Last year I tried rating teams efforts for every game they played in the last 12 months.
Then I would use these ratings to predict what the team will do next week.
The assessed ratings were a prediction of the final score for each team.
So by subtracting one score from the other,I would have my expected margin for the coming game.

This year I intend to rate each player and add up each individual player in the coming game.
The tally will again be the team's predicted score.
Did make a profit last year and hopefully can go slightly better again!

You would have to take very careful notice of any injuries and late team changes Mo.

Word of warning. Sometimes just the basic stats like kicks and handballs don't tell the full story. You can sometimes have the lesser team just chipping and handpassing the ball around in their backline picking up easy stats but not really doing anything and not threatening the other team. Meanwhile the top teams often just take a few possessions to go from one end to the other and score. The stats can be deceptive. I mean, just going purely on stats, Chris Judd is a good player but certainly nothing outstanding.

My two cents: Best just to stick to overall team ratings, too many variables to hone in on each player, such as players who are playing tagging roles etc won't rack up the stats that other midfielders may etc

Do you also believe you can keep records on over 400 players?

Moeee, the way Richmond buggarise around with it your rankings for them would be out every week. Lots of stats getting to the forward 50 and then nothing on the end of it.

By the way, nice to see a woman interested in sports betting Betsy, not too many around.

Are you sure? You can't necessarily tell someone's gender just by forum usernames as I found out with one other person.

I hope you're right, because I do agree with you. It WOULD be nice to see a woman interested in betting on sport.

Yes Doctor.
But the rating will not only reflect the number of possesions.
I have noticed many a game where the losing team had fewer or similar number of possessions.
I intend to link the possessions to the actual score scored and also to the quality of the opposition.
Like Richmond beating Bulldogs wouldn't be worth as much as them beating the Lions.
And also plenty of stats against Brisbane but still coming out with a hiding will also be allowed for in the players ratings being downgraded.

I don't need to keep the actual stats,much the same way as Don Scott,non-football personality,used to represent a horses perfomance by a single weight rating.
Once the game has been analyzed there will be only a final ratings figure for each player for each game.The actual stats that occurred will no longer be necessary.

Yes Sportz,some good comments as usual.
Firstly,I have mentioned the Champion Data Rankings that are available in a Melbourne newspaper.
A couple of guys sit and watch the replays of games and credit players stats with a much more accurate analysis of what each stat was worth.
Less points for easy marks,more for contested ones.No points for the rubbish stats.
Hopefully the newspaper will continue to publish these ratings.
I still haven't got them into my database as it is very time consuming.

What I will do is to add up the total of each players Champion game rating.Divide that total into the rating that I give the team for that particular match.Then multiply this number by the players individual Champion rating to give a final computer rating.

And I may be reading your comment on Juddy wrongly,but he really is an outstanding player Sportz!

Yeah, you were reading it wrongly.

I know he's an outstanding player, but that's what I mean. Just going by the regular stats, he's a good player but nowhere near as good as he appears when you watch the games. If you're right about how they do those rankings you talk about, then it could be a good idea.