# Lawsons League 10/1/18

By 10th January 2018 in News

onFirst games of second half completed

played | won | peel | lost | points | ends | shots | |||||||

J Aitken | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 2 | ||||||

L Munton | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | -2 | ||||||

K Thomson | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 | 10 | ||||||

G Wright | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | -10 | ||||||

G Brown | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | -5 | ||||||

A Malyon | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 5 | ||||||

A Brown | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||

W Brown | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |

McCrindle Quaich scores are:

McCrindle Quaich | ||

I Mackay | 0 | |

J Taylor | 5 | |

A Brown | 6 | |

K Thomson | 10 | |

P Robinson | 8.5 | |

G Brown | 8 | |

W Brown | 8 | |

J Aitken | 5.75 | |

L Munton | 0 | |

G Wright | 5.25 | |

A Malyon | 8 |

If anyone can explain to me the percentage calculations in the new rules I can put them into the McCrindle scores, until then these are the raw numbers (which I think add up to the same thing!). Will also be interesting to see if anyone reads this far down the page!

## 6 comments

### Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Such an interesting page I had to read on (and on)….

So, McCrindle scores –

Anyone who is a Skip in either league is eligible.

For those who skip in both leagues, easy, add both total league points together.

For those that were a Skip in one league and a Third in the other add their total league points as Skip to 3/4 of total league points for which they were Third.

For those that were a Skip in one league but were not a Third in the other (i.e. Lead or Second or did not play) just use total league points from the league for which they skipped.

Then express results as a percentage of total possible points (helps to even out any non-equal number of teams in leagues).

Simples !

I realise that the last comment may be rash and foolhardy and will prepare a FAQ immediately !

Sorry, meant to add a couple of examples …

Andy :

8 from 12pts for Hasties as Third = 6pts

2 from 2pts (so far) for Lawsons as Skip = 2pts

Total = 8 from 14pts = 57% (so far)

John :

5 from 12pts for Hasties as Third = 3.75pts

2 from 2pts (so far) for Lawsons as Skip = 2pts

Total = 5.75pts from 14pts = 41% (so far)

Ok – but that doesn’t give any weighting for number of teams in each league – that is just taking the the total score & expressing as a percentage.

If we want to include weighting for teams per league, then won’t we need to calculate %HPS for each half & then add together to give score out of 200?

Eg

Andy

6/12 from first half = 50%

Plus 2/14 (so far, I hope) from second half = 14.3%

Total McC score (so far) = 64.3/200

As you can see – a different total from yours!

Ooops. You are completely correct (I did wonder when I copied from the rules why we “bothered” with the percentages).

One way to get a normalised result is to multiply the points from the smaller league by a factor (max. points larger league)/(max points smaller league). This year that would be 14/12 … so 6 points becomes 7 for the Hasties League, etc.. then simply add points together and express as total points or a percentage.

I don’t think I read this section of the rules that closely.

Presumably the purpose of the McCrindle Quaich is to reward the most successful Skip over the full season. It cannot be right to scale the points for the shorter league before combining the scores, this would in effect be giving more points for a win in the shorter league. Also it could act as a tie break unrelated to curling performance. As a simple example imagine two skips A and B with 6 and 8 points respectively in the short league and say 10 and 8 points in the long league – That is a tie at 16 points each. With points scaling, the winner of the short half would always win overall purely on the arithmetic of the situation. Without scaling, a tie breaker – points, ends and shots should come into play and either player could win overall based on their relative curling performance. So my preference would be for a simple aggregation of the score lines for the two leagues without recourse to percentages or scaling of results. In any event a rewrite of that section of the rules is needed to include a tiebreaker procedure along the lines of those for the two leagues. Comments?

Good grief! I never knew curling was so complicated. My brain hurts!