World Rankings (12 January 2011)

ahlycotc wrote:

'orrible bastard wrote:Steve in case you missed my edit earlier. the multiplier for a friendly is 1, the multiplier for a qualifier is 2.5. there are regional multipiers too, concacaf is now 0.88 while Conmebol and UEFA is 1, these are applied to the team that are playing versus one another added up and divided by 2.

to illustrate how the rankings are bullshit, here's an example;

if the US played a friendly V Spain tomorrow;

i cant be bothered to do the sums but if the US beat Spain they would be awarded 5.58 ranking points, if they drew they would recieve 1.86 and 0 for losing

if the US beat St Kitts and Nevis in a preliminary WC Qualifier they would recieve 5.21 points, if they drew they would be awarded 1.73 and 0 for losing!

the disparity between beating shit teams in meaningful games versus beating decent opposition in shit games is ridiculous!

Check your math/rules again. I got 5.64 (or rather 564pts) if USA beat Spain. I also got 5.214 (or rather 521pts) if USA beat St Kitts and Nevis.

I know there isn't much a difference between this and your math. CONCACAF's multiplier is a bit high. I don't get how CONCACAF has the 3rd highest multiplier in the world. And with CONCACAF's new WCQ format, teams like USA and Mexico will get even easier opponents to face. I won't be surprised if both nations surge in the rankings throughout the campaign.

But 43 points (the difference between the two scenarios) can mean a lot to a team. Currently USA would go up at least 2 additional places in their ranking. Other teams could go up say 10 places because of an additional 43 points.

(polskaGOLA) wrote:Africa and Asia > North America

ahlycotc wrote:

'orrible bastard wrote:Steve in case you missed my edit earlier. the multiplier for a friendly is 1, the multiplier for a qualifier is 2.5. there are regional multipiers too, concacaf is now 0.88 while Conmebol and UEFA is 1, these are applied to the team that are playing versus one another added up and divided by 2.

to illustrate how the rankings are bullshit, here's an example;

if the US played a friendly V Spain tomorrow;

i cant be bothered to do the sums but if the US beat Spain they would be awarded 5.58 ranking points, if they drew they would recieve 1.86 and 0 for losing

if the US beat St Kitts and Nevis in a preliminary WC Qualifier they would recieve 5.21 points, if they drew they would be awarded 1.73 and 0 for losing!

the disparity between beating shit teams in meaningful games versus beating decent opposition in shit games is ridiculous!

Check your math/rules again. I got 5.64 (or rather 564pts) if USA beat Spain. I also got 5.214 (or rather 521pts) if USA beat St Kitts and Nevis.

I know there isn't much a difference between this and your math. CONCACAF's multiplier is a bit high. I don't get how CONCACAF has the 3rd highest multiplier in the world. And with CONCACAF's new WCQ format, teams like USA and Mexico will get even easier opponents to face. I won't be surprised if both nations surge in the rankings throughout the campaign.

But 43 points (the difference between the two scenarios) can mean a lot to a team. Currently USA would go up at least 2 additional places in their ranking. Other teams could go up say 10 places because of an additional 43 points.