US National FOG Rankings

General discussion forum for anything related to Field of Glory Ancients & Medieval.

Moderators: hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design

Post Reply
berthier
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:01 am
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Contact:

US National FOG Rankings

Post by berthier » Sat May 30, 2009 9:15 pm

As if there was not enough turmoil in our lives, let me add a bit more fuel to
the fire.

Since no one else seems to be prepared to put together a formalized set of
guidelines for the US National FOG Championship Series, I have worked with a
select group of individuals from around the US to work up the following
guidelines. We started off attempting to build the guidelines around
established UK guidelines but found it difficult to reconcile the 2 Grand Slams,
2 Majors and everything else as a Minor system without butting heads with the
"my tournament is more prestigious than yours" mentality. We then attempted to
divide the US into regions with the largest tournament in each region qualifying
as the main regional tournament. The two largest regional tournaments would be
graded as the 2 Grand Slams for the year and the remaining 4 would be Large
Tournaments. One issue with this method was whether to use the previous year's
attendance as the measuring stick to classify the tournament categories and what
to do if the tournament did not happen or attendance was way below normal. The
regions were very similar to what Gino Agnelly proposed a few months back on the
North American FOG list but after the response he received, and the problems
with the classification vehicle mentioned previously we trashed that idea, as
well.

The final result was a compromise, more or less, and uses the current year's
attendance to classify each tournament as it happens. Grand Slams must have at
least 4 rounds of play AND a minimum of 24 qualifying players. Large
Tournaments must have between 12 and 23 qualifying players and at least 3 rounds
of play. Standard (the old Minor) tournaments must have between 6 and 11
qualifying players and at least 3 rounds of play. Tournaments with fewer than 6
players or fewer than 3 rounds of play do not count towards the National FOF
Championship Series. Special Tournaments, such as doubles and the US Team
Tournament, also have a place in the ranking system. In this system, there can
be more than 2 Grand Slams and more than 2 Large tournaments. If you get the
players out in numbers, then you should have the status of Grand Slam. Also in
this system, only a player's top 8 finishes count, referees that compete in the
tournament and those that do not are recognized.

The complete guidelines can be found on my website at

http://www.freewebs.com/berthiersdesk/u ... elines.htm

The complete rankings can be found here

http://www.freewebs.com/berthiersdesk/U ... y%2024.pdf

And just to give you a taste, here is the top 10 thru May 24.


US National Rankings 2009
Name Tournaments Club Score
1 Crotteau, Marc 6 Tm Zero 61.36
2 Jones, Ricky 4 SMAC 60.42
3 Miller, Joey 5 Bunny 53.30
4 Martin, John 4 NGDH 53.26
5 Hazlewood, Dan 2 Beltway 42.75
6 McCampbell, Bill 4 Beltway 41.64
7 Cleveland, Lee 4 Bunny 39.67
8 McManus, Hilton 3 36.44
9 Jeske, Scott 3 Ohio 36.24
10 Hines, Chuck 5 Chicago 35.25


I have also posted the guidlines and the rankings in the files sections of both the North American FOG and the FOG discussion lits on Yahoo.

berthier
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:01 am
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Contact:

Post by berthier » Sat May 30, 2009 9:22 pm

The ranking sample did not come out so clear so here it is restructured.

1. Crotteau, Marc.....6 tournaments...Team Zero.....61.36 points
2. Jones, Ricky.........4 tournaments...SMAC............60.42
3. Miller, Joey...........5 tournaments...Bunny............53.30
4. Martin, John..........4 tournaments...NGDH............53.26
5. Hazlewood, Dan....2 tournaments...Beltway..........42.75
6. McCampbell, Bill..4 tournaments...Beltway..........41.64
7. Cleveland, Lee.....4 tournaments...Bunny.............39.67
8. McManus, Hilton..3 tournaments... ?....................36.44
9. Jeske, Scott..........3 tournaments...Ohio..............36.24
10. Hines, Chuck.......5 tournaments...Chicago........35.25

The number of tournaments indicated is the number they actually competed in. Marc and Dan have credit for refereeing tournamets as well.

Christopher Anders

jdm
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 1139
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 10:41 am

Post by jdm » Sun May 31, 2009 3:31 pm

Hi

If you send over the contents as an excel .xls to our web manager he will add your rankinks to the FOG web site
andrea@slitherine.co.uk

Regards
JDM

dave_r
General - King Tiger
General - King Tiger
Posts: 3773
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Post by dave_r » Sun May 31, 2009 4:02 pm

There appears to be six Brits in the top 36 (i.e. first page)

How is that so?

berthier
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:01 am
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Contact:

Post by berthier » Sun May 31, 2009 4:09 pm

The IWF was included as a Grand Slam.

hammy
Field of Glory Team
Field of Glory Team
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Post by hammy » Sun May 31, 2009 5:29 pm

berthier wrote:The IWF was included as a Grand Slam.
That seems a sensible plan but it looks like you have started from scratch at the start of the year.

