BuzzerBeater Forums

whoo IV.32 #3! damn why am I in there...

I want to be in IV.32, but it's hard, man it's active (yay!) but hard (no!) for that I'll just go to a un-sociable league then hopefully go to a active D3 league it'll be worth it (yay! I get to experience D3! and I tank) then I fall down to IV that's active but I know it's hard so I keep my roster and win it lol

Also kinda wondering where you got all of your info from? I hope for your sake it wasn't manually checking all leagues, that'd be painful.

A buddy sent me this thread. I commend the effort.

I wanted to point out a few things concerning my league the IV.49. Our "#1" overall is listed as Gibrona CB. I give props to him for earning the overall best record (though not PD). The 2 wins he has over the other two strongest teams in our league came with a higher effort on his part. Both of my losses to him came via TIE vs. his normal. So I guess my moral victories aren't counted in these "rankings". :(

His CR is fairly low too which is why I gather our league is ranked well below that of leagues I know are very much weaker than ours. Gibrona hasn't defeated any teams higher than D.IV. My team has, but only by playing in private leagues. Both our teams promoted into D4 the same season. His first language is Portuguese and I know for a fact he's into BBW vids as a pre-game ritual. Those two things alone make ATL Pacers our "true" overall #1. Just saying.

I wanted to bring these things to light not just because Gibrona never reads the English forums and can't defend himself but also because overall best records and PD don't show nearly the whole story. Our league has had 6 teams bot out in the last 2 seasons and 1 continually tanking for a season and a half. 2 of our managers are focused on training NT /U21 players (US and non-US).

I chose to prioritize arena the last few seasons after seeing the last 3 champions of our league come falling right back into D4. 2 of them are actually ranked #6 & #24 of these D.IV team rankings. I'm not sure how many more of the teams on this list fit that billing.

I imagine the next logical step is to rank D.V's which I'll cast my vote now for the overall #1 and that's the legendary V.65 and you know it's FOE LIFE! Rock on, Trampires.... :P

Last edited by Mix at 8/7/2012 2:19:36 PM

V.65 YA BUDDY!!!

I cut & pasted from each league's ranking comparison page, into a spreadsheet. Then I ran some pivot tables and made my formulas. Not too painful.

Chances are that either P-Dog or myself promote.

Yeah... No toughness ranking will ever be perfect. Toughness is a subjective concept that depends on match-ups, rosters, gamesmanship and a hundred other things that aren't quantifiable.

And if I tried to accomodate situations like IV.49's by including data like effort and enth, calculations would be prohibitively complex and (I think) even more subjective. After posting my rankings I considered that you could use something like average BBStats for al games in a league (from the USA NT offsite scouting tool). But I'm not willing to spend the time collecting and collating all that data. And I don't have the computer know-how to create a tool that would do it for me.

You might cite even more evidence that these rankings are a bit off: Prairie Dogs (29602) has the top NR of any D.IV team (owing to his long cup run this year). But in the two rankings, V.41 (his league) is ranked 5th and 9th. Surely they ought to be considered for toughest league overall.

Maybe I should have shown the ratings as ranges. And if I hadn't slept through my college math classes, I might have known enough about statistics to put a meaningful range on the ratings. In any case, I wouldn't take them too seriously. Like I said, this exercise was mostly to spend time on my day off and is (insert sarcasm here) *very scientific* ;-). If you're near the top, you're probably about as tough as any other league near the top, regardless of exact rating.

In defense of my rankings, however, I would say that knowing when to CT and when to TIE are part of what make teams tough. Practically, published team rankings and game results are all we really have to go on. Who wins and loses and point differential are what put you in place to promote and demote. And IMHO that's what matters, because toughness is all about how hard it is to promote and keep from demoting. If you've got a weak team with HCA throughout the playoffs, it's easier to promote than if a strong team has HCA. And a measure of league toughness should reflect that (which this does).

Does anybody have any really good first round D.IV playoff games I should be checking out tonight? I expect IV.10 to offer up relative snoozers tonight, but things should get very intense in the semis.

Recognizing my margin of error and of BB’s propensity to use words when perfectly good numbers would do (a charming, yet clunky habit), maybe this nomenclature for toughness is better:

wimpy (1): IV.34
scrawny (2): IV.6, IV.36, IV.50
weak (3): IV.23, IV.35, IV.3, IV.12, IV.7, IV.38, IV.25, IV.48
decent (4): IV.53, IV.57, IV.2, IV.8, IV.52, IV.37, IV.15, IV.40, IV.27
solid (5): IV.5, IV.44, IV.33, IV.51, IV.64, IV.13, IV.43, IV.47, IV.62, IV.61
stout (6): IV.17, IV.45, IV.21, IV.19, IV.49, IV.26, IV.11, IV.24, IV.22
robust (7): IV.1, IV.4, IV.63, IV.18, IV.9, IV.39, IV.42
rigorous (8): IV.56, IV.59, IV.46, IV.31, IV.29, IV.16
tough as nails (9): IV.58, IV.60, IV.54, IV.30
Chuck Norris (10): IV.20, IV.28, IV.32, IV.10, IV.41, IV.14, IV.55