The IMG Gradings Thread - Post all your IMG Gradings related questions or comments here

[Chrispmartha]

2 minutes ago, UBranger said:

All media is biased. Comments sections are the people, granted not a full representation but a good indicator. 

Im not saying the platform is biased, that wasn’t my point. Below the line comments are rarely indicative of what the majority of people think.

[Chrispmartha]

6 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

Hi Harry - he probably will and all the snipers will be there to shoot holes in it just like - when he comes up with ideas to fix the league structures. Plenty of people to shoot it down with absolutely no positive thoughts of their own/.

Sounds familiar that

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

12 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

HOLD THE PRESS - I'VE WORKED IT OUT

The points initially intended to be awarded and set out on page 17 of the grading document was based on us having 36 clubs (including London Skolars).

Skolars withdrawing means the increments between position 1 and last place have changed. There are now larger increments and different scores to those shown in the document.

I've just rerun Bradford with 35 clubs, as such the incremental changes to 0.1143.

Therefore Bradford get:

2.1744 points for 17th pace in 2021

1.7143 points for 21st place in 2022

2.2857 Points for 16th place in 2023

2.1744 + 1.7143 +2.2857 = 6.1714

6.1714/3 = 2.06

If you run them with 34 clubs you get an overall of 2.00 points.

I have to admit this has me beat.

[glossop saint]

24 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

HOLD THE PRESS - I'VE WORKED IT OUT

The points initially intended to be awarded and set out on page 17 of the grading document was based on us having 36 clubs (including London Skolars).

Skolars withdrawing means the increments between position 1 and last place have changed. There are now larger increments and different scores to those shown in the document.

Impressive detective work. It would have been nice for some statement from RFL or IMG. As has been said I don't know why they can't have these scores listed in full detail, to save confusion, or conspiracy theories.

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So if we lose more clubs somebody could gain an A grading while not really deserving it , cracking system Grommit 

Could be time for Del to make Swinton an offer they cannot refuse.

[Derwent Parker]

37 minutes ago, Jill Halfpenny fan said:

I have just had a look at Hunslet's performance score which to the best of my knowledge is the only other figure out there. 

Hunslet are reporting a performance figure of 0.46.

In 2021 Hunslet finished 6th in League 1 (32nd overall). They then lost in the elimination play off thus giving them 6th place (32nd) for 0.5556 points.

In 2022 Hunslet finished 7th in League 1 (33rd overall) for 0.4444 points.

In 2023 Hunslet finished 2nd in League 1 however they then lost in the preliminary final thus giving them 4th place (30th) for 0.7778 points.

0.5556 + 0.4444 + 0.7778 = 1.7778 points

1.7778/3 = 0.5926 or 0.59 points.

Somethings not adding up here.

Please ignore the numbers its a joke

Young lad asking   "DAD" when you played how did you get promoted"

Well Son"  Hunslet reported a performance figure of 0.46.

In 2021 Hunslet finished 6th in League 1 (32nd overall). They then lost in the elimination play off thus giving them 6th place (32nd) for 0.5556 points.

In 2022 Hunslet finished 7th in League 1 (33rd overall) for 0.4444 points.

In 2023 Hunslet finished 2nd in League 1 however they then lost in the preliminary final thus giving them 4th place (30th) for 0.7778 points.

0.5556 + 0.4444 + 0.7778 = 1.7778 points

1.7778/3 = 0.5926 or 0.59 points.

Young lad asking   "GRANDAD" when you played how did you get promoted"

Well Son"  We beat everybody at home and we went to their spots and beat every one of them?

Stupid this aint it

 

[glossop saint]

1 minute ago, Derwent Parker said:

Please ignore the numbers its a joke

Young lad asking   "DAD" when you played how did you get promoted"

Well Son"  Hunslet reported a performance figure of 0.46.

In 2021 Hunslet finished 6th in League 1 (32nd overall). They then lost in the elimination play off thus giving them 6th place (32nd) for 0.5556 points.

In 2022 Hunslet finished 7th in League 1 (33rd overall) for 0.4444 points.

In 2023 Hunslet finished 2nd in League 1 however they then lost in the preliminary final thus giving them 4th place (30th) for 0.7778 points.

0.5556 + 0.4444 + 0.7778 = 1.7778 points

1.7778/3 = 0.5926 or 0.59 points.

Young lad asking   "GRANDAD" when you played how did you get promoted"

Well Son"  We beat everybody at home and we went to their spots and beat every one of them?

Stupid this aint it

 

You're right. What you've said is stupid.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Jill Halfpenny fan said:

I've just rerun Bradford with 35 clubs, as such the incremental changes to 0.1143.

Therefore Bradford get:

2.1744 points for 17th pace in 2021

1.7143 points for 21st place in 2022

2.2857 Points for 16th place in 2023

2.1744 + 1.7143 +2.2857 = 6.1714

6.1714/3 = 2.06

If you run them with 34 clubs you get an overall of 2.00 points.

I have to admit this has me beat.

It only works if you use Cas' spreadsheet.

[Neil_Ormston]

I’ve just got around to updating my spreadsheet on this (that’s how I roll!). All scores I’ve seen quoted (Bradford, Cas and Hunslet) tally to what I have, so rest assured, these look Ok. Happy to check others for people.

The RL Record Keepers’ will be running a live performance table next year so fans can easily see where their club is. More details to follow (once I’ve designed it ).

[Derwent Parker]

24 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So if we lose more clubs somebody could gain an A grading while not really deserving it , cracking system Grommit 

Thats the plan

[Neil_Ormston]

7 minutes ago, Jill Halfpenny fan said:

I've just rerun Bradford with 35 clubs, as such the incremental changes to 0.1143.

Therefore Bradford get:

2.1744 points for 17th pace in 2021

1.7143 points for 21st place in 2022

2.2857 Points for 16th place in 2023

2.1744 + 1.7143 +2.2857 = 6.1714

6.1714/3 = 2.06

If you run them with 34 clubs you get an overall of 2.00 points.

I have to admit this has me beat.

That’s not how it works. You take an average of positions for the 3 seasons: Bradford have been 17th, 21st and 16th, giving an average of 18. Ranked against all other teams this is the 17th best, which based on 35 teams gives them 2.1714 points (but looks like they’re working to 2 decimal places, so 2.17 )

[Spidey]

6 minutes ago, Neil_Ormston said:

That’s not how it works. You take an average of positions for the 3 seasons: Bradford have been 17th, 21st and 16th, giving an average of 18. Ranked against all other teams this is the 17th best, which based on 35 teams gives them 2.1714 points (but looks like they’re working to 2 decimal places, so 2.17 )

I started along those lines but then didn’t rank the teams - that makes sense now. To me at least.  Good work

(Removed - talking rubbish)

Edited October 26, 2023 by Spidey

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

1 minute ago, Neil_Ormston said:

That’s not how it works. You take an average of positions for the 3 seasons: Bradford have been 17th, 21st and 16th, giving an average of 18. Ranked against all other teams this is the 17th best, which based on 35 teams gives them 2.1714 points (but looks like they’re working to 2 decimal places, so 2.17 )

Thank you, just looked at my 35 team workings and 17th does indeed give you 2.1714.

[doc]

I always hated maths.

[Spidey]

Just now, doc said:

I always hated maths.

I think you can tell by this thread those people who like it

[JohnM]

28 minutes ago, UBranger said:

All media is biased. Comments sections are the people, granted not a full representation but a good indicator. 

I think you are mistaken. Comments sections are in my opinion populated, dominated even,  by naysayers, critics, professional ingrates and trolls.

[UBranger]

Like THE TRL forum then.  I did say 'not a full representation.'  All I'm saying is it doesn't appear popular or even understood, that's my opinion too. Others think otherwise, time will tell.

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, UBranger said:

Like THE TRL forum then.  I did say 'not a full representation.'  All I'm saying is it doesn't appear popular or even understood, that's my opinion too. Others think otherwise, time will tell.

Of course some people won’t like it and some won’t understand it, but you did say nobody likes it.

The majority of the people who voted for it did though.

 

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

21 minutes ago, Neil_Ormston said:

That’s not how it works. You take an average of positions for the 3 seasons: Bradford have been 17th, 21st and 16th, giving an average of 18. Ranked against all other teams this is the 17th best, which based on 35 teams gives them 2.1714 points (but looks like they’re working to 2 decimal places, so 2.17 )

Any chance you can post the full list?

[MattSantos]

1 hour ago, Barley Mow said:

Castleford have released theirs as well.

They give a figure of 3.09.

This also doesn't compute:

Method 1 - we take the average of their score over 3 years - 7th (3.33333), 7th (3.33333), 11th (2.88889) = 3.185185

Method 2 - 9th place overall gives 3.1111 or 10th overall gives 3.0000

 

Something odd going on with the performance scores based on released info.

It has to be the first method, because maths.

Also, the second method gives an average position of 8.3 which of course is silly.

 

[MattSantos]

31 minutes ago, Neil_Ormston said:

That’s not how it works. You take an average of positions for the 3 seasons: Bradford have been 17th, 21st and 16th, giving an average of 18. Ranked against all other teams this is the 17th best, which based on 35 teams gives them 2.1714 points (but looks like they’re working to 2 decimal places, so 2.17 )

Taking the same principle.

1st, 1st and 3rd. Average position is ... 1.6

How is that scored?

edit...

Is the 1.6 average then ranked into another league table and then scored again. What happens if there's a tie?

Edited October 26, 2023 by MattSantos

[Spidey]

3 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Any chance you can post the full list?

 

[The Future is League]

34 minutes ago, Neil_Ormston said:

I’ve just got around to updating my spreadsheet on this (that’s how I roll!). All scores I’ve seen quoted (Bradford, Cas and Hunslet) tally to what I have, so rest assured, these look Ok. Happy to check others for people.

The RL Record Keepers’ will be running a live performance table next year so fans can easily see where their club is. More details to follow (once I’ve designed it ).

 

29 minutes ago, Spidey said:

I started along those lines but then didn’t rank the teams - that makes sense now. To me at least.  Good work

(Removed - talking rubbish)

 

22 minutes ago, JohnM said:

I think you are mistaken. Comments sections are in my opinion populated, dominated even,  by naysayers, critics, professional ingrates and trolls.

 

6 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Of course some people won’t like it and some won’t understand it, but you did say nobody likes it.

The majority of the people who voted for it did though.

 

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/facebook-followers-could-get-super-league-clubs-relegated-what-if-the-nrl-did-the-same-20231026-p5ef7e.html

[MattSantos]

Nah. Cant be bothered

 

 

Edited October 26, 2023 by MattSantos

[Chrispmartha]

So all this arguing over small points differences in the performance gradings could make the difference between SL and championship, just shows performance on the pitch is actually important