GIANTS'2012 REVIEW(very long)
Posted By: Daniel Murphy In Response To: GIANTS'2012 REVIEW(very long) (Strato)
Date: Wednesday, 25 January 2012, at 2:16 a.m.
In Response To: GIANTS'2012 REVIEW(very long) (Strato)
However, with ballots being filled at this very moment, I don't think anyone should be throwing their Giants picks out there, and especially not with their criteria on how to vote along with data/history backing up their suggestions because that can influence how someone (perhaps a person lacking a bit of information) may vote.
Best Don't reveal your own picks Worse Reveal your picks, but don't explain your voting criteria Worst Reveal your picks, and explain why you picked them
Seems like the wrong order to me.
But I don't see anything wrong with anyone expressing their opinion about who deserves Giant status. I don't think most voters are very well informed. Some, I would hope, many, of them want to be. Thus we see, in 2012 as in 2009, not just the sharing of opinions, but requests for them from voters, looking for information on players or groups of players they may not know much about or have overlooked. If expressed opinions influence them to a better informed vote, I don't see that's a bad thing.
The number of Giant voters who will cast a supurbly informed ballot is, well, take a guess, but I'd guess it's very small. Most Americans don't know much about European players and vice versa. Ranking 32 players by PR is guesswork; there just isn't enough data available. Voters have individual criteria, but most, I'd say, are based on a perception of strength and results flavored by reputation. The "influence" is already out there. Some who have expressed opinions disfavor votes based on reputation or votes for inactive players. Some go strictly by results, others by PR. Some consider nonplaying contributions to backgammon, others don't. Whatever you think of their reasons for their opinions, or how much influence them have, I'm hard pressed to see that voters who choose to give those opinions some weight -- especially the ones supported by criteria -- will make worse or less credible choices.
How well informed are we? For instance,
Name the top 10 players on Hristov's PR list.
Name the winners of the 10 most highly attended tournaments in the last 2 years.
Name the top 10 players with the most places on the ABT circuit 2010-2011.
Name the top 10 prize money winners 2010-2011.
Just for instance. Without looking.
Messages In This Thread
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.