|
Back to |
| The Front Page |
| Letters & Opinion |
|
Letters from our readers
8/6/97 |
Hilditch nails home his point on "volatility" with his own version of the rankings, sans decimals; the keeper of the rankings answers a critic with the first World Women's Rankings, in which the ladies of New Zealand are seen to excel; Scotland's Rod Williams produces a most amusing paraphrase of Monty Python; there is "poison" in the backyards of America, and the first American match-play tourney is to be played at Sonoma-Cutrer
| 1. | Last words on the ranking |
| 2. | With apologoes to Monty Python |
| 3. | A world women's ranking list |
| 4. | Backyard "Poison" |
| 5. |
First American match play tourney at Sonoma |
Putting too fine a point on the rankings?
[in response to New Zealand's Westerby Rises to #1]
Mulliner and Harrison [creators of the WCF world rankings] both point out that as statistical indicators of ability the rankings have an error range of +/- 50 units (in the modern numbers). It is ludicrous that they are now printed with the first decimal point; at least they should clearly be rounded to the nearest 10 (as they used to be when they were 10-fold smaller). Interestingly if we had season averages we would get a smaller error number. (This is a principle of statistics - increase the number of games included by 4, say, and the error goes done by 2, the square root of 4.)
Interesting reading is the actual number 1 at each end year:
78-84 - Aspinall
85 - Aspinall and Openshaw (joint, no silly decimal points)
86 - Mulliner and Openshaw (joint)
87-90 - Mulliner
91 - Clarke
92 - Fulford
93 - Maugham
94 - Bamford
95-96 - Fulford
I think that proves my point about the volatility of the current rankings; in the 90s in each case top of the rankings went to the player who had done best in the last couple of events in the year.
For fun. here are the top of the world rankings rounded to 50 to make them more realistic:
World Rankings as at 15 June 1997
Name Grade (rounded to 50) 1 Westerby AJ [NZ] 2750 Fulford RI 2750 Clarke CD 2750 4 Maugham DB 2700 Jackson RV [NZ] 2700 Mulliner SN 2700 7 Comish S 2650 8 Avery MN 2600 Stephens AJ [NZ] 2600 Jones SG [NZ] 2600 11 Davis S [NZ] 2550 Fleming B [A] 2550 Taves JB [USA] 2550 Skinley PJ [NZ] 2550 Baker R [NZ] 2550
--Richard Hilditch, London
With apologies to Monty Python
"I am upper class. I make one error every four games. I do occasional sextuples. I calculate my new ranking by hand after every game. I look down on him because he's middle class. If I lose to him, it will be just a fluke and shouldn't effect my ranking."
"I am middle class. I make four errors every game. I do occasional triples. I look to see where I am in the rankings whenever they appear. I look up to him because he's upper class. If I beat him, I ought to go twenty places up the rankings. I look down on him because he's lower class. If I lose to him, it will be just a fluke and shouldn't affect my ranking"
"I am lower class. I make one error every four hoops. I do occasional all round breaks. I keep hearing people talk about these rankings. I look up to him because he's middle class. If I beat him I will be very pleased and buy him a drink. I look even more up to him because he's upper class. If I beat him I would be very surprised because he is never at the same tournaments as me. I can never remember who I played yesterday and whether I won or lost. I like playing croquet."
--Rod Williams, Glasgow, Scotland from the Nottingham Board
Williams ranks the top 95 women in the world
Leo Dungan wrote on the Nottingham Board, "Chris Williams' endless possibilities [for specialized ranking lists} should include a 'women's list'."
