WFTDA Releases 2009 First-Quarter Rankings
The Women's Flat Track Derby Association today released its latest quarterly rankings (see below). These official rankings are used by the organization to determine seeding for WFTDA tournaments, including the regional tournaments to be held in September and October.
In previous quarters, WFTDA did not rank leagues which had not met certain participation requirements within the all-volunteer organization, including minimum voting and committee work participation. Beginning with this quarter, WFTDA rankings now include all member leagues who have taken part in at least two sanctioned bouts.
Says WFTDA Rankings & Stats Chair Ms. D'fiant, "Based on concerns within and outside the organization, the WFTDA member leagues reviewed and re-voted on the inactive leagues rankings policy. From now on inactive leagues will be indicated in a separate color but will retain the rank they earned through their competitive game play."
Each WFTDA region's rankings are determined by a vote of the region's member leagues. See the WFTDA website for a map of each region and its members.
Comments
Someone remind me again
How many teams are going to each regional tournament?
Regionals
10 teams each. No word yet on how many advance to Nationals.
10 teams? How does that work Bracket-wise?
Does that mean the top 2 teams have a bye till the second or third round of that Regional?
Code Nerd on Derbymatic and MooseCaster here on
DNN
Now this is a guess
I would assume 7 vs 10 and 8 vs 9 in the first round.
Hazy memory
I haven't looked lately, but this sounds right. Bottom four of ten battle it out to be the bottom two in a bracket of eight. Which also means that the winners of those battles get to play the top two seeds a few hours later on Friday.
Which can be summed up as: Ow.
- bjmacke (a.k.a. Apron)
The current take on this is for the NC regionals is:
Day 1: Six games
Day 2: Five games
Day 3: Four games
That says to me:
7/10
8/9
4/5
3/6
2/7-10
1/8-9
for day one, just as Apron said. I'm sure there will be changes, but that's the current news I've got as I've been building the Brawl of America (http://www.brawlofamerica.com/) site.
We'll be adding a lot more soon once we get e-mails out to the NC teams in early May. There may even be some hypothetical brackets for folks to look over and cluck their tongues at with the new rankings.
Best,
-Garrison for the BoA and the MNRG
How's two teams getting a bye work?
That'd leave you with six teams in the round they first skate in, wouldn't it? I hate almost all tournament structures but powers of two. I'm just like that. As of this weekend, I kinda hate double-elimination tournaments. Unless they are small ones. But I have my reasons. Heh. --->
-Barely even speaking for myself...
*~[
Grand Poobah
Six teams get a bye, actually.
With the past two years, the twelve-team structure of the tournaments meant four byes to quarter-finals and eight teams battling for QF spots.
Ten teams? Well, it's a bit less derby (fifteen games for BoA), but we will know by the end of the first day who's going to the semis, and only four teams (ranks 7-10) have to fight for a QF spot. As far as I can tell, only two teams will play twice in one day with this schedule. I dig that.
Two Questions.....
Any reason why 10 teams in the regionals?
Will it be double-elimination?
Wow, this is
Wow, this is amazing...particularly the South Central region....I am floored. Do the reps just look at outside sources, like FTS and make their votes uninformed? Do they not compare point differential between leagues that play eachother?....What I mean to say is this:
If 2 leagues haven't played eachother, how do you figure out who is better than the other? I would think then you would go see who, in common, they have played and then compare the point differentials, correct?
This looks like simple laziness to me...
SC rankings
i assume so - we looked at wins, losses & point spreads before voting. what in particular "floors" you?
rebel
atlanta rollergirls
Generally when I look at FTS
Generally when I look at FTS it is highly inaccurate.
This strikes me as the most accurate rankings release, maybe ever. yay WFTDA!
This looks like...
This looks like simple laziness to me...
This looks like something far better than what we had six months ago.
Last year and before, every league from top to bottom was ranked against one another. Leagues that were isolated from one another or only played locally were hard to rank against one another.
