pin check. So I gave it a +1 instead. Defense: Hurt - +2 each Dazed - +1 each Reversals - +1 or +2 Pin Rating - Subtract the number in () Charts: A - +2 B - +1 C - 0 Str and Ag: This is where it gets tricky. The only time Str or Ag come into play is when a move is rolled that causes a check of those scores. For instance, Barry Windham rolls a 3 on Level One Offense and hits "elbow smash - 2 (ag)" His success at that point is based on the opponent. If we were to include these in the ratings, my suggestion would be to subtract any rating below a 0. Chances are that a wrestler with a number less than 0 will almost always lose the check. Or, could just add any rating above a 0. Serves the same purpose. The third option for this would be to take away a move from the wrestlers score in light of a bad score. For Instance, Blackjack Mulligan has a +2 ag. "Elbow to neck - 2 (ag)", normally a move that would give Mulligan 1 pt towards his rating, would not count. Barry Windham: Offense: 19 Defense: 20 Charts: 7 Total: 46 Brad Armstrong: Offense: 17 Defense: 16 Charts: 6 Total: 39 Couple of statistical observations. First, I think you are undervaluing Finishers. As it stands now, a (0) Finisher is less valuable than a move-3, which it should not be. Consider adding the value of a move-3 to your modified finisher score and use that. So a (0) Finisher is worth 3, a (+1) Finisher is worth 4, and so on. If you know the average score for Agility or Power, you can easily calculate the expected value of a move-2 (ag) or move-3 (pw) or whatever. I think you do need to consider move-1’s because a card with a move-1 on L2O is significantly weaker on Level 2 Offense (and consequently stronger on Level 1 Offense) than a card with the typical two move-1’s on L1O. I think you need to reverse the values for dazed-1 and hurt-2 results. Right now, you have a hurt-2 adding more to the score than a dazed-1, and it seems like it should be the reverse. Also, I do think you need to consider the presence of down-3’s. Having one on L2D makes a card more vulnerable at that level than having them all on L3D. Any additive model is going to have hiccups. That’s why I went to the Z-score model I described above.
|
|
|
Post by Sickman on Aug 25, 2019 19:17:03 GMT -5
This is what I came up with last night in a couple hours. Offense: Lvl 2 moves - +1 a piece Lvl 3 moves - +2 a piece Finishers - 1 pt for a 0 finisher, +1 each number from there. In my mock up from last night, I originally gave 1 pt for a lvl 1 move, but changed it because lvl 1 moves are largely insignificant. When we first look at a card, the first thing we look at are how many lvl 3 moves and the strength of the finisher(s). As for the finisher, I originally gave a 0 finisher a 0, which doesn't make sense because the finisher leads to a pin check. So I gave it a +1 instead. Defense: Hurt - +2 each Dazed - +1 each Reversals - +1 or +2 Pin Rating - Subtract the number in () Charts: A - +2 B - +1 C - 0 Str and Ag: This is where it gets tricky. The only time Str or Ag come into play is when a move is rolled that causes a check of those scores. For instance, Barry Windham rolls a 3 on Level One Offense and hits "elbow smash - 2 (ag)" His success at that point is based on the opponent. If we were to include these in the ratings, my suggestion would be to subtract any rating below a 0. Chances are that a wrestler with a number less than 0 will almost always lose the check. Or, could just add any rating above a 0. Serves the same purpose. The third option for this would be to take away a move from the wrestlers score in light of a bad score. For Instance, Blackjack Mulligan has a +2 ag. "Elbow to neck - 2 (ag)", normally a move that would give Mulligan 1 pt towards his rating, would not count. Barry Windham: Offense: 19 Defense: 20 Charts: 7 Total: 46 Brad Armstrong: Offense: 17 Defense: 16 Charts: 6 Total: 39 Couple of statistical observations. First, I think you are undervaluing Finishers. As it stands now, a (0) Finisher is less valuable than a move-3, which it should not be. Consider adding the value of a move-3 to your modified finisher score and use that. So a (0) Finisher is worth 3, a (+1) Finisher is worth 4, and so on. If you know the average score for Agility or Power, you can easily calculate the expected value of a move-2 (ag) or move-3 (pw) or whatever. I think you do need to consider move-1’s because a card with a move-1 on L2O is significantly weaker on Level 2 Offense (and consequently stronger on Level 1 Offense) than a card with the typical two move-1’s on L1O. I think you need to reverse the values for dazed-1 and hurt-2 results. Right now, you have a hurt-2 adding more to the score than a dazed-1, and it seems like it should be the reverse. Also, I do think you need to consider the presence of down-3’s. Having one on L2D makes a card more vulnerable at that level than having them all on L3D. Any additive model is going to have hiccups. That’s why I went to the Z-score model I described above. The dazed/hurt score was an oversight by me. I had initially had the dazed as a +2 and hurt a +1 last night. I did not check my data when typing this up. Good point about the finisher rating. A 0 finisher should be a +3 and then add from there. I disagree about adding value to the lvl 1 moves though. Because a - 1 move on Lvl 2 Offense means that you get an extra - 2 move on Lvl 1 Offense. It still balances out imo from a score standpoint. However, maybe a couple points could be taken off to adjust for the slightly weaker card.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2019 7:26:40 GMT -5
Couple of statistical observations. First, I think you are undervaluing Finishers. As it stands now, a (0) Finisher is less valuable than a move-3, which it should not be. Consider adding the value of a move-3 to your modified finisher score and use that. So a (0) Finisher is worth 3, a (+1) Finisher is worth 4, and so on. If you know the average score for Agility or Power, you can easily calculate the expected value of a move-2 (ag) or move-3 (pw) or whatever. I think you do need to consider move-1’s because a card with a move-1 on L2O is significantly weaker on Level 2 Offense (and consequently stronger on Level 1 Offense) than a card with the typical two move-1’s on L1O. I think you need to reverse the values for dazed-1 and hurt-2 results. Right now, you have a hurt-2 adding more to the score than a dazed-1, and it seems like it should be the reverse. Also, I do think you need to consider the presence of down-3’s. Having one on L2D makes a card more vulnerable at that level than having them all on L3D. Any additive model is going to have hiccups. That’s why I went to the Z-score model I described above. The dazed/hurt score was an oversight by me. I had initially had the dazed as a +2 and hurt a +1 last night. I did not check my data when typing this up. Good point about the finisher rating. A 0 finisher should be a +3 and then add from there. I disagree about adding value to the lvl 1 moves though. Because a - 1 move on Lvl 2 Offense means that you get an extra - 2 move on Lvl 1 Offense. It still balances out imo from a score standpoint. However, maybe a couple points could be taken off to adjust for the slightly weaker card. That would work--a static adjustment to account for placement of the move-1's instead of directly adding them in. Good call.
|
|
tg54
Infinity Challenge
Posts: 183
|
Post by tg54 on Nov 29, 2021 14:33:13 GMT -5
when calculating the Rahl Rating, do you do anything with choice situations? what about chart situations?
|
|
|
Post by TTX on Nov 29, 2021 14:44:08 GMT -5
no and no.
|
|
tg54
Infinity Challenge
Posts: 183
|
Post by tg54 on Dec 6, 2021 22:35:00 GMT -5
Would you say this is accurate?
0 – 10 = Jobber 11 – 20 = Undercard 21 – 25 = Midcard 26 – 35 = Upper Midcard 36 – 39 = Superstar 40 + = Main eventer
|
|
|
Post by TTX on Dec 7, 2021 6:53:34 GMT -5
roughly......Jobber can easily be under 0 of course but I think some tag wrestlers straddle the jobber/undercard line.
|
|
|
Post by Sickman on Dec 8, 2021 1:11:03 GMT -5
Would you say this is accurate? 0 – 10 = Jobber 11 – 20 = Undercard 21 – 25 = Midcard 26 – 35 = Upper Midcard 36 – 39 = Superstar 40 + = Main eventer I use 40+ as main event talent. Anything below that I never really considered in a tier list. I would adjust your numbers to: 30-35 = Upper Midcard 21-30 = Midcard IMO
|
|