Well, here it is - the current World Rankings List for Women, as at end July 1997
10 games minimum
Grade / Games / Wins
1 Cornelius DA Miss 2491 30 18
2 Thurston H Mrs [A] 2318 49 35
3 McIntyre J Miss [NZ] 2196 61 37
4 Jones P Mrs [NZ] 2179 73 49
5 King W Mrs [A] 2163 56 39
6 Dawson CM Miss [A] 2134 67 38
7 Hadwin M Mrs [NZ] 2118 55 37
8 Stephens SD Miss [NZ] 2116 35 25
9 Carr S Mrs [A] 2098 40 18
10 Stephens CA Mrs [NZ] 2083 68 32
11 Graham R Mrs [A] 2062 26 14
12 Belz B Mrs [A] 2034 29 13
13 Hutton J Mrs [A] 2033 21 11
14 Curry GE Ms 2016 16 9
15 Young M Mrs [A] 1975 14 4
16 Young PJ Mrs [NZ] 1973 59 24
17 Prater C Mrs [A] 1969 21 10
18 Ketelaars L Mrs [A] 1968 33 15
19 Hoddy S Mrs [NZ] 1959 23 12
20 Knox C Mrs [SA] 1950 14 7
21 Frey K Mrs [A] 1936 18 10
22 Hosking J Mrs [NZ] 1934 55 33
23 Cooke D Mrs [NZ] 1931 54 30
24 Gugan R Mrs 1924 27 17
25 Grant P Mrs [NZ] 1922 37 21
26 Downton J Miss [SA] 1916 10 7
27 Fisher P Mrs [NZ] 1868 37 23
28 Bamford C Mrs [A] 1852 12 6
29 Bartlem S Ms [A] 1848 24 10
30 Alcorn D Mrs [A] 1841 13 4
31 Pierce R Ms [A] 1839 10 5
32 McCready D Mrs [A] 1825 18 7
33 Gower E Mrs [A] 1819 19 7
34 Norton PE Mrs [NZ] 1819 22 10
35 Garrod M Ms [A] 1812 14 8
36 Harris B Mrs 1805 21 13
37 McLeod A Mrs [NZ] 1796 10 7
38 Townsend CM Mrs [S] 1787 15 6
39 Boyes B Mrs [NZ] 1774 31 13
40 Durbridge C Ms [A] 1771 12 3
41 Stutz M Mrs [NZ] 1770 26 14
42 Scott E Mrs [NZ] 1763 36 13
43 Yeates YM Mrs [NZ] 1757 50 22
44 Fleming E Mrs [A] 1751 10 4
45 Carlisle V Mrs 1747 15 6
46 Ransom FE Mrs 1745 35 15
47 McGlen BA Mrs 1744 21 9
48 Vaissiere S Ms 1744 12 4
49 Le Blang L Mrs [A] 1739 25 5
50 Watts ML Mrs [NZ] 1734 71 31
51 Lea S Mrs [NZ] 1732 30 15
52 Murdoch J Mrs [A] 1730 19 4
53 Lindon O Mrs [A] 1726 17 3
54 Roach P Mrs [A] 1718 14 3
55 Versey C Mrs [NZ] 1709 13 7
56 Roberts B Mrs [A] 1709 20 6
57 Hamilton P Ms [A] 1707 20 6
58 Slavich D Mrs [NZ] 1703 15 8
59 Christensen E Mrs [NZ] 1698 15 7
60 Leonard K Ms [SA] 1694 14 2
61 Mears G Mrs 1692 11 6
62 Edmonds JI Miss [NZ] 1690 53 15
63 Stark J Mrs [NZ] 1684 15 7
64 Hinz L Mrs [NZ] 1683 14 1
65 Somers M Mrs [NZ] 1678 30 15
66 Muir G Mrs [NZ] 1674 29 9
67 Harrington N Mrs [NZ] 1668 15 3
68 Jones Pi Mrs [NZ] 1668 23 9
69 Taylor N Ms [A] 1652 23 6
70 Steward CM Mrs 1646 39 11
71 Fenwick M Mrs [NZ] 1641 15 3
72 Saunders K Ms [A] 1634 21 6
73 Anderson CJ Mrs [NZ] 1629 10 3
74 Garland M Mrs [NZ] 1623 23 10
75 Healy PV Mrs 1618 41 15
76 Elleray R Ms [NZ] 1614 18 2
77 Baty I Mrs [NZ] 1606 30 7
78 Judd E Mrs [NZ] 1606 16 8
79 Maplesden D Mrs [NZ] 1604 15 0
80 Marsh AE Mrs [NZ] 1603 10 2
81 Speers J Mrs [A] 1596 11 2
82 Dunnet E Mrs [NZ] 1578 61 14
83 Anderson J Mrs 1569 12 4
84 Kendrick E Ms [NZ] 1569 13 1
85 Osmond C Mrs 1564 29 9
86 Burnett AM Mrs [NZ] 1563 15 4
87 Stenhouse SAR Ms [S] 1562 22 6
88 Constable CE Mrs 1561 11 3
89 Magee EM Mrs 1551 16 5
90 Herbert PM Mrs [NZ] 1544 15 4
91 Nichols P Mrs [A] 1506 15 2
92 Bent E Mrs [NZ] 1480 10 0
93 Jackson M Mrs [NZ] 1476 42 7
94 Kroll A Mrs [NZ] 1466 59 14
95 Neall AM Mrs [NZ] 1412 16 3
--Chris Williams, from the Nottingham Board
We are happy to note that the first three places are taken by women from each of the three leading countries - Britain, Australia, and New Zealand. We feel compelled to point out the following statistics, leaving it to others to determine their significance: New Zealand leads the list with 45 places; Australia is second, with 29; Britain is a poor third, with 14.
