IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pab/wpaper/22.11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Pairwise contests: wins, losses, and strength

Author

Listed:
  • Carmen Herrero

    (Department of Economics, Universidad de Alicante;)

  • Antonio Villar

    (Department of Economics, Universidad Pablo de Olavide & ISEAK)

Abstract

Sports competitions represent an interesting family of evaluation problems involving pairwise comparisons. In this context, the alternatives are contending teams, and the comparison is made in terms of outcomes. Different evaluation protocols have been proposed in the literature, aimed at getting more robust estimates of the teams’ worth or better predictions of their future achievements. We present here a new evaluation protocol that can be described in two steps. First, we modify the teams’ outcomes by introducing a penalty function that ponders the points accrued by the points lost. This step already produces an interesting evaluation procedure, the relative performance rule (the ratio between points won and points lost). Second, we define a new procedure that also considers the strength of the teams in the evaluation. We call this new evaluation protocol the relative strength rule.

Suggested Citation

  • Carmen Herrero & Antonio Villar, 2022. "Pairwise contests: wins, losses, and strength," Working Papers 22.11, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:pab:wpaper:22.11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.upo.es/serv/bib/wps/econ2211.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Albarrán, Pedro & Herrero, Carmen & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Villar, Antonio, 2017. "The Herrero-Villar approach to citation impact," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 625-640.
    2. Saaty, Thomas L., 2003. "Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 85-91, February.
    3. Baback Vaziri & Shaunak Dabadghao & Yuehwern Yih & Thomas L. Morin, 2018. "Properties of sports ranking methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 69(5), pages 776-787, May.
    4. Giora Slutzki & Oscar Volij, 2006. "Scoring of web pages and tournaments—axiomatizations," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 26(1), pages 75-92, January.
    5. Baback Vaziri & Yuehwern Yih & Tom Morin, 2018. "A proposed voting scheme to reduce the sensitivity of the Markov method," International Journal of Operational Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 32(1), pages 24-40.
    6. Liebowitz, S J & Palmer, J P, 1984. "Assessing the Relative Impacts of Economic Journals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 77-88, March.
    7. Govan Anjela Y & Langville Amy N & Meyer Carl D, 2009. "Offense-Defense Approach to Ranking Team Sports," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, January.
    8. Herrero, Carmen & Villar, Antonio, 2021. "Group decisions from individual rankings: The Borda–Condorcet rule," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 757-765.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carmen Herrero & Antonio Villar, 2022. "Sports competitions and the Break-Even rule," Working Papers 22.13, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    2. Herrero, Carmen & Villar, Antonio, 2021. "Group decisions from individual rankings: The Borda–Condorcet rule," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 757-765.
    3. Gabrielle Demange, 2012. "On the influence of a ranking system," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(2), pages 431-455, July.
    4. ,, 2014. "A ranking method based on handicaps," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(3), September.
    5. Itay Fainmesser & Chaim Fershtman & Neil Gandal, 2009. "A Consistent Weighted Ranking Scheme With an Application to NCAA College Football Rankings," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 10(6), pages 582-600, December.
    6. Demange, Gabrielle, 2017. "Mutual rankings," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 35-42.
    7. Gonzalez-Diaz, J. & Hendrickx, R.L.P. & Lohmann, E.R.M.A., 2011. "Paired Comparisons Analysis : An Axiomatic Approach to Rankings in Tournaments," Discussion Paper 2011-116, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    8. Sprumont, Yves, 2018. "Ranking by rating," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(1), January.
    9. Gabrielle Demange, 2011. "On the influence of rankings," PSE Working Papers halshs-00589657, HAL.
    10. Julio González-Díaz & Ruud Hendrickx & Edwin Lohmann, 2014. "Paired comparisons analysis: an axiomatic approach to ranking methods," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(1), pages 139-169, January.
    11. Carmen Herrero & Antonio Villar, 2018. "The Balanced Worth: A Procedure to Evaluate Performance in Terms of Ordered Attributes," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 1279-1300, December.
    12. Gonzalez-Diaz, J. & Hendrickx, R.L.P. & Lohmann, E.R.M.A., 2011. "Paired Comparisons Analysis : An Axiomatic Approach to Rankings in Tournaments," Other publications TiSEM 2dbfd64d-2a1b-445c-86c6-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Csató, László & Petróczy, Dóra Gréta, 2021. "On the monotonicity of the eigenvector method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(1), pages 230-237.
    14. Fang, Lei, 2022. "Measuring and decomposing group performance under centralized management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(3), pages 1006-1013.
    15. Jean Heck & Peter Zaleski, 2006. "The most frequent contributors to the elite economics journals: Half century of contributions to the “Blue ribbon eight”," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 30(1), pages 1-37, March.
    16. Pantelis Kalaitzidakis & Theofanis P. Mamuneas & Thanasis Stengos, 2011. "An updated ranking of academic journals in economics," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 44(4), pages 1525-1538, November.
    17. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    18. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    19. Melody Lo & M. C. Sunny Wong & Franklin G. Mixon, 2008. "Ranking Economics Journals, Economics Departments, and Economists Using Teaching‐Focused Research Productivity," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 74(3), pages 894-906, January.
    20. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2013. "The Relevance of the “h-” and “g-” Index to Economics in the Context of A Nation-Wide Research Evaluation Scheme: The New Zealand Case," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 32(1), pages 81-94, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    sports competitions; pairwise comparisons; tournaments; dominant eigenvector; win-loss; strength; Premier League.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • Z19 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Other

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pab:wpaper:22.11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Publicación Digital - UPO (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deupoes.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.