Part of the NAF ranking system is based on NAF coaches present in the event:
But I wonder if, for team events, this is correct forumla to use? Wouldn't/shouldn't it be based on the number of teams in an event, rather than players? As I understood it (many years ago, so please correct me if I've got it wrong) the bigger events (i.e. more players) get a higher K-value because it's harder to get multiple wins, as there's more chance of playing someone with an equal (within reason) record than at a smaller event, where that might not be possible.The number of NAF coaches in the tournament determines K-Value in this equation. The formula is:
K-Value = (Square Root (Number of NAF coaches) ) * 2
The Majors have a fixed K-value, regardless of how many are actually in attendance. This is based on 60 coaches, but then double points are awarded. Eurobowl is also now treated as a Major for ranking points.
And I have no issue with that.
But although team events might have high numbers, the potential pool of players is a lot smaller.
For example:
One year, both the ARBBL Open and Pick'n'Mix have 36 coaches.
At the ARBBL Open, I can draw one of 35 coaches. I win the first game, so I have a pool of 34 opponents for round 2.
At the P'n'M (team of 3), I can only draw one of 35 coaches for round 1 (as it's picked on team then coach within team). I also win the first game, but now I only have a pool of 10 opponents (1 coach per team who is in the same position as me within their respective team).
So, should Team events going forward (and historically?) have a K-value based on the number of teams rather than players, or have I missed something blindingly obvious within the whole ranking forumla?
(And before anyone asks, my rankings would take a hit if this was applied in most cases, so I'm not asking for my benefit. )