A comparative study of scoring systems by simulations

L\'aszl\'o Csat\'o

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: Scoring rules aggregate individual rankings by assigning some points to each position in each ranking such that the total sum of points provides the overall ranking of the alternatives. They are widely used in sports competitions consisting of multiple contests. We study the tradeoff between two risks in this setting: (1) the threat of early clinch when the title has been clinched before the last contest(s) of the competition take place; (2) the danger of winning the competition without finishing first in any contest. In particular, four historical points scoring systems of the Formula One World Championship are compared with the family of geometric scoring rules, recently proposed by an axiomatic approach. The schemes used in practice are found to be competitive with respect to these goals, and the current rule seems to be a reasonable compromise close to the Pareto frontier. Our results shed more light on the evolution of the Formula One points scoring systems and contribute to the issue of choosing the set of point values.

Date: 2021-01, Revised 2022-06
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cmp and nep-spo
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Published in Journal of Sports Economics, 24(4): 526-545, 2023

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/2101.05744 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:2101.05744

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().