### Alternate Scoring System

Hi Gang,

I'd like to propose an alternative scoring system. It's a tiny bit more complicated, but it reduces the likelyhood of ties (by introducing a total number of votes factor), and it emphasizes consistent votes over a single high vote (making it less random and arbitrary).

Under this system, this is the way round 3 would have turned out:

To get these results, I awarded points like this:

1st - 5 points

2nd - 4 points

3rd - 3 points

4th - 2 points

5th - 1 point

This awards consistency more than a single high vote, which the current exponential system emphasizes (reducing the disruption caused by random voting, particularly in the lower ranks).

I normalized these results on a scale of 0 - 1.

Then I totalled the number of votes for each entry, and normalized those to the same scale.

The last step multiplies both scores, and scales the final score such that the top ranked tune gets 100 points. You still get an exponential scale with this scheme, with fewer ties, and better resistence to random voters and tampering.

Some observations:

The top 3 results didn't change, but Sonicade (deservedly) places a bit better. In terms of points, there is a 3-way tie near the bottom of the pack. robwilliamsjnr gets recognition for placing on 3 top lists, rather than two (as my entry placed), which pushes him out ahead of the other stragglers. Likewise, my entry beats fr0gr0ck, because I got two votes, rather than one.

I hate to come off sounding like a sore loser, but when I looked beyond the top 3 places, the results seemed totally random to me. When Mick pointed out that the current system was based on an exponential simple tally scale, it seemed like something that could be easily corrected.

I challenge each of you to compare these results to the official results, honestly. I think you'll find that my list makes more sense when you listen to the music and think about how each contestant placed.

Either way, I placed very low, but I don't think any amount of math tinkering is going to help that.

- Eric

I'd like to propose an alternative scoring system. It's a tiny bit more complicated, but it reduces the likelyhood of ties (by introducing a total number of votes factor), and it emphasizes consistent votes over a single high vote (making it less random and arbitrary).

Under this system, this is the way round 3 would have turned out:

- Code: Select all
`1 GroovyOne`

2 Mick Rippon

3 Harmony

4 Sonicade

5 Necto Ulin

6 Overthruster

7 Aged

8 Chotoro

9 DJ Status

10 robwilliamsjnr

11 Dilvie

12 fr0gr0ck

13 dj_io

To get these results, I awarded points like this:

1st - 5 points

2nd - 4 points

3rd - 3 points

4th - 2 points

5th - 1 point

This awards consistency more than a single high vote, which the current exponential system emphasizes (reducing the disruption caused by random voting, particularly in the lower ranks).

I normalized these results on a scale of 0 - 1.

Then I totalled the number of votes for each entry, and normalized those to the same scale.

The last step multiplies both scores, and scales the final score such that the top ranked tune gets 100 points. You still get an exponential scale with this scheme, with fewer ties, and better resistence to random voters and tampering.

Some observations:

The top 3 results didn't change, but Sonicade (deservedly) places a bit better. In terms of points, there is a 3-way tie near the bottom of the pack. robwilliamsjnr gets recognition for placing on 3 top lists, rather than two (as my entry placed), which pushes him out ahead of the other stragglers. Likewise, my entry beats fr0gr0ck, because I got two votes, rather than one.

I hate to come off sounding like a sore loser, but when I looked beyond the top 3 places, the results seemed totally random to me. When Mick pointed out that the current system was based on an exponential simple tally scale, it seemed like something that could be easily corrected.

I challenge each of you to compare these results to the official results, honestly. I think you'll find that my list makes more sense when you listen to the music and think about how each contestant placed.

Either way, I placed very low, but I don't think any amount of math tinkering is going to help that.

- Eric

- dilvie
- Regular
**Posts:**86**Joined:**Tue May 16, 2006 4:40 am