Derby Master Standard method of scheduling poor results

[BradJ]

I've been given the task to review our software and suggest changes. We currently use DM. I've entered our 30 scouts into the system and generated some test schedules using the Standard method which is suppose to be based on the Stearns method. I always thought one of the parameters of this method was to help maximize your number of opponents. I set up the schedule for our 4 lane track and 8 rounds (64 races total) and was surprised that the schedule only had you racing against an average of 17 other racers. You have the potential to race against 24 given you race once per round and you have 3 others on the track with you. This method does evenly distribute your races between the lanes so I'll give it credit for that but I really thought it did a better job of mixing up the racers so you compete against more. We are not using the latest version but have 6.1 but the website mentions nothing about changing the scheduling formulas between versions. Has anyone else noticed this using DM? We are looking into the Grand Prix software but would like to avoid another purchase if possible. I'm not finding any other options in the program but wanted to check to see if I'm missing something.

Thanks and Happy New Year!

Brad

[Stan Pope]

Stearns often suffers some accuracy issues as compared to PPN due to its algoroithm. The author of the Stearns DOS software told me that if a particular schedule seems unsatisfactory that I should just ask it to generate another, as there is a random component to the schedule generation.

All such software suppliers can include PPN as an optional schedule generator, but I don't know if DM has undertaken that opportunity. The PPN software is free, and inclusion involves only minor license conditions.