The Methodology of Officially Recognized International Sports Rating Systems
A comprehensive comparative survey is presented, covering official rating systems as published by internationally recognized sports federations. Mind sports and physical sports are both included. As of November 2010, competitions in 159 international sports are organized by sports federations recognized by the IOC, Sport Accord and by Wikipedia identified under List of International Sport Federations. Of the 159 sports, 18 are combat sports in which opponents are in direct physical contact as in boxing and wrestling, 74 are independent sports in which significant contact is not allowed as in swimming and archery and 67 are object sports in which indirect contact is allowed while opponents attempt to control an object as in basketball and chess. Of the 159 sports, 60 sports have no rating system, two combat sports have a subjective rating system, 84 sports have an accumulative system in which points accrue non-decreasingly over some window of time, and 13 sports have an adjustive system in which a rating self adjusts based on the difference between some observed result and a prediction of that result based on past performance. For accumulative rating systems, features include converting results to points, ageing results more than one year old, and possibly adjusting points using other performance measures. Such systems are favored by tournament organizers who want to encourage many top competitors to enter as for skiing and tennis. The adjustive systems include Elo, probit and averaging methods. These systems are favored for their technical sophistication by sports such as chess, draughts, go, cricket, and womens soccer. This study thus identifies the observed successful methodology used by the various sports federations to publish comparative ratings. Predictive success of certain rating systems are tabulated for FIBA world championship basketball, Grand Slam tennis and FIFA mens world cup soccer.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 7 (2011)
Issue (Month): 4 (October)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.degruyter.com|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jqas|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Ruth N. Bolton & Randall G. Chapman, 1986. "Searching for Positive Returns at the Track: A Multinomial Logit Model for Handicapping Horse Races," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(8), pages 1040-1060, August.
- Raymond Stefani, 1997. "Survey of the major world sports rating systems," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(6), pages 635-646.
- Stefani Ray & Pollard Richard, 2007. "Football Rating Systems for Top-Level Competition: A Critical Survey," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-22, July.
- Trono John A., 2010. "Rating/Ranking Systems, Post-Season Bowl Games, and "The Spread"," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 6(3), pages 1-20, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:7:y:2011:i:4:n:10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.