[EM] Re: Condorcet baseball rankings

[Paul Kislanko]

You can't substitute "games-won" for "votes". They are two different things.

I take things seriously, including mathematical logic. If you were "implying
that Condorcet completion methods such as RP or Beatpath could be used to
evaluate the round-robin winner when no team is undefeated by any other" you
are mistaking both sports contests and voting methods. 

It is much more likely that the hundreds of rating systems developed for
comparing sports teams who haven't played head-to-head would be applicable
to a voting system than it is for a voting system to be applicable to
sorting out who's the best team in a sporting event.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: election-methods-electorama.com-bounces at electorama.com 
> [mailto:election-methods-electorama.com-bounces at electorama.com
> ] On Behalf Of Ted Stern
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 5:18 PM
> To: election-methods at electorama.com
> Subject: [EM] Re: Condorcet baseball rankings
> 
> On 29 Oct 2004 at 14:31 PDT, Paul Kislanko wrote:
> > Before the expansion, MLB actually had a nearly perfect 
> round-robin that
> > resulted in two teams meeting for the championship.
> >
> > But in no case then or now was the result of a game 
> determined by voting. 
> 
> Hmm, maybe you're taking this a little too seriously (again 
> ;-)?  I was
> implying that Condorcet completion methods such as RP or 
> Beatpath could be
> used to evaluate the round-robin winner when no team is 
> undefeated by any
> other.
> 
> In other words, substitute games-won for votes.
> 
> Ted
> -- 
> Send real replies to
> 	ted stern at u dot washington dot edu
> 
> Frango ut patefaciam -- I break that I may reveal
> 
> ----
> Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em 
> for list info
>