Here's an example for you: Should the Long Island Roller Rebels be ranked above or below the Big Easy Roller Girls? I don't know. They don't play one another, and probably aren't likely to. With the rankings being divided up between four regions and only member leagues within those regions voting, it gives us the people who'd be most likely to know one another deciding the rankings.
With the economy the way it is, leagues are wisely trying to stay a bit closer to home. In the past it was leagues like Carolina, Sin City and some others who flied everywhere and bouted everyone that were the best ways to provide a decent frame of reference for where this or that league actually stood in the rankings. Right now, there's too many leagues to effectively rank all of them in one poll.
DNN does it, but it's done with a smaller subset, and focusing on the top.
-Barely even speaking for myself...
*~[
Grand Poobah
What was East Texas Bombers' second sanctioned bout?
Because I'm not seeing it on either of my two sources. Just curious.
-Barely even speaking for myself...
*~[
Grand Poobah
They're one of the founding member leagues
... so I believe they didn't have to meet that requirement.
That said, it's a pretty academic point, don't you think?
Why not?
... so I believe they didn't have to meet that requirement.
That said, it's a pretty academic point, don't you think?
Here's what the WFTDA rankings page says: "The following leagues have not yet played two sanctioned wftda games and will not be ranked at this time:"
It doesn't say, "Unless they've been around for a really long time." I see one sanctioned bout on FTS, I see one on DerbyMatic. I did find a bout that I'm not sure WHY it wasn't sanctioned back in '07.
To be perfectly honest with you, I was half-wondering if there was a sanctioned bout that somehow both we and FTS might have both missed. Or if WFTDA might have made an "oops."
-Barely even speaking for myself...
*~[
Grand Poobah
Q3 2008
Was the first time East Texas was ranked and officially moved out of ineligibility. I'm not sure what their second game was, but it looks like they got it in there somewhere.
I agree with Poobah
I agree with Poobah regarding non-power-of-two tournaments. It's just untidy, and byes are sort of silly. I say go run out quick and add three teams to the East, two to the West, and one to the North, and let's have it be sixteen teams.
Further untidiness comes in the form of the "Central" suffix appended to "North" and "South." Can't we just have North, South, East and West? Adding "Central" disrupts my need for terminological harmony.
Hey wait...
Further untidiness comes in the form of the "Central" suffix appended to "North" and "South." Can't we just have North, South, East and West? Adding "Central" disrupts my need for terminological harmony.
It's all about me Rev. Norb, not you. Oh, please be sure and get the color right on my tassel when you make me and end-level boss in your game.
My powers are "multiple paragraphs of tedium" and the ability not designate her actions an effective block. When I defeat the player, she is so tired of hearing me blather about derby minutia, she quits playing the sport. The upside to you is that you can place an incentive code in the game at this point. Player gets a discount on your upcoming "Drunken Dodgeball" game.
-Barely even speaking for myself...
*~[
Grand Poobah
wow...
.....was there not time to update based on the recent DCRG vs Dominion game? It was more than a 100-point spread.
~dr.SKabs
DC Rollergirls
Too late for this vote.
Voting is done quarterly, and the quarter for this set of rankings ended March 31.
Q109 Ranks
The rankings are based on data through March 31, 2009.
So, no-- no opportunity to adjust based on the outcome of a game last weekend. (Congratulations to DC, by the way!)
Trust me, I can understand as well... there are definitely some spots I would move around if scores after the close of the quarter could be considered.
xo,
Loco Chanel
Thanks...
.....Loco!
~SKabs
OC missing?
Anyone know what happened to the Orange County Roller Girls? I don't see them on any of the lists.
OCRG
OCRG resigned from WFTDA.
Aunt Flo #28
San Diego Derby Dolls
resigned from WFTDA... are
resigned from WFTDA... are they the first to ever do this?
Yes.
