Scoring Anomalies – Round 17

Written by Motts on July 18 2019

I haven’t made any tweaks to the scoring formula this week, although I am no longer rounding the raw scores, as they are rounded after scaling, so doing it twice just reduces precision.

What I have done, however, is add a feature to the software that can automatically give a full point-by-point breakdown of a player’s raw score. I’ll be making some aesthetic improvements to the output next week (sorry about the camelCase!), but it’s working, which is the most important thing.

As an example, here is the breakdown of Josh Dunkely’s monster score on the weekend (SyntheticCoach gave him 209 – 231 pre-scaling – while Champion Data gave him 202):

Moving on, Dane wanted to know which Crouch brother was robbed more on the weekend. According to SyntheticCoach, the answer is neither, with both players getting very close to what the system thinks they should have. That said, the Crows dominated both the game and the SuperCoach scoring, so you cold argue that they got left out a bit in the scaling.

Matt: 92 (106 un-scaled) compared to 98; Brad: 99 (114) vs 103

Meanwhile, some people had been wondering if Carlton’s Will Setterfield had been robbed of a few points late in the match. I can’t say when points were or were not allocated, but SyntheticCoach thought his effort was worth 85 (88.5), while Champion Data thought it was only worth 70.

Ben McEvoy’s handful of owners can also feel a bit ripped-off, with SyntheticCoach awarding him 129 (145) compared to the 102 that he actually got. But I think I know where his missing points went: his teammate, Shaun Burgoyne, was awarded 111 by CD, compared to a synthetic score of just 92 (103.5).

Finally, in the Essendon vs North Melbourne game, both teams’ rucks fared poorly in the scaling, with Todd Goldstein being awarded 132 points, compared to 152 (159.5), and his opponent Zac Clarke only getting 88, compared to 114 (119.5)


Let me know in the comments if you would like to see a full scoring breakdown for a particular player (or even just their SyntheticCoach score).


Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom

4 thoughts on “Scoring Anomalies – Round 17”

    1. 40 percent kicking efficiency, plus general handball-happiness, is probably what killed it. It could have been a much bigger score otherwise.


  1. Apologies to everyone for the delay in getting this up. We’ve been having some technical issues today. Luckily, Motts was able to get it up for me.

    Thanks Motts!


    1. Never apologise for lateness of awesomeness! Thanks Salamander.

      I knew it (Setterfield)! We was robbed!



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *