| Rank | Team | Avg |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | HJS Paarl | 4.64 |
| 2 | Paul Roos | 4.53 |
| 3 | Paarl Gim | 4.44 |
| 4 | Affies | 3.94 |
| 5 | Grey College | 3.81 |
| 6 | Monument | 3.81 |
| 7 | Michaelhouse | 3.79 |
| 8 | EG Jansen | 3.75 |
| 9 | Nelspruit | 3.75 |
| 10 | Oakdale | 3.64 |
| 11 | Grey PE | 3.61 |
| 12 | Outeniqua | 3.56 |
| 13 | Bishops | 3.51 |
| 14 | SACS | 3.46 |
| 15 | Selborne | 3.39 |
| 16 | Jeppe | 3.38 |
| 17 | Noord-Kaap | 3.20 |
| 18 | Maritzburg College | 3.20 |
| 19 | Eldoraigne | 3.13 |
| 20 | Boland Landbou | 3.11 |
LEAGUE RANKINGS
Ek korrek myself, bellville onoorwone in die liga . Het egter op die oakdaletoer in hul pre season verloor. Steeds n baie goeie seisoen sover
Bellville hoerskool lyk gr8 vanjaar . Hoop om die skool teen die einde van die seisoen in die top 20 te sien. Steeds onoorwonne. Laat my dink aan Bellville se 2005 -2007 jaargroepe en in n mannier ook die 2012 groep , wat domineer teen super B liga skole. Asook kan kompeteer teen super A liga spanne en soms n upset veroorsaak teen die tradisionele groot rugbyskole.
(Paarl Gym old boy) slegs graad 8 en 9 in bhs gewees
@QC86: @Djou: The FNB rankings is also a shocker – need to get hold of their CEO to tell them they should start concentrating !
@QC86: Fully agree. They are clueless.
@Kempie Pa: As julle St. Johns en die ander paastoernooie nog as opwarmingswedstryde sien is die probleem tog sekerlik by julle? jy kan tog sekerlik nie die span benadeel wat sy huiswerk gedoen het nie. Daardie wedstryde dra dieselfde gewig as die wedstryde in die middel en einde van die seisoen.
@BoishaaiPa:
Julle le swaar klem op wedstryde wat meer opwarmings wedstryde vir die spanne van Noordvaal was. Meeste spanne het tot 5 wedstryde in 9 dae gespeel.
@BoishaaiPa:
Ek prober nie die ranking afskiet nie, ek stem saam dat dit die beste is van wat beskikbaar is. Ek dink net dat die wedstryde aan die begin van die seisoen nie ‘n werklikke weergawe van die sterkte van die spanne is nie. Ek sal graag wil sien hoe die spanne teen mekaar opweeg as hulle op volle vorm is wat dan gewoonlik van die middle van die seisoen aan is. Kempies bevoorbeeld speel alty heelwat beter later in die seisoen. Dit dui dalk daarop dat die Kaapse skole beter af seisoen programme het. Nelspruit wat laas jaar die Beeld trofee gewen het het nie goed gespeel voor hulle wedstryd teen Kempies nie maar het dan ‘n paar groot kanonne in ‘n ry gewen.
@Kempie Pa: BHP’s ranking by far the most accurate i have seen,enjoy it for what it is and appreciate his effort and move on.You want to burst a vein go look at SA schools ranking
@Kempie Pa: Net om by te voeg…Teen die tyd wat St Johns aangebreek het, het Monnas darem ook al n Ierse toer agter die blad gehad plus 4 wedstryde tuis wat hulle almal gewen het ingesluit EG Jansen…Hoeveel meer voorbereiding will jy dan nog he?
@Kempie Pa: Ek hoor wat jy se, maar dink jy nie altwee spanne is in dieselfde bootjie aan die begin van die seisoen nie?. Elke ou is natuurlik geregtig op sy eie opinie en daai opinies is maklik om uit te spreek as dit nie hoef getoets te word nie. Ons kan egter nie oor moontlike uitslae oordeel nie, maar slegs or die werklike.
@Kempie Pa: Ek bly in Durbanville, ek kan die wingerde van my huis af sien, dit maak my nie ‘n wynboer nie, maar dit hou my wel dors
@KempiePa: Die werkloosheidsyfer se metode het nie verander nie – die steekproef het wel.
Monnas se o.19’s het by St Johns gespeel – en Monnas het verloor teen Boishaai en Paul Roos. So, dieselfde span speel nou as die een wat by St Johns gespeel het.
By the way, hoeveel o.19’s is in die Monnaspan.
@Ploegskaar:
Kempies is ‘n plaasskool. Ons ruik die sewerage wat die plaas langsaan gebruik om sy kunsmis rekening te verlaag aan die begin van elke plant seisoen.
@BoishaaiPa:
My punt is dat julle as ‘n voorbeeld nie nou so maklik vir Monnas sal wen as aan die begin van die seisoen. Jy baseer jou opinie op resultate gedurende die deel waar spanne voorberei vir die seisoen. Op dieselfe manier sal die Bulle S15 wen na ‘n baie goeie voor seisoen. Die werklikheid is nou heel anders.
Jou ranking sisteem is duidelik en die kritisie is op die verkeerde perd deur dit af te skiet. Die werklike sienswyse moet wees dat jou formule die resultaat gee en ‘n ander een gewoonlik ‘n ander. Jy kan nie jou werkwyse net aanpas om ‘n resultaat te kry wat jou pas nie. Die laaste werkloosheid syfer het vreemde resultate gegee en toe die mense dieper krap kom dit aan die lug dat die metode verander was. Die lesers kan na verskillende rankings kyk en dan besluit wie regtig die beste spanne is.
As jy net jou huidige metode gebruik moet EG nou die gunsteling wees Saterdag. Die werklikheid is dat daar ‘n fundamentele verandering aan die Monnas span is met die terugkeer van hulle ouer spelers. Dit is waar ‘n fokus groep ‘n voordeel is, hulle kan na al die feite (wat rankings wat op ‘n sekere manier bepaal word insluit) kyk en dan ‘n mening lug. Hoe groter die groep en hoe beyer die kwaliteit (van die lede). Hoe akurater sal die uitslag wees, baie meer akuraat as ‘n formule sisteem.
@kosie: My seun is nou 4de jaar Siviel by US…Daai materiaalkunde is nogal n riller soos ek dit verstaan (of glad nie verstaan nie!)
Well, if the rankings is not of much use it does help in getting people to converse at least. I agree with both Djou and Kantman viewpoints, but we are not looking at an exact science here. It is not about prediction or relative strength. This is about results and is driven by results, that is the one certainty we do have i.e. the actual outcome. I concur that there are many other factors that can influence the result, but there is no way we can calculate for that (and this is were I actually agree with Djou) so we have to make an assumption that all things being equal the result is one actual certainty we do have. The other is the categorization of schools were we made use of previous results as well as popular opinion to determine their relative category. The methodology used to calculate the results is known and applied the same throughout so you have a constant. The eventual outcome (or rank) is thus to determine who is doing the best (up to that point) given their results and the opponents they play, not their actual or relative potential strength. To use current form as a benchmark based on observation and popular opinion is akin to saying that because the Sharks are now winning a game or two, they should actually be in the top 3 of the S15 log as they will now beat those teams they lost against. They had their chance, they did not take it, they must live with the results!
@Ploegskaar:
Oh, by the way, I got this formula from the Chief Engineer at Meduppi Power Station ( Well it should be a power station one day in the future and another R200 Billion)
Is dit nie die formule waarna julle soek nie ?: 1+Sin x / n = 1+ Six =1+6 = 7 ( Volgens die handleiding, “Maths Simplified” )
My last words on this topic.
A few years ago before we knew this blog. BHP used to blog his top 30 on rugby 365 under the top 20 thread. He explained his formula then. My challenge to people who oppose his posts is to add your own 2 cents to his and publish your own on this thread. It’s good and well to have opinions, but opinions are like @r$3holes…everyone has one. Disagree all you want, it’s your right. If this is so serious to you, bring a method you deem better. As long as not all teams play each other none of these rankings will be perfect. That is a fact. Are they useless? Well the answer to that depends on what you take out of them. The use they serve to me is that they bring out an interest in SBR I didn’t think I had. Being in CT, I have watched more SBR games in the last 3 years than I had in the previous 12 years since I lived here. It has mattered very little where Dale are ranked…as flattering as it is in our good years
Chill…
So, almal kan nou relax en weer die Top 20 geniet!
Ok almal. Tx, ek het julle nou kwaad genoeg, maar het nou genoeg info vir my navorsingsprojek in psychology.
@Djou: Ek verstaan wat jy probeer se. Ek het al geleer dat mens soms ook nie te gekompliseerd moet wees nie.
Nietemin dink ek min sal jou teorie van veranderlikes verstaan. Dis amper soos om ingeneurs materiaalkunde net te verstaan. Dit gebeur net nie!
@Djou: Sorry, cannot see why you need theory for a ranking. We all agree uncertainty and the inability to resolve it, therefore we agree the Category (rating) used in BHP and the application of that in a formula. Using opinions (not always very “honest” in SBR) could only be used to improve the category. It will fail to establish an “accurate” ranking unless they each each use some kind of formula …
@kosie: Dankie, maar wil eers weet of kunstande tel, of moet dit regte tande wees.
En watter tand? Melktande, vampiertande, kiestande???? 
@Cappie: Lyk my die ingenieurswese werk nie so goed om die kleur van ‘n perd te bepaal nie. Probeer die kunste!
@Andre T: O dit is maklik. Vra ietsie moeiliker.
En gee sommer die formule vir ‘n tand se deursnee. EK kry dit nerens nie en wil graag die valstande terugsit.
@Andre T: Om jou eerste vraag te beantwoord met Djou se teorie. Neem eers ‘n x straal van die tand en dan sal die deursnee maklik berekenbaar wees.
Onthou net, die tand in jou vraag is die spul waarom alles draai en soos jy weet, verskil tande. Daar het jy dit. Eenvoudig om te verstaan.
Terlooos, indien jy regtig jou tand se deursnee wil weet, sal ek jou kan help!
@Djou: Sienende dat jy vandag op n roll is………Wat is die verskil tussen n krokodil?
@AndreT: Ek is nog besig om my valstande uit te haal. Tel dit ook? En wat is die formule vir deursnee van ‘n tand nou weer?
@Kantman: You don’t have to use game theory to predict. It has lots of applications. But I am not proposing it, just saying it is a theory with formulae and therefore you have something to base it upon.
And probability theory is mostly used by insurance companies also not to predict but more to determine price.
And I repeat, you can’t use formulas under conditions of uncertainty. It is a simple fact. Seems like everybody who comments misses the simple fact, or chooses to ignore it because they so desperately wants a formula. This is gullible.
So, not miles ahead as you can’t and should not use it.
@Djou: I think the mistake in the use of game theory or any other probability methods is that it is trying to predict. BHP’s ranking is not a rating or prediction on who will win, it is just a ranking based on a published and reasoned formula. Predictions in “leagues” where not all teams play each other struggle to be more than 60% correct over time.
The problems for me with other “official” sbr rankings include that they are often compiled in a sloppy manner, include wrong and incomplete results, dictated by regional bias (and unknown individuals) or purposely created in a way that tries to draw page views. On the above BHP’s ranking is miles ahead.
Wat is die lengtedeursnee van n tand?
@Djou: Gedink dit is jou perd, want jy was baie vinnig op hom.
@AndreT @Bog: Ok, here is the thing. Everybody can compile his/her own rankings using their own method. BHP compiled his rankings and used a formula as the method. And the formula is not based on any theory. Now, just because a formula is used, many think it is superior.
So, without a theory, a formula is useless. More so under conditions of uncertainty.
Now, if you want to use a theory, the best is game theory (John Nash who developed the theory for which he won the Nobel Prize died last weekend) and game theory has formulae in matrix format. But the closest you will get is a rough estimation.
However, if you use a huge number of honest opinions, the ranking will stabilise at an average. And it will most likely be the closest to right as you can get. And it will ensure that weaker teams are not ranked higher than stronger teams. Also, it will ensure that teams who play weak opposition and winning will not be ranked higher than strong teams losing against strong opposition.
Also, it is not wise to publish rankings so early due to the very small sample.
@Cappie: Jy is mos ingenieur, jy behoort te weet.
Julle klink soos n klomp dronk manne in n kroeg. Elke ou praat sy eie stront so hard as wat hy kan,maar niemand luister na die volgende een nie. Maar ek sien iemand het darem verneem na die “wherabouts” van Tjoppa. Was hy net uit die script geskryf of is hy dood in Shirley se aansienlike boesem?
@Die Ken: In daardie geval kan elke skool in elke voorstad, seker sê hulle is ‘n plaasskool, behalwe Monnas, Kempies, EG ens, die is eerder mynskole
Miskien die rankings opstel met my beproefde metode van Lotto nommers kies. Dis eintlik baie eenvoudig. Vat die verskil in temperatuur tussen Koekenaap se maksimum en Bultfontein se minimum. Halfeer daardie getal, en vermemigvuldig met die % styging in petrolprys. Tel die dag waarop jy verjaar by, en deel deur die getal Cheetahs in die Bokspan. Dan het jy jou eerste nommer. Om die tweede nommer te kry is bietjie meer gekompliseerd. Ek was laasweek netr met 6 nommers verkeerd. Maar dit raak darem al beter.
Grasshopper klink werlik ingelig ( hy het dan al die grade)
wie is die ander werklik ingeligtes?
@Djou: Wil nie hê jy moet saamstem nie, wil net weet of is die swart perd djoune?
@BoishaaiPa: My opinie is nie ‘n formule nie. Maar gaan doen bietjie navorsing oor navorsingsmetodes en metodologie en jy sal vind dat dit algemene praktyk is en die metodologie is wat aanbeveel word in derglike omstandighede. Trouens, jy kan dit self toets in excel met die randbetween funksie en jy sal vind dat daar min afwyking is na ongeveer 412 lesings (opinies). Dit is hoe marknavorsing gedoen word.
@Cappie: Ek is nie ‘n sikofant nie.
@Andre T – ek is die uitsondering en sal nooit die formule-gedrewe graderingstelsel kan aanvaar nie – nie omdat ek nie wil nie, maar omdat navorsing getoon het dit kan nie werk nie.
Maar moet nie my word daarvoor vat nie – doen eie navorsing of vra diegene wat werklik ingelig is.
@Djou: Sjoe Djou, hoe lyk jou perd?
Waaroor gaan die bohaai? Ons het slegs n ranglys opgestel wat ons dink op HUIDIGE vorm sou wees. Dit dra geen waarde dit word slegs vir interessantsheidsonthalwe gedoen.
Boishaaipa se ranglys word offisieel deur ons erken as die doeltreffendste.
@Djou: So julle afleidings is gebasseer op wat julle sien..maw die aaname is dat julle of alle wedstryde dus gesien het wat gespeel is of net op die resultate?…en dan verkry julle ook n gemiddeld…maw julle maak gebruik van n formule maar volgens jou kan formules nie werk nie. Dus hoe kom julle dan by n resultaat uit?..Jy maak ook n aaname dat n opinie meer akkuraat is, kan jy dit bewys?…Dis baie maklik om opinies en aanames te maak as dit nooit getoets gaan word om die teendeel te bewys nie. Soos bv dat op huidige vorm sal Monnas vir Paul Roos klop…op grond waarvan?…op ander spanne se uitslae?..Dis net iemand se opinie en dit kan net so min bewys word soos dat bewys kan word dat enige ranking stelsel akkuraat is. Die feite is dat daar wel n resultaat is en op grond van daai resultaat word n uitkoms bepaal. Ek wonder wat sal tennispelers en golfspelers daarvan dink as hulle rankings gegrond moet word op n opinie en gevoel van die administrateurs en nie op werklike resultate nie!
@BoishaaiPa: Maar dit is juis die punt wat ek heeltyd probeer maak en julle weier om te luister. Dit is dieselfde as wat iemand my sou vra watter superrugbyspan heelbo moet wees gegrond op huidige vorm. Alles is subjektief – en gegrond op opinies wat weer gegrond is op wat ons sien.
‘n Formule gaan die opinies of graderings ‘n fisiese wetenskapwet maak nie, maar dit is wat jy poog om te doen – en sommige ouens glo jou.
Niemand hoef met ons opinies saam te stem nie, maar die metodologie wat gevolg is, is dat vyf persone se graderings gekry is en die gemiddeld daarvan is bereken. En die metodologie is meer akkuraat hoe meer opinies verkry word. En terloops, ‘n menigte ingeligte en berekende opinies is meer werd as formules in ‘n veld waar formules nooit kan werk nie.
@Cappie: Ons het nie BoishaaiPa se rankings nodig om ons eie opinies te vorm nie – ons ly nie aan minderwaardigheids- en sikofantiese-komplekse dat ons heeltyd met iemand moet saamstem nie. Sommige van ons wil help, maar as die donkie nie wil luister nie, los hom. Ek het al voorheen hier gese “Hoe meer ‘n leuen verkondig word, hoe groter word die kans dat mense dit as die waarheid aanvaar.”
@BuiteBreek: Een van die dae is daar die “Oorspronklike Wit Bulle”, die “Wit, groen, geel en rooi Bulle”, die “Wit, blou en rooi Bulle”, die “Rooi Bulle” ens ens.
Die plaas ding is ook nie te moeilik nie, hulle sal beweer dat in 1920 is AHS op ‘n plaas gebou.
Dink nie dat skool ranking ooit 100% sal kan wees nie want skole speel nie teen mekaar altyd nie en n skool wat dalk presteer in Upington kan met n goeie ranking agv onoorwonne status.
Dink die rankings veral as n mens dit vergelyk met die ander sites s’n is die akkuraatste van die lot.
@Die Ken: Hulle sal hard moet kan bewys dat hulle regtig op ‘n plaas is, voor hul dit kan “steel”.
Seker met rede dat Oakdale, net Bulle genoem word.
@BoishaaiPa: Ek sou egter graag die opinies gehoor het as hulle nie jou rankings as ‘n basis gehad het om van af te werk nie.
@BoishaaiPa: Dis soos die kies van ‘n rugbyspan smaak my!
@Djou: Ek het gisteraand 4 ouens gehoor met 4 verskillende Top 10’s en menings…Watter een is dan nou reg en op watter metodologie word dit gebasseer? Subjektiewe duimsuig is seker ook n aanvaarde manier van bepaling.
@Ploegskaar: Nerens?
@BuiteBreek: @Ploegskaar: Pasop, hulle gaan “Die Plaas” by julle steel, nes hul “Die Wit Bulle” by Monnas gesteel het
@Djou: Nee jong, jy is te slim vir my. Na my mening is die formule kriteria en formule berekeninge steeds konstante instrumente, die uitslae wat ingevoer word konkreet, en word ‘n definitiewe uitkoms/ranking gelewer
HIER KOM NOG ‘n VERASSING OP WIE NR EEN GAAN EINDIG. Hou BoishaaiPa se finae ranking dop!
@McCull@McCulleys Workshop: You will find Tjoppa at Ruggas.co.za
He is working very hard!
@Gungets Tuft: I am with you mate. Also left that occupation for something far more interesting and rewarding.
Journalists, however, are so gullible. They always ask the economist, publish it and don’t ask the questions that should expose the economists for the fraud they are committing.
I think you are better off irritating people. At least you deliver a service worth the while and one that will always be needed.
@Ploegskaar: See, that is where we differ. The formula can be changed to fit any criteria.
And, the way you just proposed does not need a formula. It is easy to identify the schools that consistently perform well.
Actuaries will tell you that it is possible to quantify risk (by way of probability theory), but you can never never never ever ever calculate uncertainty by way of formula.
And here we are dealing with uncertainty, not risk.
Rugby 15 and Radio Ruggas just published their rankings. Must say it is much closer to the truth from 7 – 20. The first 6 is almost the same.
@kosie: Indeed! The ebb and flow, and the change in times. That’s why, all things being equal, one can never go wrong with a prediction where “ceteris paribus” is included as a disclaimer. See what I did there?
That’s exactly it. The clear explanation of how BHP gets his outcome is what I most appreciate. It’s his method, it may not be perfect, but the formula is there to see. That’s it…method marks…that’s how I got through maths and accounting…my answer may have been wrong, but I still got credit for showing my workings
@Playa: Even with all other things being constant, some will still have a “annus horribilis”!
The question should rather be, what unchanged or constant variables we all agree on and you would quickly find that “tempora mutantur” will constantly plague us all!
I think BHP tries to do his best, at least he can explain his outcome, something most would struggle to do!
@Gungets Tuft: Difference here is we are not trying to predict anything using assumed data, we are trying to display a order of things based on actual outcomes!..Just the methodology that is still under scrutiny, but the results is their for all to see!
Who knows what is the remaining fixtures for Monument this year?
If they go through all their games without losing I think they should go close to the number 1 spot.
Personally I think they are now the side to beat in SA.
As to us I think we will take that fourth spot for now but do not know how long we will hang onto it. Jeppe is around the corner…
@Djou: The data (results) that you feed into the constant formula criteria, is by means of the constant formula calculations, supposed to produce an outcome/ranking, which will be used in the constant formula criteria at the beginning of the next season, to establish a constant.
By my reckoning schools that are consistently successful (provide consistently good results/data) will produce a favourable outcome/ranking each year, and more or less the same constant to be used for the following year. It’s not that kind to fly-by-nights though…
@Gungets Tuft: As long as you say ‘ceteris paribus’ at the end of each economic prediction, you’ll never be wrong
@Djou: See now, I am with you. Before, when you were pulling Ploegie’s leg…I was convinced that the English we were taught at Dale was not ‘core’ English, and rather English ‘Li(g)t’…I had already begun drafting an e-mail to the headmaster requesting some sort of refund for being misled.
@Kempie Pa: Don’t worry, we don’t have a false sense of superiority, we actually know because we kicked your arses in most games!
…
Besides…All schools start of with exactly the same handicap in early season, not just the Noordvaal schools. Some schools pick up injuries through the season who can ill afford it and their season turns into a nightmare…there are many variables why teams under perform, but you cannot bring that into the equation and compromise for it. You have to play the hand you are dealt with!
@Djou: I am, due to some obvious misdeed in a previous life, also an economics graduate (before I discovered my undeniable talent for towing and irritating other road users). You are correct. The opening slide at my first ever Economics lecture had a picture of a CEO with cigar, lying back in his “swivel and tilt” saying to his economist “This is what I would like to say, go and find me some stats to back it up” ….
PS = That “swivel and tilt” … that’s his chair … snot what you thought at all
@Grasshopper: Can,t be too happy when they lose to those small private schools up the hill!!
@Playa: Another way of demonstrating it is reviewing the economic profession. They use all kinds of formulas to predict the economy. And they are wrong all the time. And nothing happens to them when they are wrong. They would have been much more cautious if they had to pay money every time their predictions are wrong, or even losing their jobs if they are wrong. They would under these stringent circumstances refrained from using formulas to predict the economy as no formula can predict uncertainty.
@Maroon: No google: Just plain math and stats principles.
@Playa: Just pulling Ploegskaar’s leg a bit.
@Grasshopper: I’d rather let you list the constant good ones and the constant bad ones.
@Buitebreek: As mens na al die kommentare kyk het min enige van die twee gehad en dit is “diep” konstant.
@BuiteBreek:
@Djou: hoe smaak daai Google?
@BoishaaiPa:
I think that the rankings is very good. The categories is the only area open to subjectivity.
The reasons why the teams perform good or bad should not be used as an excuse to change the teams rankings. As an example, I believe that Kempies is good enough to be a top 20 team but how they perform on the field does not support that notion.
I don’t think that the captains choice is a good idea as the views might be subjective.
I don’t think that Glenwood is a top 20 team this year either.
The rankings does not reflect Noordvaal teams that will be strengthened by the return of the under 19’s after the Tuks series.
I would like to see the rankings without the early tours as many teams where still developing at the time and experimenting with combinations before for example the Tuks series and now the leagues. I know that a lot of inter region games where played but a lot of the Noordvaal teams played up to 5 games in 9 days influencing the quality of the effort. This would give the Cape teams a false sense of superiority.
@Djou: Sal van die manne hier fisiese of lewenswetenskappe wees? Want ‘n paar is diep “konstant”.
@Djou: Agreed, but some schools are constantly good and others constantly kak
@BoishaaiPa: Yes, I am aware of it….I do it often too. Seriously though, as long as Glenwood beat College & Westville I’m a happy Old Boy. Occasionally beating a Boishaai, Affies, Monnas and Grey Bloem is also great but very rare…
@BoishaaiPa: See. I am going to show my lightie this post as a graphic illustration as to why he does Maths core, rather than Maths Lit like his ballie. English comprehension ook.
@Grasshopper: That’s not sarcasm boet…it’s called “taking the piss”…Don’t get too upset or think its personal, this is not as serious as some would like to believe!
@Gungets Tuft: Category of a school implies the point their opposition will receive when they win against them. If MH is a 4, their opposition will receive that Cat point. There are not many schools who avg more than 4 over the season, so most teams playing (and winning) against MH will boost their avg.
@Djou: Goeie genaade!
@Ploegskaar: The constant is not constant as the type of formula you use will change the constant and as the formula itself is not a constant it can’t produce a constant.
You will only find the true constants in physics and in some cases the natural sciences.
Some economic and social sciences are using formulas designed for physics and therefore are constantly producing constants in outcomes that equates to wrong results (forecasts).
@BoishaaiPa: Fighting the urge to step over this sleeping dog ..
.. I didn’t mean their average, I meant their category. I thought that the category came into it.
Radio Ruggas
12h00………discussion of past weekend’s results
17h30……..Top 20 rankings with Boishaaipa
18h00……..Radio Ruggas panel discussing our own Top 10 teams on CURRENT form
@Cappie: Jy is reg, ek moes Ploegie ook so paar keer lees om te verstaan. Dit laat my dink aan ‘n ou oom wat ‘n vriend van my pa was en afkomstig was van Montagu.
Hy het maar gesukkel met die Engels en as hy Engels lees, lees hy as volg: moeilike woord moeilike woord “is” moeilike woord moeilike woord “and”. Dit was sy somtotaal van Engels. Hy het maar sy hele lewe gesukkel!
@Grasshopper: If you’ve recognised all the factors which make it unreliable, then stop taking it so seriously. You’ve studied economics, you should be aware of the “on the other hand” rider to all arguments.
I respect ou BHP for his work, I admire his tenacity, and that his might be the best of the rankings, but if I allow it to twist my jock strap like you do I will end up singing soprano in the SchoolboyRugby choir …
Chill … Glenwood is Glenwood, doesn’t matter where the rankings are. If you let rankings drive decisions then some really odd things happen …
@rugbyfan: Yes and rename themselves ‘Purchasewood’ as Bonty loves to call them….
@BoishaaiPa: Ou maat, ek wens ek jou geduld hiermee gehad, ek is sommer moedeloos vir jou part! En te oordeel aan van die kommentaar wat jy kry, doodgelukkig met my nederige ND!
@Ploegskaar: Ek moes ‘n paar keer lees wat jy geskryf het, en hoe meer ek dit lees, hoe meer besef ek jy is “spot-on!”
@BoishaaiPa: hahahah, sarcasm the lowest form of wit
OK so I take a lambasting for having an opinion. Rankings should be done over a long period of time, not by season. The Top 20 for the past 5 years will show which sides/schools are consistently good. I honestly don’t care if Glenwood are top 20 or not, as long as we beat DHS, College and Westville I’m stoked. A big scalp here and there just adds to cherry to the top.
@Ploegskaar: You surely have a double masters in logic to come up with that good an analogy!
Common people think about it with all the buying Glenwood does they should be in a ‘Super League” of there own. Maybe you could call it “Someone Else’s League” as they are using someone else’s players.
@Ploegskaar: HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
@Vleis: I like that idea of the “captain’s pick”…We could give extra bonus points for a team we know is doing well below par than they should, given that they might have had a rough start with injuries or close losses, but their relative performance against top teams are not bad.
We can also have a look mid season at the schools categories and do an adjustment on their category point, moving them up or down relative to their current performance. That would be a simple exercise and all results will then be recalculated based on the new categories. Could make for a more decent and up to date barometer.
Would like to get some feedback on what the other bloggers think.
@BoishaaiPa: You are right, if you think it is statistically irrelevant, what does it matter.
I shudder at the lack of logic some apply here. In my opinion all the mentioned variables for all the teams (pathetic ref, kak coach, vrot intake, pathetic ref, injuries, pap bal, Energade running out before the game, pathetic ref) are factored into results over a 3 year period to arrive at a constant, the category value. This base constant is then used with the win/loss/draw % and bonus points, constants that apply to all teams, to formulate the ranking. Also, you must be an absolute poepsak to list upping your game for old annual derbies as a variable, as logically teams involved would do that every year, which in fact makes it a constant, which is factored into the results, to still arrive…at a constant
@BoishaaiPa: A few comments from my side:
1. I apologise if I came across as too critical, as I do think that your ranking is the best in the country – especially up to number 30.
2. Unlike Grassy, I certainly wasn’t trying to adjust my school upwards, as they are nowhere near top 50 this year anyway.
3. I agree that you shouldn’t put all the schools into one category. Tier 1 schools should all be between 4 and 5, Tier 2 schools between 3 and 4, Tier 3 schools between 2 and 3 and the tiny schools (e.g. Port Shepstone, Crawford, Reddam, etc) between 1 and 2. My points are: a) a school’s category should be able to move by one during the year depending on the season that they’re having; and b) if a school wants to move up a category permanently then it must play more schools of a higher tier – e.g. in the big schools league in Beeld rather than medium, etc.
4. I think that the perfect system would be your mathematical system (but tweaked a little as per 3 above) plus a few subjective picks – like captain’s picks in the Ryder cup. Perhaps one captain’s pick for every ten spots in the ranking – i.e. 5 in top 50. You could highlight which ones are the captains’s picks.
@Grasshopper: Yes, we all know that, but that one win or loss will not change the consistency and performance of the team as a whole during the season. It will only defy their success around Interschools on the day, but not about the rest of the season overall. Gim will still be ranked higher due to their better overall performance and that is how it should be.
@BoishaaiPa: But schoolboy rugby is not black and white, we all know that. Paarl Boys could lose to every WC school and Paarl Gim beat everyone, however on derby day that form goes out the window. Boishaai could easily win, it’s called passion and ‘wanting it’. Anyway, I wasn’t going to comment on it as I don’t believe in any of the systems, just felt it strange College still being there…..
@Grasshopper: Well if you see that as an insult, you are a little too sensitive. Throwing around credentials like that you are bound to get some comeback. You know the turtle complex?…
Anyway, we all know that you cannot quantify certain criteria, but this is a very straightforward system using win/loss and relative strength as base. I guess the Sharks should ask to be given 2 extra points each game during Super 15 coz they have such a kak coach and it’s not their fault they keep losing!..Trying to over complicate matters with unquantifiable criteria is typical over analysis.
@BoishaaiPa: As my dad, always says…Don’t bring me problems, bring me solutions. If you ‘feel’ your team should be higher, pluck out a formula and let’s see where they land. The fact that there are 5 other rankings in the country already proves that none are flawless. okes will just choose to the believe the one that places them in a cushy top 20 position….well…until it puts them at 40 the following year, then all of a sudden it’s twak…and the one that was twak the year before is now the in thing because it puts them in the top 20…and so forth and so forth…
You have a tough crowd
@Playa: Now you must know how I feel.
..As soon as someone’s team is not there where they would like them to be there is a major flaw in the system! I recall certain bloggers singing the praises of this very same system. Can’t please them all I say and move on! Accept it for what it is and trying to be and if they don’t believe in it why comment on it?. They can just ignore it for all I care…I have no problem with that either.
@BoishaaiPa: Insults are like water off a ducks back. Not sure why people do that, maybe to make themselves feel better. My point is factors like ‘workload’, ‘depth, injuries, weather conditions, ‘had a bad day’, ‘got 2 yellow cards’, rubbish ref etc cannot be quantified in a mathematical way. My gut feel is 9 times out of 10 Glenwood are better than College as an example and I think even College supporters would support that. A gutfeel Top20 would probably be more accurate. Another example, I think Glenwood were lucky vs Noord Kaap and that 9 times out of 10 Noord Kaap would beat them this year. Anyway, point made…
@Gungets Tuft: Groundhog Day
@Grasshopper: I never said its flawless, but your logic in trying to justify GW standing by comparing them to NK makes me think you should ask your money back…
@Grasshopper: Then why are you bleating about Glenwood surely being in the top 20 – you know the truth – there are lies, lies, lies damn statistics and lies. Whether MHS should be in the top 20 or not is irrelevant, because we don’t know, neither do we know if Glenwood 2nds should be in the top 100.
@BoishaaiPa: boet, I have an honours degree in commerce, majoring in stats & economics. I’m aware how the system works. It’s still severely flawed, far too many factors to get a fair system.
@Vleis: I have sent Beet the results of the adjusted categories, changing all schools on 1 and 2 to a 3. Hopefully he will post the results for you. There is not a significant change, couple of schools swop positions. I then did a calc where there are only Cat 5, 4.5 and 4 schools, thus everyone on a much more even category and the results is obviously very different. This resulted in a school like Oos-Moot being in the top 5 and with all due respect, I doubt they really belong there ahead of Affies, Monnas etc. Rugbyman will get a hernia if we use that methodology as this pushed Garsies way out to No 65! There must be a category system where schools are tiered in a way with the obviously stronger schools at least 2 to 3 points ahead of weaker teams.
@Grasshopper: Then you will also understand that you cannot just use one or two examples that works in your favor to compare. GW also lost 5 games, two in which they did not get any points. NK only lost 2 games so far. Other teams successes influence your teams ranking as well. They are thus statistically doing better than you, hence their better ranking.
@Vleis: Thanks for the feedback. The tier 2 schools like Stellenberg and Tygerberg are currently at Cat 4. What I will do is a comparative ranking moving all Cat 1 and 2 Schools up to Cat 3. I will then post all the schools and their categories and see what result we get. Remember that I have never claimed that this is a foolproof system and that I know there is lots of different criteria that can influence the outcome of a game, but with input we can try and develop it into some sort of believable barometer.
@Gungets Tuft: If you look at the averages, there is actually only 3 schools who have an average above 4. So anyone else playing a 4.5 and winning will gain in their averages. The teams winning and playing strong opposition will be at an advantage and that is what you would like to see. If House can beat the likes of Glenwood and MC don’t they deserve their spot?
@Grasshopper: I’m going to regret engaging here because, with due respect to the people that do the rankings and publish them, I don’t mean to distespect their work, I think rankings are mostly subjective, don’t take into account the many influences of schoolboy rugby, such as the old rivalries that have schools play well above themselves in certain circumstances.
Your problem with House is that, despite them being ranked well, they’re only a 4.5 school, so even beating then narrowly could DROP you a place or two. That’s the weird one for me, but such is life. House doing well in KZN, but playing few other matches, even fewer outside KZN, means they can topple a few “5” schools and their ranking is in orbit.
I’ve already contributed more than I like to rankings, so out of this, I will read on because maybe BHP will put me right.
@McCulleys Workshop: yes, like the House 2nds too…
@Grasshopper: Glenwood 2nds are top 20 material.
@Gungets Tuft: but Glenwood beat Noord Kaap and lost to Michaelhouse by 5. I know it’s not linear, remember I work in analytics. Glenwood realistically is Top 20 at least…
What has happened to Tjoppa?
@Speartackle: Hahaha
@Ploegskaar: I’d include them in Cat 3, along with all the other Tier 2 schools that play a good proportion of their season against Tier 1 schools.
So, for example, I’d have all the Cape Tier 1 schools between 4 and 5 – they should be moved around during the year depending on that particular season’s results. Likewise, I’d have all the Cape Tier 2 schools between 3 and 4, also moved around during the season – e.g. Stellenberg, Belville, Tygerberg, etc would be at 4 this year. Indeed, Tygerberg would get moved to 4 most years.
Of course, St John’s and Saints have had weaker 1st teams in the past few years, which may indicate that a cat 3 rating is inflated. On the other hand, St John’s sent weakened age group teams down to the Cape this year and still won 33% of their games v the Cape Tier 1 schools. Equally, St Alban’s are having a nightmare season with 12 players out injured, incl. captain (fly-half) and vice captain (8th man), but still managed to lose by only 11 away to Jeppe (ranked 16th) on Saturday, so I don’t see them being categorised at a level of 2 either.
@Speartackle: Wil net seker maak, is daai Bul se knolle nie een of ander tyd verwyder nie? Dit maak dit dan eerder ‘n plot met ‘n plastiek os
@Speartackle: Baie respek vir AHS, maar moet die die PTA manne reghelp. Dis so goed Rustenburg noem homself ‘n kusdorp omdat Sun City se branders 50km daarvan is.
Sal julle asb met meer respek van AHS Pretoria praat
@BuiteBreek: Ja, klink vir my ook meer soos ‘n groente of kruie tuin, met ‘n plastiek bul in plaas van ‘n Stodels tuin-dwerg.
@Ploegskaar: ‘n redelike klein plot. Meer so vir ‘n stokperdjie as iets ernstigs.
@Speartackle: Miskien moet DSTV ‘n realiteitsprogram begin, “I wanna be a farmer”. Slegs skoolseuns mag inskryf.
@BuiteBreek: Ouderdom is n lelike ding hoor
@Vleis: For interest sake, where would you categorize St. John’s and St. Stithians?
@BuiteBreek: Klink meer soos ‘n plot, nê?
Sien op Netwerk24 ‘n groot plakkaat wat die naweek daar op Affies se pawiljoen gehang het, waarop staan “Welkom op die Plaas”? Ek is bekommerd oor die standaard van ondderig in PTA, as drie rugbyvelde en ‘n bul klassifiseer as ‘n Plaas.
@Lindenpa: I agree. As I’ve said before, the significant weakness in this system is from about 30 down as BHP thumb sucks the ‘category level’ of schools outside the W Cape – often underestimating them.
A much fairer system would be to categorise the super schools at 5 or 4.5 points and then all the remaining tier 1 schools at 4 points. All the ‘tier 2 schools’ that play some fixture against the tier 1 schools should be at 3 points – e.g. Brackenfell, Belville, St Benedict’s, Northwood, Helpies, Linden, etc.
Ai, ek probeer hard om die rankings te ignoreer want dit is tog net vir die pret. Om Linden egter as `n B-liga skool te klassifiseer terwyl ander skole wat ook in die Beeldtrofee vir groot skole speel as A-liga geklassifiseer word, is net nie reg nie. Wat het Heidelberg Volkies bv. die afgelope paar jare gedoen om so `n klassifikasie te regverdig? Hulle het hierdie jaar `n goeie eerstespan, maar dit is die uitsondering eerder as die reel.
Daar is `n paar ander voorbeelde ook (Vereeniging Gim, Ben Vorster, Potch Gim ens.), maar miskien moet ek net stilbly en dit aanvaar…. Kyk maar of ons bo in die B-liga kan eindig
.
Hoe lyk dit my die ses skole met die beste “track record” is nou bo-op die log?
@Speartackle: @BoishaaiPa: die top 6 (in watter volgorde ookal) sou 80% van die blogbesoekers se top 6 in die begin vd jaar gewees het. So, in geheel gesien, maak dit sin… 1 tot 6 is so naby aanmekaar dat elkeen vd 6 met “swings en roundabouts” daar hoort.
@Speartackle: Ja, maar na 5 jaar as Grey en paar Kaapse skole al is wat die trofee gewen het gaan julle gatvol raak en weer iets anders probeer!
@BoishaaiPa: Wragies net twee top 20 spanne sonder ‘n koshuis behalwe as ‘n paar onlangs gesluit het. Dus, kry ‘n koshuis en die ranking pad is oop.
@BoishaaiPa: Geld wat stom is…..maak reg wat krom is
@Grasshopper: my sentiments exactly . All too confusing for my standard grade brain to compute. Keep it simple for us laymen . Top 50 and that is that.
An alternative which could work . We should have 2 sections in KZN ,1ST and 2ND tier. 6 in each section. Early in the season you paly your festival games(3) in total. You then revert back to your region and play a home and away basis.
@Speartackle: Julle probleem sal wees dat indien alle skole nie inkoop nie sal dit maar net nog n afgewaterde kompetisie wees…As skole soos Grey, Paul Roos, Bishops, Affies ens uit n streek nie daaraan deelneem nie sal daar nooit geloofwaardigheid aan die toernooi wees nie. Amper soos die World Cup rugby sonder Suid Afrika!…Dis soos die Burger toernooi hier in die Kaap…die WP verteenwoordiger word sommer gekies uit die skool wat kapasiteit het om te speel…Die trofee het nie werklik groot prestige nie. Nie soos in die Noorde vir die Beeld Trofee nie.
@Pinotage: Kwalifiseer asseblief veranderlikes
@Speartackle: Baie eenvoudig..moenie jou blindstaar teen waar die spanne op die ranking is nie..dit gaan nog steeds wat die kategorie punt is…Paul Roos het Wynberg (5) gewen terwyl Gim vir SACS (4) punte gewen het..PR dus 1 punt meer verdien en hul gemiddeld verbeter…Monnas speel teen laer kategorie spanne…SACS kon geen bonuspunte verdien nie..wys jou naby die spanne aan mekaar is…as jy n nulletjie optel op n Saterdag kan jy paar plekke val!
@Pinotage: Nee jong die super moonthede skop lelik vas daarteen. Hulle speel mos vir die genot van rugby met hul 36 spanne sonder telborde en hulle kyk ook gladnie nie na rankings nie veral as die borgskappe onderhandel word.
En al hierdie jarelange tradisionele derbies en interskole sal onder gedrang kom en die kinders in die 0/16 G span sal dan teen Motherwell se 0/23 B span moet speel en nog n duisend ander kuk redes. Nee ek stem saam met jou ……….Bring on the Radio Ruggas National Schools Rugby Championships
@Grasshopper: This was explained in the Regional Rankings thread posted last week.
@Speartackle: Die rankings kan NOOIT 100% akkuraat wees nie.Daar is net te veel veranderlikes. Is die tyd egter nie ryp vir n compo soortgelyk aan die Coke T20 krieket nie? Dit is n uitstekende formaat waar n Nasionale wenner bepaal word. Kry n wenner in elke Provinsie en speel tot jy n wenner het. O shit maar die puriste gaan my nou seker stenig. Ek sit solank my seun se krieket helmet op.
@BOG: Ek sien n Old Grey het darem n golftoernooi in Swaziland gewen……………..
Hoe is Monnas in die top 20? Jy kan mos nie ODIs met toetse vergelyk nie. Ook nie D/N wedstryde met dagwedstryde nie.
@Cappie: Eldoraigne is in Centurion so jy is reg, daar is net 1 skool van Pretoria en dan ook net 1 van Centurion.
Nee Pniel…….hierdie week maak baie dinge nie vir my sin maar ek sal maar wag dat T jou uitmekaar haal oor Paarl Gim wat sak na hulle nr 4 verwoes en Grey spring as hulle net een helfte speel en Paarl Roos spring ook as hulle n Premier 2 span wen en Monnas daal na 2 honderdtalle en nr 4 van verlede week sak 10 plekke………
@Cappie: Ek verneem dat Ruggas beplan n Casper/Spear show elke week. Ek oorweeg dit nog
@Speartackle: Janee..mense moet n slag lees wat Beet bo-aan die artikels skryf en nie net aandonner en hulle eie afleidings maak nie!
@BoishaaiPa: Lyk my jy en Andre T sal jou Top 20 show in engels moet doen sodat die soutpielare ook kan verstaan
@Grasshopper: The mind boggles to have to explain it week after week. Different criteria accounts for different rankings. Only games played against other regional opposition count.
@Cappie: jy krap nou waar dit nie jeuk, jy gaan net vir spear wakker maak
@Grasshopper: I think it relates to the effect of out-of-province opposition. College beat Grey High, PBHS, Parktown. Glenwood lost a few to out of province teams.
Ask me again why I hate the rankings …
Ek dink BoishaaiPa wag net nog vir Tuine se uitslae, dan sal die top 50 op wees.
This makes no sense, Glenwood are No2 in KZN in the regional ranking but below Maritzburg College here. Glenwood spanked College but don’t feature here….the mind boggles.
@Speartackle: O genade, jy is reg! Hulle is ook in Pretoria. Blou Maandag!
@Cappie: Is Eldoraigne in KZN?
Net een skool van Pretoria in die top 20?
Ek sien daar is spanne wat die leër mooi klim. Ja, ek sal ook graag wil sien hoe het dinge verander laer af tot by nr 50. Ek is seker Garsies moet nou al in wees.
@CharlesZA: I agree, please bring the top 50 back.Thanks.
Why not top50 anymore?