It's my understanding that they're intent on being more of a rec league.
-Barely even speaking for myself...
*~[
Grand Poobah
Indeed
Indeed.
But they're still playing a pretty fair amount of interleague according to their schedule.
Ok, Grab your pens and pencils
As far as I know this is the Schedule/Bracket for regionals.
I really hope I'm wrong. If you model this it turns out to be more of a 3 game random round-robin than an actual bracket tourney. There are also alot of things that concern me. First, why does the #1 seed get punished with having to play #6 meanwhile, #2 & #3 play the winners of the bottom 4. Also if you draw up the bracket and model the results of lower seed victory the whole way through you get some kinda silly results(5th&6th group Switch with 7th & 8th).Finally it is possible for the 6th seed to lose in the first round to the #1 by one point, beat the next two opponents and still only be able to place 8th. There is no way to win yourself into the 3rd./4th. place finals. It's not about if you lose.... but, WHEN you lose.
Game 1: Seed 9 v. Seed 8
Game 2: Seed 7 v. Seed 10
Game 3: Seed 1 v. Seed 6
Game 4: Seed 2 v. Winner Game 2
Game 5: Seed 5 v. Seed 4
Game 6: Seed 3 v. Winner Game 1
Game 7: Loser Game 3 v. Loser Game 1
Game 8: Loser Game 5 v. Loser Game 2
Game 9: Winner Game 3 v. Winner Game 5 (semifinal)
Game 10: Winner Game 6 v. Winner Game 4 (semifinal)
Game 11: Loser Game 7 v. Loser Game 8 (9th/10th place)
Game 12: Winner Game 7 v. Winner Game 8 (7th/8th place)
Game 13: Loser Game 4 v. Loser Game 6 (5th/6th place)
Game 14: Loser Game 10 v. Loser Game 9 (3rd/4th place)
Game 15: Winner Game 10 v. Winner Game 9 (Championship)
This is just what I have fished up. I hope it is only a preliminary proposal.
If not, I hope that eventually all the necessary corrections are made.
well....
you are not wrong and this is not preliminary. The leagues voted in this structure and this schedule. Concerns were raised. Votes were cast. It was approved as you describe. Expect that I'm 99.9% certain that a fix has been made, whereby if you win/lose the games you are expected to based on rank you will walk out with the same rank you came in with (5th/6th and 7th/8th will no longer be switched). At this point change cannot be affected to the regional tournaments. However, it is NOT too late to get involved with the nationals structure. Nationals will be a whole 'nother challenge. There are 12 teams invited. Have a great idea for how 12 teams can battle it out? In 3 days time? Please speak to your/your favorite WFTDA reps soon. Votes will be cast in the near future on this very topic.
Another general idea to throw out into the derby community is.....
POWERS OF TWO! You might be surprised what a difference they make in developing tournament structures. When it comes time to vote on tournament structures for 2010, please remember the following numbers...2,4,8,16,32,64.
10, 12 and 14 can sound like an opportunity to get more teams involved, but it's really difficult to avoid byes and funky structures. really. especially since we are currently only ranking within region. The lack of national rankings is a good idea because it helps rankings reflect regions accurately and that seeds teams well coming into regionals. However, a national tournament with a non-binary number of participants AND no official national ranking system? tough. real tough. A 10, 12 or 14 team tournament with no byes? Harder yet. Have questions? again, get with a WFTDA rep and bring 'em to the boards. Or seriously, email me at reckless116sr@gmail.com
Our community could use some more general discussion on what makes and breaks tournaments. Both from a competition standpoint, and from a logistical one. The few leagues who have hosted large tournaments surely have some experience in these areas- but we all can contribute to the conversation. Jump on in,
Reckless
12 team tournament
I think a 12 team tournament is perfect for nationals and I don't even know what there is to vote on. It's been done, like a tone of times, NFL Playoffs, most NCAA conference basketball tournaments, etc.
The reason I say it's perfect for nationals is because in a 12-team tournament format, the top 4 seeds get a bye (so, the winners of each regional earn a bye, as they should).
so...
12 vs 5
11 vs 6
10 vs 7
9 vs 8
1 vs 9/8
2 vs 10/7
3 vs 11/6
4 vs 12/5
1/9/8 vs 4/12/5
2/10/7 vs 3/11/6
then, the championship.
The only question there should be is how to seed, not on the tournament structure. Just like there shouldn't be a question on a 10-team tournament structure but the WFTDA apparently still got it wrong.
I've always thought the
I've always thought the NFL's 12-team playoff structure of recent years was dopey. The top four teams get the first week off, thusly extending the playoff season by one week for benefit of TV advertising revenue via a weekend of games between the bottom feeders. Then the bye teams -- tanned, rested and ready -- usually swoop in and destroy the teams that played the first week ((though this is not always the case)). It's an obviously revenue-centric contrivance.
Baseball's eight-team structure and the NBA's sixteen-team structure are much less icky, although the NBA's sixteen teams often include a few pretty bad ones. The NCAA's 64 team basketball tournament is about perfect.
So, let's say each division expands to at least 16 teams -- one assumes this is not at all far off. We then could have four regional tournaments with 16 teams each. That's eight first-round games on Saturday ((which is a lot, but can be done)); four second-round and two third-round games on Sunday -- fourteen games total for the weekend. Then...the two surviving teams from each region go to nationals, where we have four "Elite Eight" games on Saturday, then two "Final Four" and one championship game on Sunday. This can get padded out with various consolation/seeding matches as needed. The one negative thing about this schedule is that it doesn't leave much room for consolation/seeding bouts at regionals, so teams might only play once after traveling to regionals. Eh.
That is my plan for world peace. Like Krushchev said, we shall someday rule the world by invitation.
4 regions, 16 teams ... perfection
The NCAA's 64 team basketball tournament is about perfect.
I agree. Year after year, every March we all get to witness the evidence of how perfect that system is. And with Derby still growing strong, it should be possible to field 16 teams per region soon right?
Disagree
I disagree because the 64 teams chosen for the NCAA tournament are chosen from a field of over 300 teams. Even though there are a ton of the teams in the NCAA tournament, teams still have to have a good season to make their way into it.
The WFTDA has what? 70-something leagues and you want 64 teams to be in the tournament? What's the point of playing a regular season game, a team is basically guaranteed to make the tournament. This is why the NBA/NHL Playoffs are horrible, because almost everyone makes it.
Also, you would want 4 regions with 16 teams each? Okay, so then I assume nationals would only be 4 teams? Because in the NCAA tournament, only the winners move on, where as in roller derby, you can lose the regional championship (and it looks like now, you can lose in the regional semifinals) and still make nationals.
You skipped my qualifier ...
I did say that with derby still growing strong, the tournament could be expanded "soon."
And that would probably mean making "regionals" a part of the "national" tournament. Turning the entire thing into one big, smooth running tournament.
To me, that works way better than anything based on the NFL, NHL or NBA systems.
Of course, with DNN having its own ranking system ... we're just a few computer based ranking systems away from having the option to model the entire system after NCAA football. lol
Well, that would pretty much
Well, that would pretty much require every league in USA and Canada to join WFTDA to have there be a good reason to have 64 teams. I assume, then, that you wouldn't crown regional champions? You'd just play until there was 2 or 4 teams left in each region.
Hey, I'm working on one of those computer ranking systems. Don't laugh.
I don't really get how you
I don't really get how you can say the NFL's structure is "extended" and yet point to the NBA Playoffs as a better playoff structure. The NBA Playoffs takes 2 months (seriously, the Chicago/Boston series has been going on since I was born and there's still 2 games left). In my opinion, the NFL Playoffs are only bested by the NCAA Tournament. Teams earn a bye and home field advantage by having the best record and winning their division. It's not for TV, it's so teams that play in tough divisions can still make the playoffs without winning their division, as they should (Pittsburgh a couple years ago was a wild card and they won the Super Bowl).
