I understand that.

 

I think more along the lines that these ratings predict Male is 11 points better than Simon Kenton.

i think that's a common mistake.

The Litratings began in about 1935. Frank Hubert Litkenhous was the creator of the rating system based on score differential.

 

I do not think the formula has ever changed.

I stripped out the results of 2 weakest teams on top 3 teams schedule and came up with following:

 

1. Trinity 147.45

2. Covington Cath 141.48

3. St.X 131.31

 

Seams more realistic.

i think that's a common mistake.

 

Why is it a mistake?

 

The Lit Ratings assign a number to each team. What does that number mean relative to numbers of other teams?

Since you are relatively new to the website, I recommend you research some of the many threads that have been opened on this topic. Bottom line, private schools do not have any advantage over public schools - unless a public school chooses to roadblock students from going to their school.

 

Perhaps someone can link some of the threads on this topic here so we don't end up with another three pages of discussion on it in this thread.

 

I agree this discussion is for another thread but in Kentucky there are not nearly enough private schools to create any type of meaningful separate class. Plus, like you pointed out, since THE RULES ARE THE SAME FOR EVERY HIGH SCHOOL IN KENTUCKY NO MATTER WHAT ANYONE AT YOUR SCHOOL TELLS YOU, it doesn't make any sense to separate anything.

The Litratings began in about 1935. Frank Hubert Litkenhous was the creator of the rating system based on score differential.

 

I do not think the formula has ever changed.

 

Me calling it an Apollo Era Algorithm was giving it the formula way too much credit then.

Dr. Lit started with a slide rule.

It is still garbage.

 

Let's take the case of Trinity, they beat X by 28 but are only rated 3 points better than the Tigers. The Rocks beat Male by 22 but they are only rated 6 points better than the Bulldogs.

 

And while I am at does anyone really think the Boyle County Rebels could stay within 5 points of Trinity?

 

Total garbage...

 

Believe what you want about the rankings, but the points are not meant to be a point spread. It's simply a numerical rating based on the formula.

Believe what you want about the rankings, but the points are not meant to be a point spread. It's simply a numerical rating based on the formula.

 

The numbers have to have some statistical significance as they relate to each other. All I am asking for is the "key" so to speak so I/we can interpret the results.

Why is it a mistake?

 

The Lit Ratings assign a number to each team. What does that number mean relative to numbers of other teams?

Based on what I read before about the Lit ratings, they aren't meant to be point differential. You are making a common, yet incorrect assumption.

 

Believe what you want about the rankings, but the points are not meant to be a point spread. It's simply a numerical rating based on the formula.

And yeah, this.

Based on what I read before about the Lit ratings, they aren't meant to be point differential. You are making a common, yet incorrect assumption.

 

 

And yeah, this.

 

I think I have it now, I am wrong but no one can tell me what is right.

The numbers have to have some statistical significance as they relate to each other. All I am asking for is the "key" so to speak so I/we can interpret the results.

 

They're "statistical" in that they're a numerical result of a formula. But they have nothing to do with points spreads.

 

Think of the entire group of teams from top (Covington Catholic, 137.3 rating) to bottom (Jenkins, 1.0). CovCath wouldn't be a 136.3-point favorite over Jenkins.

 

CovCath is simply 136.3 points ahead in the rating number.

 

I guess the number really has no actual "value" other than to give an indication of whether the team went up or down from week to week and who would be "favored" in a given matchup.

They're "statistical" in that they're a numerical result of a formula. But they have nothing to do with points spreads.

 

Think of the entire group of teams from top (Covington Catholic, 137.3 rating) to bottom (Jenkins, 1.0). CovCath wouldn't be a 136.3-point favorite over Jenkins.

 

CovCath is simply 136.3 points ahead in the rating number.

 

I guess the number really has no actual "value" other than to give an indication of whether the team went up or down from week to week and who would be "favored" in a given matchup.

 

Now that we can agree on!

@theguru, I agree these aren't worth the paper they are printed on, but I don't think the rating for each team is supposed to be a score comparison or predictor of point spread.

 

Hey Watusi, humor me here, just for the record, do we agree that these (ratings) aren't worth the pixels they light up?

I think I have it now, I am wrong but no one can tell me what is right.

It is a statistical combination of a bunch of different criteria wrapped up in a final power ranking. I'm not sure there is an correlation to points on the field.

 

Look at these QB ratings. Does it mean that Deshaun Watson is responsible for 10 points more per game than Carson Wentz on the scoreboard? If not then what do those numbers mean?