Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="bensei" data-source="post: 30347" data-attributes="member: 830">Why is noone (besides number 1) really interesed in the tennis world ranking? Because noone can follow the formulas to calculate it.I think it would not make the ranking tables very interesting, if they are sorted according to numbers, and nobody can follow the calculation system.I'd say anything nonlinear is too complicated.(I'm a mathematician, so I'm really not afaid of formulas in general <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> )The ranking should be done by the average, and nothing else.Who qualifies for the top 10 - on the other hand - should be a little more complicated than just a minimum number of votes. Perhaps my suggestion above, perhaps something a bit stronger here...I also do not want to see the PHB topping the list...The top 10 should measure only quality, not amount of 'buzz'.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="bensei, post: 30347, member: 830"] Why is noone (besides number 1) really interesed in the tennis world ranking? Because noone can follow the formulas to calculate it. I think it would not make the ranking tables very interesting, if they are sorted according to numbers, and nobody can follow the calculation system. I'd say anything nonlinear is too complicated. (I'm a mathematician, so I'm really not afaid of formulas in general ;) ) The ranking should be done by the average, and nothing else. Who qualifies for the top 10 - on the other hand - should be a little more complicated than just a minimum number of votes. Perhaps my suggestion above, perhaps something a bit stronger here... I also do not want to see the PHB topping the list... The top 10 should measure only quality, not amount of 'buzz'. [/QUOTE]

Verification