What is your thought on ringers?
Yeah, that is a tough nut to crack. I haven't paid much attention to the effect over the past two or three years, but I would imagine that a larger team bring in a ringer has a much lower effect than bringing in a ringer to a 'lower performing' team.
Correct! There are two quantities that we deal with:
1) Percent - Smaller teams will always win a race based on percent increase. That is a fact, not a debatable point.
2) Points - Raw point races will always be won by the "big dog" team in the race, if they are present. Here, that is EVGA, and that is also a fact.
We have used categories for this, in the past. A simple one would award points based on a teams placement in the categories. For example:
Chimp Points earned:
Points Category: Percent PPD Improvement
10 - EVGA 10 - Vietnam Global Team
9 - OCN 9 - Tech Power Up!
8 - OCF 8 - Hardware Canucks
7 - TSC 7 - OCAU
6 - MaxPC 6 - OCF
5 - Vietnam Global 5 - MaxPC
Total Chimp Points for the Day:
15 - Vietnam Global Team
14 - OCF, OCN, EVGA
11 - MaxPC, Tech Power Up!, etc.
Which can work fine, if the categories are based on PPD, instead of factors like percent participation. The participation factor will also be yet another factor favoring small teams.
And in these categories, the starting point must be RACE performance last year - if available. NOT current ppd!
Current or average monthly ppd figures have NO relation to racing point production.
That said, I was finally just reading the thread at EVGA and I liked the idea of having two measurements or a longer CC. That could help on the point of bringing in ringers. Something like a month or month and a half between measurement points (having a measurement of a week or so should be fine). That would discourage some ringers from jumping from one team to another for the duration(s). Maybe a third, possibly shorter, measurement time in the middle somewhere as well to discourage the ringers from folding for the new team only during the measurement times.
From my vantage point, a 'ringer' from a small, lower point producing team could be someone purchasing a new GPU, but on a larger, more PPD producing team, it would have to be someone with some real 'firepower' (as in 1 million + PPD or something).
I do like the idea of having multiple formats. Maybe a jaded monkey with a badge or designation for the format. I don't think that a flat out Points format would be good (mainly due to the top four or five teams making at least twice avg. PPD of what the 6th place team makes
[where did hardware.no come from?]).
I have asked myself the same question? Who are these people?
I don't know solid solutions, but the pairing or grouping of teams seems interesting too. create a few teams of teams that have roughly the same PPD average and let the Uber teams fight it out in some kind of race. That could even be another format added to the list!
Also, one interesting thing in the EVGA forum being thrown around for an idea on the ringer problem is to limit 'new' folders on a competing team to a certain number of points (250k PPD for example). That seems interesting, but a way to outwit that is easily enough thought of.
Fun for all!