See, I'm of the opinion that you should be able to lose in regionals and still make nationals. With a 12-team national structure, a team can lose in the semifinals of regionals and still make nationals. The same can be said for a 16-team national tournament, but I just think that's too many games in a weekend. You should also reward the winners of each regional with a first round bye.
(edit: I want to change what I said here) Byes are only messy in the current regional system where a team doesn't earn a bye, they just get voted into one. This is wrong, the regional tournament should be 8 or 16 teams so no team gets an advantage just because they're a league with a good reputation. Byes at nationals would not be messy because they would be earned by winning the regional tournament.
HUH?????
Shouldn't it be.....
Game 3-#3 versus #6
Game 4-#4 versus #5
Game 5-#2 versus Game 1 Winner
Game 6-#1 versus game 2 Winner?????
The Original GGRDonald
Power of DEUX!
South Central Region: Ass
South Central Region:
Ass City and West Texas rankings being above NWA Rollergirls:
Per:
Ass City vs. Big Easy Rollergirls- 89-80 +9
NWA Rollergirls vs. Big Easy Rollergirls- 11-82 +34
Ass City vs. Dallas Derby Devils- 60-228 -168
NWA Rollergirls vs. Dallas Derby Devils- -75
Ass City vs. Alamo City Rollergirls- 126-114 +12
NWA Rollergirls vs. Alamo City Rollergirls- 141-33 +108
West Texas vs. Oklahoma Victory Dolls- 145-123 +22
NWA Rollergirls vs. Oklahoma Victory Dolls- 165-46 +119
I will say that West Texas just played Alamo for the second time and got a slightly better point differential than NWA's game against them last year, but who's to say...and I think, that if NWA played them again their differentials would be better.
Also, NWA did play Ass City back in '07, but I would bet my last dollar that if they went up against them again, with all the changes in the Ass City lineup that there would be no contest....
This is what I mean by research and bout comparisons....
No offense to anyone but I often wonder if Texas leagues get a boost....
you must be crazy...
South Central Region:
Ass City and West Texas rankings being above NWA Rollergirls:
Per:
Ass City vs. Big Easy Rollergirls- 89-80 +9
NWA Rollergirls vs. Big Easy Rollergirls- 11-82 +34
Ass City vs. Dallas Derby Devils- 60-228 -168
NWA Rollergirls vs. Dallas Derby Devils- -75
Ass City vs. Alamo City Rollergirls- 126-114 +12
NWA Rollergirls vs. Alamo City Rollergirls- 141-33 +108
West Texas vs. Oklahoma Victory Dolls- 145-123 +22
NWA Rollergirls vs. Oklahoma Victory Dolls- 165-46 +119
you are seriously crazy. West Texas played OKVD when OKVD was at full strength, when NWA played OKVD they were down both of their star jammers.
alot changes not only on a yearly level but per quarter within the charters ect... you can't base anything farther out than maybe 2 quarters in regards to team A vs Team B, then Team A vs Team C. it just wont' work.
Ass City played BERG without 6 of their best girls(herrasiz mine, Miley virus, ect) they only had 11 at the game anyways. in regards to san antonio, Ass City played them like 2 weeks ago, NWA played them FOREVER ago... alot changes... but most importantly the rankings are voted on! they are talked about between the leagues in the region ect...
i believe NWA is a great team, and they have one of the most awesome transplants from texas, Le-Le, i'm sure they will do alot of damage if they make it into regionals, but until these 3 teams play each other, nothing can really be said.
wow.
Dallas Deception Men's Derby
St00pidfast- Shaking pivots/blocker and breaking ankles daily!
Slightly Better???
