G'day, thanks for your interest in how we calculate an experience's ranking score. It's at the core of Rankers so I'm pleased you're curious.
The ranking score percentage is used to compare and sort experiences in ranking tables. It is not necessarily a direct measurement of the quality of a particular experience as rated by its customers. I've found it a useful tool to allow me to find the best experiences with confidence. But I've also found it important to read the customer reviews before making any final judgements!
We calculate an experience's ranking score using a multi-factor data model instead of a raw data average (mean). This model takes into account several important questions. For instance - is there a trusted body of reviews? What is the age of a review and is the review from a credible source?
Below you'll find details around some of the important factors that went into calculating the ranking score for Luggate Cricket Club Camping Ground.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at info@rankers.co.nz. We don't believe this is perfect or complete so we're always interested in ways we might make improvements.
Luggate Cricket Club Camping Ground
Valid Reviews
63 Valid Reviews
The Luggate Cricket Club Camping Ground experience has a total of 67 reviews. There are 63 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 4 invalid reviews that are excluded from the calculation. Reviews can be excluded only when a reviewer is not verified or after an investigation by our team determines the reviewer is not genuine.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 63 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 25 |
|
40% |
| 9/10 | 11 |
|
17% |
| 8/10 | 6 |
|
10% |
| 7/10 | 7 |
|
11% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
6% |
| 5/10 | 3 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 1/10 | 6 |
|
10% |
78.25% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Luggate Cricket Club Camping Ground valid reviews is 78.25% and is based on 63 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
Face-to-Face Reviews
12 Face-to-Face Reviews
The Rankers team meets with travellers while they’re in New Zealand and conducts face-to-face surveys. These reviews, in our opinion, are the most trusted in the industry and represent a critical control sample. To our knowledge, we are the only travel review website in the world that has gone to this extent.
More about face-to-face reviews
Within the 63 valid reviews, the experience has 12 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 12 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 5 |
|
42% |
| 9/10 | 3 |
|
25% |
| 8/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 7/10 | 2 |
|
17% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
8% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
8% |
81.67% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Luggate Cricket Club Camping Ground face-to-face reviews is 81.67% and is based on 12 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
82.69%
Rankers calculates a weighted mean as a base average on which we can improve. Individual review's ratings are given a weight based on several factors. The weight of a review determines the overall impact it'll have on the final weighted average.
Recent reviews have more weight as they are more relevant and reflect the experience as it currently operates. Over time reviews become less relevant and loose their impact on the ranking score.
Low rating reviews carry slightly less weight. This dampens the effect of very low ratings for every experience across the board. This is especially important when the experience has few reviews overall and a single negative rating can grossly mischaracterise an experience. Consistent poor reviews will still result in the experience receiving a comparitively low ranking score.
Credible sources provide reviews that can be trusted. If we have verified a reviewer is genuine via a face-to-face meeting then the review carries additional weight.
| Reviewer | Rating | Age | Relative Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Laurie | 5/10 | 194 days | 99% |
| Rozenn | 5/10 | 406 days | 92% |
| Rebecca | 9/10 | 650 days | 100% |
| Ana Capucho | 10/10 | 741 days | 91% |
| Larissa | 9/10 | 802 days | 83% |
| Susan | 9/10 | 925 days | 67% |
| Katie Edser | 8/10 | 1047 days | 52% |
| Vicky | 10/10 | 1047 days | 53% |
