All Tournament Team Rankings Explained

In the past, the only option for all tournament team consideration was to use actual PPG. With current technology, more choices are now available. UPCquiz will now provide all tournament team rankings based on Actual PPG, Equivalent Average, and Projected PPG. Each of these rankings measures quizzer strengths in different ways, and a summary of each metric is provided in the chart below.

* Percent Contribution has been replaced by Equivalent Average. They are in reality the same statistic. The only difference is that Equivalent Average is calculated by multiplying the Percent Contribution by a static number (either 350 or 270) to make the value an equivalent average similar in appearance to the other points per game averages.

ATT by Actual PPG	ATT by Equivalent Average	ATT by Projected PPG
What It Measures	What It Measures	What It Measures
Actual Points Per Game (PPG) measures the average of the actual points earned by a quizzer in each quiz.	Equivalent Average (EA) uses the percentage of points earned by a quizzer prior to a quiz becoming locked as well as the total points possible in a quiz (270 for junior, 350 for senior) to find an equivalent average.	Projected PPG measures a quizzer's percent contribution by the lock and also factors in how many questions the quizzer answered correctly by the lock to get its calculated value.
How It Is Calculated	How It Is Calculated	How It Is Calculated
\text{PPG}_{quiz}=\text{total points earned in that quiz} \text{PPG }=\frac{\text{Sum of PPG}_{quiz}}{\text{total number of quizzes}}	\text{EA}_{quiz}=\frac{\text{total points earned by the quizzer up to lock}350}{\text{total possible points up to lock}} \text{EA }=\frac{\text{Sum of EA}_{quiz}}{\text{total number of quizzes}} junior quiz calculation is comparable	\text{Score}_{proj} =\text{EA}_{quiz} - \text{Score}_{lock} \text{pPPG}_{quiz} = \begin{cases} \text{Score}_{lock}, & \text{if (numC }=8) \\ \text{Score}_{lock}+40, & \text{if (numC }=7)\text{ AND }(\text{Score}_{proj}>40) \\ \text{Score}_{lock}+70, & \text{if (numC }=6)\text{ AND }(\text{Score}_{proj}>70) \\ \text{Score}_{lock}+100, & \text{if (numC }=5)\text{ AND }(\text{Score}_{proj}>100) \\ \text{Score}_{lock}+\text{Score}_{proj}, & \text{otherwise} \end{cases} \text{pPPG }=\frac{\text{Sum of pPPG}_{quiz}}{\text{total number of quizzes}} * junior quiz calculation is comparable
Pros	Pros	Pros
Easy to calculate and understand Historical continuity	Relatively easy to understand and explain Rewards competitive contribution Based on actual percent contribution at time of lock	Rewards competitive contribution Based on actual percent contribution as well as number correct at time of lock Emphasizes the contributions of 20 and 30 point responses by factoring in number correct for quiz outs.
Cons	Cons	Cons
Includes points which have no competitive significance Does not necessarily identify the top quizzers at a tournament Rewards "running up the score" Penalizes not "running up the score"	May disproportionately reward the efforts of a quizzer who would only typically answer earlier questions (i.e. "a 10 point quizzer"). In other words, the top quizzers at a tournament are typically instructed not to answer multiple 10 point questions, which means they are at an early disadvantage to be recognized for their competitive proficiency. Because most quizzes are locked around question 17-19, not all the 30s are always competitive, but the top quizzers on a team are almost always the ones who are better at answering 30 point questions.	Uses complex calculations, making the metric more difficult to self-calculate or explain to others In the rare scenario of a quizzer with seven correct before lock, it can be to the advantage of a quizzer (from an individual award perspective) to not quiz out because the static formula results in a higher 7-correct pPPG versus the 8-correct pPPG. Because it is called a "projected" PPG, many falsely assume that it is a variable guess at what could happen in the future; pPPG is in reality a static metric based on actual performance at the time of lock, considering both actual percent contribution and actual number correct.