Our final score vs. Alamo was +131 (187-56 to be exact) and took place in March (2 months ago).
The bout NWA had against Dallas was over a year ago----a lot changes in a years time in derby. The score you listed for Ass City happened just a few months ago against Dallas...the comparison there I don't feel is accurate. Really the same goes for your comparison of Big Easy, Ass City & NWA as well....
I'm not saying that a bout for West Texas vs. NWA wouldn't be a good one...in fact I think it would be a very close & exciting bout----but I do take offense to your statement about Texas leagues getting a boost.
West Texas is working hard & we are very excited to be where we are in such a short amount of time....our hard work has paid off....we love derby....and we are working even harder to prove that we deserve to be there.
I'm not saying that people shouldn't compare scores, they absolutely should.....but to me there is a point where you are looking too far back...especially on a league that has only been in WFTDA for a year....they typically improve and I am sure when voting people take that into consideration.
Definitely speaking for myself :)
Lethal Whoopin
Proud Skater in Texas!!!!
Ummmmmm
Our final score vs. Alamo was +131 (187-56 to be exact) and took place in March (2 months ago).
The bout NWA had against Dallas was over a year ago----a lot changes in a years time in derby. The score you listed for Ass City happened just a few months ago against Dallas...the comparison there I don't feel is accurate. Really the same goes for your comparison of Big Easy, Ass City & NWA as well....
I'm not saying that a bout for West Texas vs. NWA wouldn't be a good one...in fact I think it would be a very close & exciting bout----but I do take offense to your statement about Texas leagues getting a boost.
West Texas is working hard & we are very excited to be where we are in such a short amount of time....our hard work has paid off....we love derby....and we are working even harder to prove that we deserve to be there.
I'm not saying that people shouldn't compare scores, they absolutely should.....but to me there is a point where you are looking too far back...especially on a league that has only been in WFTDA for a year....they typically improve and I am sure when voting people take that into consideration.
Definitely speaking for myself :)
Lethal Whoopin
Proud Skater in Texas!!!!
I believe that pulling scores from the last year is relevant and if this was not the case then teams like Kansas City should be ranked far lower based on lack of more current bout data(2009) in their region. People place KC in their spot, I believe, due to past performance....and are pulling from bouts just as old as I'm referring....to point out accuracy you must apply such factors to ALL leagues not just the ones you choose to.
I'm not putting West Texas down, in any way, I think your league is definitely up and coming, I am just at odds with how your ranking is justified.
Not saying that..
Sorry---not saying that you shouldn't look at all in what has happened in the past...I'm just saying a team is completely different in a years time...so when comparing two scores of Team A vs. Team B & Team C. vs. Team A....you have to consider the time frame and what has happened since then....not just for themselves but the other teams as well.
Throwing scores up in comparison you have to also consider time....thats all I'm saying.
Support
And to offer up some tangible evidence about not looking back too far, I present my league, the Denver Roller Dolls, as proof of how past performance isn't a good indicator of future performance. You can also add Oly in there too. Derby itself changes drastically from season to season and so does team performance.
Most everything that happened in 07 is completely irrelevant at this point in terms of team performance. I don't even give much credence to the first half of 2008 any longer. It's about how a team is playing this season that matters and the new stipulations WFTDA placed on regions is working. There is more tangible, relevant data to rank teams within their regions.
Thanks,
Big Evil for the run down stats. Nice to meet you I am PRO from NWARG. Dont know if your a fan or not, but thanks for the notice out there in Derby Land.
We are super stoked about the new ranking system and hope to work as hard as our fellow leagues in South Central in order to move up. Rock out West Texas, Ass City, Big Easy, hopefully we will see you all soon at regionals, if not playing - we will be cheering! Til then its really only worth it if your having fun!
And Big Evil, I hope to meet you sometime in person, it's always nice to meet new derby peeps. Perhaps you can attend a bout sometime and give us a shout!
PRO-NWARG