| Giovanna Sedglach | 10/10 | 1047 days | 53% |
| Annie87 | 10/10 | 1471 days | 16% |
| Erna | 8/10 | 1563 days | 12% |
| Mike oconnor | 10/10 | 1593 days | 11% |
| Wai wai | 10/10 | 1777 days | 7% |
| Maskwahine | 7/10 | 1836 days | 6% |
| Erica Barron | 10/10 | 1897 days | 6% |
| James | 10/10 | 1928 days | 6% |
| Mike and Chris Tutty | 10/10 | 1928 days | 6% |
| Tim | 10/10 | 1928 days | 6% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 1928 days | 6% |
| Josh | 10/10 | 1958 days | 6% |
| mike oconnor | 9/10 | 1989 days | 6% |
| Cam | 10/10 | 1989 days | 6% |
| Mike oconnor | 8/10 | 2020 days | 6% |
| Jake | 10/10 | 2202 days | 6% |
| Caleb | 10/10 | 2202 days | 6% |
| Ylva | 10/10 | 2263 days | 5% |
| mike oconnor | 8/10 | 2567 days | 5% |
| Alzbeta Soukupova | 5/10 | 2598 days | 3% |
| Dustin Benton | 9/10 | 2628 days | 4% |
| Andrew Bulloch | 1/10 | 2913 days | 2% |
| Graham H | 1/10 | 2963 days | 1% |
| Harriet Smith | 9/10 | 3243 days | 3% |
| Charlotte van Geel | 1/10 | 3297 days | 1% |
| Ina and Max | 7/10 | 3310 days | 2% |
| Dennis Schwarz | 6/10 | 3562 days | 2% |
| Tatiana Rochereau | 10/10 | 3575 days | 2% |
| Kerry Knott | 10/10 | 3575 days | 2% |
| Nadja | 7/10 | 3623 days | 1% |
| Christopher | 7/10 | 3677 days | 2% |
| Bob Fontaine | 8/10 | 3772 days | 2% |
| Lionel C. | 6/10 | 3785 days | 1% |
| Danica Vrsaljko | 9/10 | 3955 days | 1% |
| Markus Johannes | 10/10 | 3955 days | 1% |
| kate barton | 1/10 | 3969 days | 0% |
| Mike R | 7/10 | 4041 days | 1% |
| Lisa Quayle | 9/10 | 4046 days | 1% |
| Mel | 1/10 | 4059 days | 0% |
| Tom Guthknecht | 1/10 | 4297 days | 0% |
| Neil Lewis | 2/10 | 4334 days | 0% |
| Fenna Newmann | 10/10 | 4341 days | 0% |
| Matt Hyland | 9/10 | 4343 days | 0% |
| Francisco Pablo Miguel | 6/10 | 4359 days | 0% |
| J Weston | 6/10 | 4362 days | 0% |
| arnaud paquet | 8/10 | 4393 days | 1% |
| SC W | 9/10 | 4393 days | 1% |
| Ariadna & Omer | 10/10 | 4424 days | 1% |
| David Restell | 7/10 | 4546 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 7/10 | 4607 days | 1% |
| Mycall | 10/10 | 4699 days | 1% |
| Luisa | 10/10 | 4704 days | 1% |
| Sohie | 10/10 | 4704 days | 1% |
| Jaime Castells | 9/10 | 5164 days | 1% |
| Ofir Avimeir | 10/10 | 5408 days | 1% |
Adjustments
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
Sample Size Adjustment
No Adjustment
A reasonable number of reviews are necessary in order for the average to be credible and for an experience to take a prime position within the ranking tables. As such, experiences with only a few reviews have a moderated score. This does not mean that the experience or the reviews can't be trusted. The Luggate Cricket Club Camping Ground experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-3.86% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 44 days. However the Luggate Cricket Club Camping Ground experience does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
In addition, an experience's ranking score may be adjusted for each day there is no new ranking. After 1 day the adjustment comes into effect. The maximum number of days that can be adjusted for is 200 days. Due to the seasonal nature of many businesses, this adjustment is applied dynamically throughout the year.
The Luggate Cricket Club Camping Ground experience has been adjusted for 190 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 187 | -3.80% |
| 188 | -3.82% |
| 189 | -3.84% |
| 190 | -3.86% |
| 191 | -3.88% |
| 192 | -3.90% |
| 193 | -3.92% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
3.33% Adjustment
Every experience's review score is adjusted to balance out the disproportional number of negative reviews that are contributed.
You won't be surprised to learn that disgruntled customers are more likely to leave a review than happy ones. They are motivated to share their experience and warn others. We consider this a good thing and it's why reading the reviews is important. However we've learned it can misrepresent the experience in a more overall sense.
We apply a balancing adjustment to counteract this effect and ensure the ranking score is a more fair representation of the experience. This adjustment is applied equally to all experiences.
Final Ranking Score
82%
The final ranking score once any adjustments, ratings, and rounding has been applied. This value is recalculated each day and a short rolling average is applied. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.