The new FIFA calculation: a brief comparative analysis (II)

See here for my previous post about the new FIFA calculation method. It explains how I came by the set of numbers used here.

There are suspicions that the number of points to be gained per match in relation to the points gaps that will occur in the ranking when using the new method for a prolonged period, will result in too little chances to improve a team's ranking in an relatively short amount of time. The previous post showed that the climb in ranking positions for 'ín form' teams indeed was (much) slower than in the 'old' FIFA-ranking.


In this part I will focus on the points and the points gaps of the June 2018 ranking compiled with the new method. And compare these with the corresponding elo ratings.

The classic elo-rating has the advantage that the goal difference in a match plays a magnifying role in the number of points a team can gain in a match. 
The new FIFA-method doesn't have this advantage. FIFA's method on the other hand gives extra advantage to teams (aka the big shots) reaching the knock-out stages of important tournaments: they can't lose points anymore in these knock-out matches. The vast majority of the 211 teams in the ranking however shall not profit from this rule/advantage.

First a plot with the point-gaps in the June 2018 ranking, in comparison between the new method and elo. The x-axis shows the ranking position at which the gaps occur.

You can see that the points-gaps at the top end of the ranking are equally big for both methods. A large part of the ranking sees relatively small gaps (5-15 points), also for the new FIFA method. Towards the bottom end of the ranking the gaps grow bigger again.

The frequency distribution of the gaps shows that the elo-ranking even has slightly bigger gaps than the new FIFA-method:

The earned and lost points in the eight years between 2010 and 2018 are plotted for both methods in a frequency distribution:

In this graph you can see the fairly symmetrical distribution of the elo-method. The new FIFA-method clearly shows a skewed distribution. Especially the bin +50 to +100 points is overrepresented.
The average points difference over all teams in this method is 12, while for elo this average is, as expected, 0.

The top-25 of the June 2018 ranking calculated with the new FIFA-method:

1	Germany	1906
2	Brazil	1863
3	Spain	1815
4	Argentina	1809
5	Portugal	1762
6	France	1749
7	England	1708
8	Mexico	1699
9	Chile	1698
10	Colombia	1694
10	Netherlands	1694
12	Belgium	1688
13	Italy	1672
14	Uruguay	1641
15	USA	1638
16	Switzerland	1625
17	Croatia	1610
18	Peru	1607
19	Costa Rica	1583
20	Poland	1556
21	Iran	1543
22	Australia	1540
23	Sweden	1532
24	Ghana	1527
25	Japan	1521

The teams that performed well in the knock-out stages of the major tournaments in the 8 years  between June 2010 and June 2018 surface on top. Points-gaps at the very top are relatively big (around 30-40 points each). From spot 7 downwards the gaps become smaller and smaller.

Finally, the effects of the World Cup 2018. The top-25 of the August 2018 ranking with points and in the last column the position in the actual August ranking:

1	Brazil	1892	3
2	France	1873	1
3	Germany	1842	15
4	Belgium	1825	2
5	Spain	1811	9
6	Argentina	1774	11
7	Portugal	1766	7
8	England	1747	6
9	Croatia	1726	4
10	Uruguay	1720	5
11	Mexico	1710	16
12	Chile	1698	12
13	Colombia	1697	14
14	Netherlands	1694	17
15	Italy	1672	21
16	Switzerland	1651	8
17	USA	1639	22
18	Sweden	1607	13
19	Peru	1585	20
20	Denmark	1566	9
21	Iran	1562	32
22	Russia	1558	49
23	Costa Rica	1543	32
24	Poland	1537	18
25	Ghana	1526	45

Doesn't look too farfetched now, does it ? Brazil on top, not far before France. Belgium climbing further up. Germany and Argentina not so heavily punished. Croatia on a more normal spot 9. Denmark and Russia idem dito on spot 20 and 22.

General conclusion: the points distribution and the points gaps distribution of the new method after 8 years resembles the characteristics of the elo-rating. And the elo-ranking is known for it's inertia.

The old ranking could be severely manipulated by not playing friendlies, Wales and Romania have proven that in the recent past. This new ranking method at least does not have that major drawback anymore. 

Maybe the I-factors and/or the scaling factor must/shall be tweaked after each World Cup (like the former Confederation coefficient), who knows. For now we will have to deal with this method as it stands.

---

About me:

Software engineer, happily unmarried and non-religious. You won't find me on Twitter or other so called social media. Dutchman, joined the blog in March 2018.