The UK rankings work on a rolling 12 months so it is not about who has played the most comps in the first few months of the year. Obvioulsy at the end of the year there is a full 12 months counting but in January we just drop the preceding January scores.

berthier
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:01 am
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Contact:

Post by berthier » Sun May 31, 2009 5:58 pm

The previous year's rankings used a different method than the one we have put together. ONe of the tie breaks built into this method is the previous year's EOY ranking.

hammy
Field of Glory Team
Field of Glory Team
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Post by hammy » Sun May 31, 2009 6:28 pm

berthier wrote:The previous year's rankings used a different method than the one we have put together. ONe of the tie breaks built into this method is the previous year's EOY ranking.
I realise that the old US ratings were differently weighted but if the new system is significantly different at least in the way the data is maintained it is going to make life very difficult when it comes to trying to produce international rankings. As it stands it takes me a couple of days to massage the data into my spreadsheet and double check that there are no silly errors.

berthier
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:01 am
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Contact:

Post by berthier » Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:31 am

Hammy,

I will see what we can do. It would require a significant reconfiguration of the rankings at this point but even so we will look at it.

C

hammy
Field of Glory Team
Field of Glory Team
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Post by hammy » Mon Jun 01, 2009 8:23 am

berthier wrote:Hammy,

I will see what we can do. It would require a significant reconfiguration of the rankings at this point but even so we will look at it.

C
If you are running a parallel but different system and Jim still maintins the existing system there will be no issue. I will just use Jim's data. What I need at the very least is something in the same basic format as the software I use for the BHGS rankings which is a table with player names down the side, tournament names across the top and the places that a player finished in listed for each comp next to the players name.

Because the international rankings use a different weighting to local ones I am not bothered with the actual ranking value, just where people placed in each event.

petedalby
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3018
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:23 pm
Location: Fareham, UK

Post by petedalby » Mon Jun 01, 2009 11:56 am

When do you plan to update the UK rankings Hammy?

We've had the Challenge and IWF since the last update?

Cheers

Pete

hammy
Field of Glory Team
Field of Glory Team
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Post by hammy » Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:18 pm

petedalby wrote:When do you plan to update the UK rankings Hammy?

We've had the Challenge and IWF since the last update?

Cheers

Pete
I sent Matt the post Challenge rankings some time ago but it fell through the cracks. I sent it again last week. I will chase it.

The IWF won't impact the UK rankibgs though, only the US and World ones.

hammy
Field of Glory Team
Field of Glory Team
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Post by hammy » Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:19 pm

hammy wrote:
petedalby wrote:When do you plan to update the UK rankings Hammy?

We've had the Challenge and IWF since the last update?

Cheers

Pete
I sent Matt the post Challenge rankings some time ago but it fell through the cracks. I sent it again last week. I will chase it.

The IWF won't impact the UK rankibgs though, only the US and World ones.
Actually checking the BHGS site the post Challenge rankings are indeed there.

philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8663
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 » Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:39 pm

hammy wrote:
hammy wrote: Actually checking the BHGS site the post Challenge rankings are indeed there.
Are you sure, these are almost exactly if not exactly the same as put up at the challenge.

dave_r
General - King Tiger
General - King Tiger
Posts: 3773
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Post by dave_r » Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:47 pm

I don't think they are, despite the claims on the top of the page that they are from the 1st May.

In fact, I know they aren't correct, as in the version for the 1st May I was above Dave Handley :)

hammy
Field of Glory Team
Field of Glory Team
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Post by hammy » Mon Jun 01, 2009 2:53 pm

dave_r wrote:I don't think they are, despite the claims on the top of the page that they are from the 1st May.

In fact, I know they aren't correct, as in the version for the 1st May I was above Dave Handley :)
You are right,

I read the 1st of May and eyeballed the top 4 (which I thought changed after the Challenge but in fact it didn't).

I have sent the new file to Matt, he must just be busy. I will prod him again. After all it is time for the next set of rankings now anyway.

hammy
Field of Glory Team
Field of Glory Team
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Post by hammy » Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:03 pm

hammy wrote:
dave_r wrote:I don't think they are, despite the claims on the top of the page that they are from the 1st May.

In fact, I know they aren't correct, as in the version for the 1st May I was above Dave Handley :)
You are right,

I read the 1st of May and eyeballed the top 4 (which I thought changed after the Challenge but in fact it didn't).

I have sent the new file to Matt, he must just be busy. I will prod him again. After all it is time for the next set of rankings now anyway.
OK on further checking I realised that for some reason that despite updating my master sheet with the results from the April comps, I sent Matt a copy of the End of March rankings, not the end April ones :(

Sorry chaps. The correct file is on its way to Matt as you read this :oops:

petedalby
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3018
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:23 pm
Location: Fareham, UK

Post by petedalby » Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:50 pm

The IWF won't impact the UK rankibgs though, only the US and World ones.
Oh bu**er!

I was planning on that being my 3rd comp of 2009. Will struggle to add 4 more.

Never mind...

Pete

Scrumpy
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1423
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:27 pm
Location: NoVa

Post by Scrumpy » Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:01 pm

Waste of time winning it then Pete ? :D

philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8663
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 » Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:12 pm

A man of your calibre should only need a couple more any way Pete. Give someone else a chance.

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion”