The Adjusted League Table

[MikeUpNorth]

Updated: 27th Feb

Those of you who listen to Over the Bar will already be familiar with Peter Storey's league table, but it deserves it's own thread. It will be kept updated throughout the season.

The idea of the table is to adjust the points according to the difficulty of the fixtures already played, with the idea being the team at the top is best placed to win the league. The scoring system is as follows:

Win home fixtures (57 pts)
Win away fixtures v bottom 8 (24 pts)
Draw away fixtures v middle 8 (8 pts)
Lose away fixtures v other top 4 (0pts)

This gives you 89 points, and almost certainly the title. The current net points table is shown below (with 0 being on target for 89 points):

=1. United - 3

Spoiler

Birmingham (h) 0
Burnley (a) -3
Wigan (a) 0
Arsenal (h) 0
Spurs (a) +2
Man City (h) 0
Stoke (a) +2
Sunderland (h) -2
Bolton (h) 0
Liverpool (a) 0
Blackburn (h) 0
Chelsea (a) 0
Everton (h) 0
Portsmouth (a) 0
West Ham (a) +2
Aston Villa (h) -3
Wolves (h) 0
Fulham (a) -1
Hull (a) 0
Wigan (h) 0
Birmingham (a) -2
Burnley (h) 0
Hull (h) 0
Arsenal (a) +3
Portsmouth (h) 0
Aston Villa (a) 0
Everton (a) -1
West Ham (h) 0
Wolves (a) 0

=1. Arsenal -3

Spoiler

Everton (a) +2
Portsmouth (h) 0
Man Utd (a) 0
Man City (a) -1
Wigan (h) 0
Fulham (a) +2
Blackburn (h) 0
Birmingham (h) 0
West Ham (a) 0
Tottenham (h) 0
Wolves (a) 0
Sunderland (a) -1
Chelsea (h) -3
Stoke (h) 0
Liverpool (a) +3
Burnley (a) -2
Hull (h) 0
Aston Villa (h) 0
Portsmouth (a) 0
Everton (h) -2
Bolton (a) 0
Bolton (h) 0
Aston Villa (a) 0
Man Utd (h) -3
Chelsea (a) 0
Liverpool (h) 0
Sunderland (h) 0
Stoke (a) +2
Burnley (h) 0

3. Chelsea -6

Spoiler

Hull (h) 0
Sunderland (a) +2
Fulham (a) +2
Burnley (h) 0
Stoke (a) +2
Spurs (h) 0
Wigan (a) -3
Liverpool (h) 0
Aston Villa (a) -1
Blackburn (h) 0
Bolton (a) 0
Man Utd (h) 0
Wolves (h) 0
Arsenal (a) +3
Man City (a) -1
Everton (h) -2
Portsmouth (h) 0
West Ham (a) 0
Birmingham (a) -2
Fulham (h) 0
Sunderland (h) 0
Birmingham (h) 0
Burnley (a) 0
Hull (a) -2
Arsenal (h) 0
Everton (a) -1
Wolves (a) 0
Man City (h) -3

4. Liverpool - 14

Spoiler

Spurs (a) -1
Stoke (h) 0
Villa (h) -3
Bolton (a) 0
Burnley (h) 0
West Ham (a) +2
Hull (h) 0
Chelsea (a) 0
Sunderland (a) -1
Man Utd (h) 0
Fulham (a) -1
Birmingham (h) -2
Man City (h) -2
Everton (a) + 2
Blackburn (a) -2
Arsenal (h) -3
Wigan (h) 0
Portsmouth (a) -3
Wolves (h) 0
Aston Villa (a) + 2
Stoke (a) 0
Spurs (h) 0
Wolves (a) -2
Bolton (h) 0
Everton (h) 0
Arsenal (a) 0
Man City (a) 0
Blackburn (h) 0

This is based on the following groupings of teams, which will now be fixed for the season:
Top Four: Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool
Middle Eight: Everton, Man City, Spurs, Aston Villa, Fulham, West Ham, Sunderland, Stoke
Bottom Eight: Wigan, Blackburn, Bolton, Hull, Portsmouth, Burnley, Wolves, Birmingham

 

[Laphroaig]

Rowem made an alternative system. His rules are thus:

I like Peter's points system. If you wanted to make it more accurate then you could change it to include probabilities. This would reward tricky results with a certain amount of points, based on difficulty. Something like:

Home games against bottom 12: Aim to get 36/36 points (3 points per game). Scoring system remains the same.
Home games against the upper middle 4: Aim to get 10/12 points (2.5 ppg). For a win you get +0.5 points, a draw -1.5 points, a defeat -2.5 points.
Home games against top 4: Aim to get 6/9 points (2 ppg). Win = + 1 pt. Draw = -1 pt. Defeat = -2 pts.

Away against the bottom 6: Aim to get 15.5/18 points (2.5 ppg). Win = +.5, Draw = -1.5, Defeat = -2.5.
Away against the lower middle 6: Aim to get 12/18 points (2 ppg). Win = + 1, Draw = -1, Defeat = -2.
Away against the upper middle 4: Aim to get 7/12 points (1.75 ppg). Win = + 1.25, Draw = -.75, Defeat = -1.75
Away against the top 4: Aim to get 3/9 points (1 ppg). Win = +2, Draw = 0, Defeat = -1.

Total points required = 89.5. I did it that way so that the numbers would work nicely. Might be a bit complicated but I think it's more accurate.

The teams are rated like this:
Bottom 6: Pompey, Hull, Burnley, Birmingham, Wolves, Bolton
Lower middle 6: Fulham, West Ham, Stoke, Sunderland, Wigan, Blackburn
Upper middle 4: Everton, Aston Villa, Spurs, Man City
Top 4: Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool

1. United - 3.25

Spoiler

Birmingham (h) 0
Burnley (a) -2.5
Wigan (a) + 1
Arsenal (h) + 1
Spurs (a) + 1.25
Man City (h) + 0.5
Stoke (a) + 1
Sunderland (h) -2
Bolton (h) 0
Liverpool (a) -1
Blackburn (h) 0
Chelsea (a) - 1
Everton (h) + 1
Pompey (a) + 0.5
West Ham (a) + 1
Aston Villa (h) - 2.5
Wolves (h) 0
Fulham (a) - 2
Hull (a) + 0.5
Wigan (h) 0
Birmingham (a) - 1.5
Burnley (h) 0
Hull (h) 0
Arsenal (a) + 2
Pompey (h) 0
Villa (a) - 0.75
Everton (a) - 1.75
West Ham (h) 0
Wolves (a) + 0.5
Fulham (h) 0
Liverpool (h) + 1
Bolton (a) + 0.5

2. Chelsea - 4.75

Spoiler

Hull (h) 0
Sunderland (a) + 1
Fulham (a) + 1
Burnley (h) 0
Stoke (a) + 1
Spurs (h) + 0.5
Wigan (a) - 2
Liverpool (h) + 1
Villa (a) - 1.75
Blackburn (h) 0
Bolton (a) + 0.5
Man Utd (h) + 1
Wolves (h) 0
Arse (a) + 2
City (a) - 1.75
Everton (h) - 1.5
Portsmouth (h) 0
West Ham (a) - 1
Birmingham (a) - 1.5
Fulham (h) 0
Sunderland (h) 0
Birmingham (h) 0
Burnley (a) + 0.5
Hull (a) - 1.5
Arsenal (h) + 1
Everton (a) - 1.75
Wolves (a) + 0.5
Man City (h) - 2.5
West Ham (h) 0
Blackburn (a) - 1
Villa (h) + 0.5

2. Arsenal - 6.75

Spoiler

Everton (a) + 1.25
Portsmouth (h) 0
Man Utd (a) -1
Man City (a) -1.75
Wigan (h) 0
Fulham (a) + 1
Blackburn (h) 0
Birmingham (h) 0
West Ham (a) - 1
Spurs (h) + 0.5
Wolves (a) + 0.5
Sunderland (a) - 2
Chelsea (h) - 2
Stoke (h) 0
Liverpool (a) + 2
Burnley (a) - 1.5
Hull (h) 0
Villa (h) + 0.5
Pompey (a) + 0.5
Everton (h) - 1.5
Bolton (a) + 0.5
Bolton (h) 0
Villa (a) - 0.75
Man Utd (h) - 2
Chelsea (a) - 1
Liverpool (h) + 1
Sunderland (h) 0
Stoke (a) + 1
Burnley (h) 0
Hull (a) + 0.5
West Ham 0
Birmingham (a) - 1.5

4. Liverpool - 19

Spoiler

Spurs (a) -1.75
Stoke (h) 0
Villa (h) -2.5
Bolton (a) + 0.5
Burnley (h) 0
West Ham (a) + 1
Hull (h) 0
Chelsea (a) - 1
Sunderland (a) - 2
Man Utd (h) + 1
Fulham (a) - 2
Birmingham (h) - 2
Man City (h) - 1.5
Everton (a) + 1.25
Blackburn (a) - 2.5
Arsenal (h) - 2
Wigan (h) 0
Pompey (a) - 2.5
Wolves (h) 0
Bolton (h) 0
Everton (h) + 0.5
Arsenal (a) - 1
City (a) - 0.75
Blackburn (h) 0
Wigan (a) - 2
Man Utd (a) - 1

Updated 28.03

 

[Solius]

I am incredibly confused right now.

 

[Laphroaig]

The points system is based on the idea that 89 points win the league. 89 "real points" are 0 points in these systems, the purpose of the system is to see whether a team is on or behind schedule.

 

[olesmyhero]

That's a lot of work, for not much reward.

 

[Sarni]

Shouldn't a victory over Wigan give us +2?

 

[MikeUpNorth]

That's a lot of work, for not much reward.

As the season progresses it should give a fairly decent indication of how the teams are performing in relation to each other as the fixture list is not evenly distributed.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

Shouldn't a victory over Wigan give us +2?

No, Wigan have been designated a 'bottom 8' team for the purposes of calculation.

 

[SmashedHombre]

That's a lot of work, for not much reward.

Ha agreed. It's interesting, but really quite pointless. You can't predict the League with any sort of formula, and you certainly can't predict it this early on. Really that table doesn't show us anything we don't already know

 

[Cal?]

We're on -3pts compared to my preseason predictions, I thought we'd be top with a 100% record.

Bloody Burnley.

 

[Ramshock]

what a load of wank

 

[Laphroaig]

Good input, grumpy.

 

[Addis]

Nice idea, shame it's completely useless though.

The number of other factors that haven't (and can't) be considered makes it like trying to predict what will happen in an F1 race.

 

[Laphroaig]

The number of other factors that haven't (and can't) be considered makes it like trying to predict what will happen in an F1 race.

It's not an attempt at predicting anything, as far as I know. The systems are based on the assumption that it takes 89 points to win the league, but that's an assumption and not a prediction. What factors haven't been considered here that you feel ought to be?

 

[Cal?]

It's not an attempt at predicting anything, as far as I know. The systems are based on the assumption that it takes 89 points to win the league, but that's an assumption and not a prediction. What factors haven't been considered here that you feel ought to be?

No team wins the league by winning all their home games, in fact, I'd argue that beating other top 4 teams at home is much harder than beating the so called mid-8 away.

 

[Mockney]

I think a team should be awarded brownie points for wearing an attractive kit. And if at least one player makes onto Gay Times Sexiest Man of the Year list they should get 6

 

[Addis]

I think a team should be awarded brownie points for wearing an attractive kit. And if at least one player makes onto Gay Times Sexiest Man of the Year list they should get 6

True. Were it not for Ronaldo we'd be 19-16 down by now.

 

[Mockney]

True. Were it not for Ronaldo we'd be 19-16 down by now.

Indeed...Fergie works to much the same system, the whole Ronaldinho chase was a ruse, he would never have sold Beckham if he didn't know we'd get Ronaldo, it would've been suicide..David was like Jesus to the gays. We're in for it now though, I'm just holding out hope Berba will oil himself up for a pants ad soon, he's got potential

 

[p_ps_sock]

too much like a RAWK thread, convoluted and unnecessary

 

[talking robot]

Rowem made an alternative system. His rules are thus:


1. Chelsea + 3

Spoiler

Hull (h) 0
Sunderland (a) + 1
Fulham (a) + 1
Burnley (h) 0
Stoke (a) + 1

2. United + 0.75

Spoiler

Birmingham (h) 0
Burnley (a) -2.5
Wigan (a) + 1
Arsenal (h) + 1
Spurs (a) + 1.25

3. Arsenal - 1.5

Spoiler

Everton (a) + 1.25
Portsmouth (h) 0
Man Utd (a) -1
Man City (a) -1.75

4. Liverpool - 3.75

Spoiler

Spurs (a) -1.75
Stoke (h) 0
Villa (h) -2.5
Bolton (a) + 0.5
Burnley (h) 0

Man City + 1.5

Spoiler

Blackburn (a) +0.5
Wolves (h) 0
Portsmouth (a) +0.5
Arsenal (h) + 0.5

I don't agree with any "adjusted" league table where United is not top. I mean, if you're gonna adjust it, at least do it right.

 

[Kraftwerker]

It's not that bad an idea to be fair.

For instance, last year we had alot of tough fixtures in the first half, many of which we dropped points in. On the other hand, the scousers had alot of easy games, some of which they dropped points in. So although they were ahead of us in November/December on points, technically we were still in a better position to win the title.

Lots of our fans said this at the time, and this is just a fairly interesting way of calculating that aspect.

 

[Decotron]

I think both systems work, basically just look at whose 4th under both sets of rules. Cant argue with that!!!!

 

[Jopub]

whatever system ses we are champs in the end is good

I'll go with that !

 

[CnutOfAllCnuts]

Retarded

 

[MikeUpNorth]

You lot are so easy to please.

 

[FortBoyard]

Doesn't this prove to a point that this table is meaningless at the moment, mainly because Man City have a 100% record but are third in this system. We will have to wait a long time before we can garner anything from this as not enough fixtures have been played out.

 

[HsJ]

too much like a RAWK thread, convoluted and unnecessary

This is about right.

 

[Plechazunga]

Doesn't this prove to a point that this table is meaningless at the moment, mainly because Man City have a 100% record but are third in this system. We will have to wait a long time before we can garner anything from this as not enough fixtures have been played out.

On the contrary, pete's system is meaningful from the start of the season, because it ascribes value to matches based on who's playing.

Whereas the normal league table is pretty much meaningless until everyone's played enough games for a pattern to emerge. With the normal table you can't deduce much from the fact that in week 2 United have played Arsenal and Villa away and are four points behind Chelsea who have played Hull and Sunderland at home.

As the season progresses the normal table will get increasingly accurate at reflecting the form of the teams over the course of the year, but there can still be anomalies for a long while, as last year when we played so many tough matches in the first half.

 

[dumbo]

I like the idea. It's like par in golf.

It will be interesting to see how it pans out, whether it proves to be pretty accurate or if it is total bollocks during the season.

Good work mike.

 

[Gillespie]

That Peter Storey is a genius and a jolly nice chap too

 

[MikeUpNorth]

I like the idea. It's like par in golf.

Why couldn't I think of that analogy? It's such a nice easy way of describing it. Well done.

 

[Plechazunga]

When you think about it, it's kind of like the concept of par, in golf

 

[Gillespie]

When you think about it, it's kind of like the concept of par, in golf

Still the resident intellectual, eh, Plech?

 

[MiamiSpartan]

Triple bogey against Burnley, and an Eagle at Spurs.

I liked it when Peter brought it up in the podcast. Good idea for a thread to keep track of it.

 

[kelvinhole]

It's not that bad an idea to be fair.

For instance, last year we had alot of tough fixtures in the first half, many of which we dropped points in. On the other hand, the scousers had alot of easy games, some of which they dropped points in. So although they were ahead of us in November/December on points, technically we were still in a better position to win the title.

Lots of our fans said this at the time, and this is just a fairly interesting way of calculating that aspect.

I think the most interesting example from last season must have been Chelsea.

Even when they were sitting pretty at the top of the table having won six or seven straight away games at the start of the season, the 'adjusted' league table showed them to have -10 or something, because of their horrible home record.

Little wonder they ended up third in the end.

 

[Bearded but no genius]

We're on -3pts compared to my preseason predictions, I thought we'd be top with a 100% record.

Bloody Burnley.

Good old Cal.

 

[peterstorey]

I think the most interesting example from last season must have been Chelsea.

Even when they were sitting pretty at the top of the table having won six or seven straight away games at the start of the season, the 'adjusted' league table showed them to have -10 or something, because of their horrible home record.

Little wonder they ended up third in the end.

I'm pretty sure I posted a table around Xmas with Man Utd about +2, Liverpool -1,Chelsea -10, and Arsenal -12. Can't seem to find it now.

 

[eric le roi]

Some people have way too much time on their hands...

 

[FortBoyard]

On the contrary, pete's system is meaningful from the start of the season, because it ascribes value to matches based on who's playing.

Whereas the normal league table is pretty much meaningless until everyone's played enough games for a pattern to emerge. With the normal table you can't deduce much from the fact that in week 2 United have played Arsenal and Villa away and are four points behind Chelsea who have played Hull and Sunderland at home.

As the season progresses the normal table will get increasingly accurate at reflecting the form of the teams over the course of the year, but there can still be anomalies for a long while, as last year when we played so many tough matches in the first half.

Yes but this is still entirely reflective of who you have played. Man City haven't had the chance to face a team to get points off while Chelsea have, so it has the exact same flaws, ie it takes ages for a pattern to emerge and the early pattern is entirely based on fixtures.

In other words just use your brain to establish who is on form.

 

[Im red2]