Explaining TPR: Volume III - The Method Component
Part One
In the previous installment of this exploration of the TPR formula, we spent a considerable amount of time diminishing the importance of wins and losses. The premise is that a win or loss is a component of performance quality, not an arbiter of quality in itself. We even put forward an example in which a losing fighter received a higher performance rating than the fighter who defeated him.
The result of these conclusions is that the Win component is the smallest contributor to total performance quality. While that is true, we will see that winning or losing plays a part in determining the point value of other components. This installment will focus on the next-smallest contributor, the Method component, which is closely tied to win/loss.
Like the Win component, the weight for Method was heavily influenced by the findings of the survey we conducted. Just as one has to make a hard decision about the relative quality of wins vis-à-vis losses, one has to make a similar value judgment about finished fights versus decisions. This choice is a little harder. The win/loss question forces a valuation of winners and losers. As discussed, not all wins and losses are the same. It's easy to conclude that the general, idealized "loss" can be better than the general, idealized "win" because there's not enough information to make a firm, black-or-white decision. The fighters themselves are often not in control of the outcome. Maybe the judges awarded a bogus decision or maybe the referee stepped in for an unjust stoppage. If the goal of every fighter is to win his fight, the point is that you can't always blame the loser for failing to meet that goal.
Method is the opposite. Every decision has the common inconclusive characteristic. That a fight goes to a decision is entirely in the hands of the fighter. If the goal of every fighter is to finish his fight (as is the first principle of the FightMetric system), we would have to say that a fight that goes to a decision means failure to meet that goal every single time. The principled stance is that a finished fight is always better than a decision.
This is nice in theory, but it doesn't hold up in practice. Some of the most cherished performances in MMA history were in fights that went to a decision. To pick just one example, Randy Couture's performance against Tito Ortiz was five rounds of dominance to the point of embarrassment. It takes a hard line to say that performance was worse than Gabriel Gonzaga's knockout of Kevin Jordan, despite the fact that Gonzaga finished and Couture did not.
The survey results showed this in practice. The majority of respondents - exactly two-thirds - took a nuanced approach and said that decision victories can be better than finished fights. It is interesting to note that the percentage of respondents that chose the hard-line approach - that finishes are always better than decisions - increased compared to the win/loss question. Only 24% said that a win is always better than a loss compared to 33% for this question, a testament to the added level of complexity in making this choice.
posted by FightMetric @ 5:04 PM
0 Comments
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home