What I said I don't like...that it decides our winner based on how we do against the rest of the world instead of each other....

Suppose that it's just you, me, and DM, and at the end of the month, thee are our totals:

Code:
       HR   RBI   AVG.
PL     13    39   .340
JG     12    55   .330
DM     11    40   .333
Based on some kind of method of "weighted" the scores in each category, I'd say that you should be the winner because your big lead in RBIs more than offsets the small amount that you trail by in homers and average.

But if you throw us into aleague with 7 other people and go by percentile rankings, like so

Code:
            HR  (pct)  RBIs  (pct)  Avg.  (pct)   Total
Player 1    17          60          .400
Player 2    16          59          .375
Player 3    15          57          .360
Player 4    14          56          .334
   PL       13   60%    39    30%   .335    70%     160
   DM       12   50%    42    50%   .333    50%     150
   JG       11   40%    55    60%   .330    40%     140
Player 5    10          41          .300
Player 6     9          38          .290
Player 7     8          37          .280
Because of the large differnce between 5th and 6th place in RBIs, DM and I can be way behind you in raw totals, but not lose much on a perentile basis because no one had between 55 and 42 RBIs to fill in those "missing places" and drop us further in percentile.

Obviously an extreme example, but you should get the idea.

If there's a month when you have, say 50 RBIs and I have 48, but there are a zillion people with 49, I will lose a lot more "percentil points" than a difference of 2 RBIs is worth.

And, as in the example above, vice-versa.

If you have 50 RBIs for the month and I have only 42, but there are a disproportionatley low number of players in between, I will not lose as many "percentile points" as an 8 RBI difference should be worth.

"Difficult....not impossible"