Poison in the backyard?
[in response to "Backyard Croquet - Can the Game be Rehabilitated?"]
I am writing to relay to you a variation on the standard croquet rules which we have found adds more drama and suspense to casual backyard croquet games. We call it the "poison rule."
In this variation, striking the turn-around stake is optional. A ball which strikes the turn-around stake, at any time during play, becomes "poisoned" (and receives the traditional bonus stroke). Thereafter, if that ball strikes another ball, the struck ball is removed from the game and a single bonus stroke is awarded to the striker. However, if another ball during its turn strikes the poisoned ball, the poisoned ball is removed from the game and the striking ball is awarded a single bonus stroke. All other rules on traversing the course apply to the poisoned ball (with the exception that if all other players/teams are eliminated the game is called without completing the course).
Obviously this rule dramatically changes the strategy of the game. A
player that is far behind will go poison themselves. Poisoned balls must
make their kill attempts at high speed (so that if they miss they end
far enough away to discourage retaliation). A leader must decide whether
to make an attempt to kill a poisoned ball (possibly wasting a turn by
being pulled out of position) or try to stay away. A poisoned ball can
park itself at the next wicket and force the leader to make a
long-distance try or waste a turn being coy and trying to draw an attack
from the poisoned ball. Games that start out as boring run-aways
quickly become tight and suspenseful.
A disadvantage we have experienced in casual play of the standard game is that if a team (or a player during cut-throat) becomes far enough behind they become frustrated and lose interest - and generally a single strong player will dominate a backyard game to the extent that the game loses appeal to the other players. This variation acts as a dramatic equalizer, and gives an opportunity for a player/team far behind to make up a lot of ground quickly (by eliminating their opponents), or be removed from the game quickly (and go get refreshments). We have found that this rule allows players of a broad range of skill levels to simultaneously enjoy the game by keeping all players "in the hunt."
Watching a poisoned ball shoot towards yours (which may be poised to finish the final wickets) certainly raises the pulse While I realize your focus is on the standard rules and competitive croquet, I hope you may be able to pass on this variation to casual players who are looking for ways to keep the entire family or group involved in the backyard croquet wars.
--Scott Ramsey
The "poison rule" has long been a favorite variation for backyard play, and it works very well with the official USCA BASIC BACKYARD RULES published on this Website.
Sonoma-Cutrer hosts first American match play tourney
The date is August 29 - September 1 (Labor Day); the venue is the two courts of the Sonoma-Cutrer Winery; the format is a single block of eight, playing International advanced rules in best-of-three matches. Prize money will be awarded for first and second places. The entry fee of $65 includes lunch each day.
Players are invited based on a ranking list devised by the SCC based on the WCF ranking list and observation of current form. Players wishing to be considered for the tournament should contact Mike Orgill at (707) 585-7819; E-mail morgill@sonic.net.
The Sonoma-Cutrer Croquet Club is sponsoring this tournament to promote international match play; the tournament will also serve as an excellent tune-up for the USCA International Rules Championship in Oakland later in September. To our knowledge, this is the first serious match play tournament to be mounted in the United States.
--Mike Orgill, Rohnert Park, California