fanatic46041 Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 103lbs.....673-64 win % 1051.56 112lbs.....621-65 win % 955.38 119lbs.....579-76 win % 671.84 125lbs.....606-71 win % 853.52 130lbs.....639-71 win % 900 135lbs....597-74 win % 806.75 140lbs....566-72 win % 786.11 145lbs....570-71 win % 802.81 152lbs....583-70 win% 832.85 160lbs....565-71 win % 795.77 171lbs....608-62 win % 980.64 189....565-80 win % 706.25 215lbs....591-90 win % 656.66 hwt.....596-76 win % 784.21 Looks like 103 toughest...........215 weakest.... not really a shock just numbers for fun ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-train Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 how can you have a winning percentage over 1,000? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinedad Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 how can you have a winning percentage over 1,000? New math..... ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I think its part of that VooDoo Economics stuff I head about from Ben Stein. Or maybe the Fuzzy Math that Bush and Gore keep talking about so much. It's all about how you work the numbers anyway. You could also say 103 has the least competition thus increasing their wins to losses. You could also say 215 has the most competition increasing their losses to wins. You could also point out that maybe the top 103 wrestlers are spaced so far appart in the state that they never face each other. You could say the opposite about most 215 pounders. Again its all in how you want to uses the numbers to say what you want. Y2 usually teachers and extensive class on this at some point during the summer. ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XCard Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 Shouldn't 103 Winning % be .913? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silence Dogood Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 Shouldn't 103 Winning % be .913? At a quick glance, it doesn't look like any of them are calculated correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boot Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 Yeah, they aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XCard Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 Noticed that also after looking at the rest of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justadadnow Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 103 .900 112 .895 119 .868 125 .882 130 .888 135 .876 140 .872 145 .875 152 .879 160 .874 171 .898 189 .858 215 .847 285 .872 not a very big difference across the board 103 and 171 very close Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtv2112 Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 103 .900 112 .895 119 .868 125 .882 130 .888 135 .876 140 .872 145 .875 152 .879 160 .874 171 .898 189 .858 215 .847 285 .872 not a very big difference across the board 103 and 171 very close I think your math is wrong as well. Try [(number of wins)/(total matches)]*100 This will give you a percentage. 103 should be 673/737=0.913, or 91.3% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtv2112 Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 103lbs.....673-64 win % 1051.56 112lbs.....621-65 win % 955.38 119lbs.....579-76 win % 671.84 125lbs.....606-71 win % 853.52 130lbs.....639-71 win % 900 135lbs....597-74 win % 806.75 140lbs....566-72 win % 786.11 145lbs....570-71 win % 802.81 152lbs....583-70 win% 832.85 160lbs....565-71 win % 795.77 171lbs....608-62 win % 980.64 189....565-80 win % 706.25 215lbs....591-90 win % 656.66 hwt.....596-76 win % 784.21 Looks like 103 toughest...........215 weakest.... not really a shock just numbers for fun ;D You divided the number of wins by the number of losses and multiplied by 100. Not a winning percentage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts