Abstract
Combinatorial/probabilistic models for cross-country dual-meets are proposed. The first model assumes that all runners are equally likely to finish in any possible order. The second model assumes that each team is selected from a large identically distributed population of potential runners and with each potential runner’s ranking determined by the initial draw from the combined population.
Acknowledgement
We thank the anonymmous referee for pointing out the Wilcoxon rank-sum statistic as well as many other references.
References
Boudreau, J. W. and S. Sanders. 2015. “Choosing “Flawed” Aggregation Rules: The Benefit of Social Choice Violations in a League that Values Competitive Balance.” Economics Letters 137:106–108.10.1016/j.econlet.2015.10.001Search in Google Scholar
Boudreau, J., J. Ehrlich, S. Sanders, and A. Winn. 2014. “Social Choice Violations in Rank Sum Scoring: A Formalization of Conditions and Corrective Probability Computations.” Mathematical Social Sciences 71:20–29.10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2014.03.004Search in Google Scholar
Boudreau, J., J. Ehrlich, M. F. Raza, and S. Sanders. 2018. “The Likelihood of Social Choice Violations in Rank Sum Scoring: Algorithms and Evidence from NCAA Cross Country Running.” Public Choice 174:219–238.10.1007/s11127-017-0494-0Search in Google Scholar
Conover, William J. 1980. Practical Nonparametric Statistics, (2nd Edition), pp. 252–256, John Wiley and Sons. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/cd-22/manual/v2chapter6.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Hammond, T. H. 2007. “Rank Injustice?: How the Scoring Method for Cross-Country Running Competitions Violates Major Social Choice Principles.” Public Choice 133:359–375.10.1007/s11127-007-9193-6Search in Google Scholar
Huntington, E. V. 1938. “A Paradox in the Scoring of Competing Teams.” Science 88(2282): 287–288.10.1126/science.88.2282.287Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Lehman, E. L. 2006. Nonparametrics: Statistical Methods Based on Ranks. New York: Springer.Search in Google Scholar
Mann, H. B. and D. R. Whitney. 1947. “On a Test of Whether one of Two Random Variables is Stochastically Larger than the Other.” Annals of Mathematical Statistics 18(1): 50–60.10.1214/aoms/1177730491Search in Google Scholar
Mixon Jr, F. G. and E. W. King. 2012. “Social Choice Theory in 10,000 Meters: Examining Independence and Transitivity in the NCAA Cross-Country Championships.” The American Economist 57:32–41.10.1177/056943451205700103Search in Google Scholar
National Federation of State High School Associations. 2016–17. Participation Survey Results, http://www.nfhs.org/ParticipationStatistics.Search in Google Scholar
Szedlik, S. 2010. “May the Best Team Win, Determining the Winner of a Cross-Country Race.” In Mathematics and Sports, edited by Joseph A. Gallian, Ch. 24. Mathematical Association of America, pp. 295–315.10.5948/UPO9781614442004.025Search in Google Scholar
Wilcoxon, F. 1945. “Individual Comparisons by Ranking Methods.” Biometrics Bulletin 1:80–83.10.1007/978-1-4612-4380-9_16Search in Google Scholar
©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Offensive or defensive play in soccer: a game-theoretical approach
- A hybrid random forest to predict soccer matches in international tournaments
- Bayesian statistics meets sports: a comprehensive review
- A point-based Bayesian hierarchical model to predict the outcome of tennis matches
- Using a Markov decision process to model the value of the sacrifice bunt
- Combinatorial models of cross-country dual meets: what is a big victory?
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Offensive or defensive play in soccer: a game-theoretical approach
- A hybrid random forest to predict soccer matches in international tournaments
- Bayesian statistics meets sports: a comprehensive review
- A point-based Bayesian hierarchical model to predict the outcome of tennis matches
- Using a Markov decision process to model the value of the sacrifice bunt
- Combinatorial models of cross-country dual meets: what is a big victory?