How does that compare to the current distribution, Bowler?
What is 'can be' is cool - how it is different from 'currently it would be...' is the data I suppose I'm asking for...
Currently, it is...
This month.... (insert data)
With this plan, it would look like
(data, different)
Supporting idea how these results are better - here
The distribution would have been the same under either system. The difference lies in when they were won, which prize was won, and how close the adjustment makes it. Under the current system, the room with the lowest participation won prize A 3 out of 4 weeks. Under the adjustment system the lowest participation room won prize A 1 out of 4 weeks.
The average differnece from high point division winner to low point division winner under the current system was 18 pts. With the adjustment is would have been 11.70.
The instances of a division winner going from a prize to no prize from system to system are as follows:
Nov. 4 D1 89 pts. with 10 drivers (second low of the night)
Nov. 11 D5 88 pts. with 10 drivers (low of the night)
Nov. 25 D3 86 pts. with 9 drivers (third low of the night)
The instances where a division winner went from no prize to a prize would be as follows:
Nov. 4 D3 87 pts. with 11 drivers (second high of the night)
Nov. 11 D1 84 pts. with 14 drivers (high of the night)
Nov. 25 D5 86 pts. with 10 drivers (high of the night)
From those two lists, you can see how the system works. Each of the division winners that would get a prize under the new system had what looks like a better night than the driver that would have lost a prize. 87 w/ 11 is better than 89 w/ 10. 84 w/ 14 is better than 88 w/ 10. 86 w/ 10 is better than 86 w/ 9.
It's not a huge difference but it does a pretty good job at limiting the advantage a driver would have in a division with lower attendence.