Looking at the list of top raters for the year, I thought “who has been more consistently performing as top rater in the 19 years of RateBeer?”.
I collected the data of the top 50 raters per year, and assigned a score by position.
The Max 5 formula means that a rater in the top 10 positions got 5 points, 4 points for position 11 to 20 and so on.
The Max 10 formula means that a rater in the top 5 positions got 10 points, 9 points for position 6 to 10 and so on.
The results of Max 5 and Max 10 are very similar; but pushing it further (for example 50 points for the top rater, 49 for the second and so on) would penalize too much who was strong/top rater for many years versus somebody who did a #1 one year and then nothing.
