Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by DeltaOne81
Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 07:34PM
After One:
Harvard 0 at Dartmouth 0
Cornell 1 at St. Lawrence 0
Yale 1 at Union 0
In the 1st:
Princeton 0 at RPI 0
Brown 1 at Vermont 0
Colgate 1 at Clarkson 1
Thanks to Ben via USCHO
Harvard 0 at Dartmouth 0
Cornell 1 at St. Lawrence 0
Yale 1 at Union 0
In the 1st:
Princeton 0 at RPI 0
Brown 1 at Vermont 0
Colgate 1 at Clarkson 1
Thanks to Ben via USCHO
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 07:41PM
Since we're stealing (but attributing, so I guess it's sampling), also from Ben:
After the first period in Hanover, it's 0-0.
Harvard fairly lucky to be tied, because Dartmouth hit one post and had another beat hyphen but trickle wide.
Shots 10-7, but Dartmouth had the territorial advantage.
After the first period in Hanover, it's 0-0.
Harvard fairly lucky to be tied, because Dartmouth hit one post and had another beat hyphen but trickle wide.
Shots 10-7, but Dartmouth had the territorial advantage.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2005 07:42PM by Trotsky.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 07:43PM
BC/UNH scoreless after 1.
Not sure who to route for in that one. UNH winning would help us, BC winning would help Harvard/Dartmouth/Colgate. I don't think I can bare to route for UNH anyway.
Not sure who to route for in that one. UNH winning would help us, BC winning would help Harvard/Dartmouth/Colgate. I don't think I can bare to route for UNH anyway.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 07:46PM
Cornell down 33-25 to Penn at the half. Hell, that's not all that bad. Tomorrow we have the first chance to sweep Princeton in..., I dunno, maybe ever.
Anybody catch the fantastic banner that the Penn kids unfurled vs Princeton? "Now the Ivy League cellar has a backdoor." Classic.
Anybody catch the fantastic banner that the Penn kids unfurled vs Princeton? "Now the Ivy League cellar has a backdoor." Classic.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: RichH (---.stny.res.rr.com)
Date: February 25, 2005 07:48PM
[Q]Trotsky Wrote:
Cornell down 33-25 to Penn at the half. Hell, that's not all that bad. Tomorrow we have the first chance to sweep Princeton in..., I dunno, maybe ever. [/q]
And that Princeton-Cornell game will be aired on YES.
Cornell down 33-25 to Penn at the half. Hell, that's not all that bad. Tomorrow we have the first chance to sweep Princeton in..., I dunno, maybe ever. [/q]
And that Princeton-Cornell game will be aired on YES.
Re: penn banner
Posted by: rita (---.resnet.purdue.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 07:54PM
thanks for sharing that... my laugh for the night. yup, quite classic.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 08:12PM
BC takes the 1-0 lead on UNH.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 08:41PM
UND/UAF tied at 1 after 1
BC 2, UNH 1 after 2
Minn/SCSU no score after 1
BC 2, UNH 1 after 2
Minn/SCSU no score after 1
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 08:47PM
Dartmouth-Harvard scoreless in the third.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 08:51PM
Stolen:
13:14 to go in regulation. Still 0-0. Dartmouth getting the territorial adv. again this period.
13:14 to go in regulation. Still 0-0. Dartmouth getting the territorial adv. again this period.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:09PM
1-0 Dartmouth late
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:10PM
2 mins to go at Hanover, 1-0 Green.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:12PM
Harvard ties it in Hanover
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:13PM
and Clarkson ties it with Gate with 1 second left - what a night
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: ben03 (---.rochester.res.rr.com)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:33PM
dartmouth beats sucks 2-1 in ot!!!!!!
thanks for another ivy championship Sucks
thanks for another ivy championship Sucks
___________________________
Let's GO Red!!!
Let's GO Red!!!
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: Dart~Ben (66.240.10.---)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:35PM
You're welcome.
And feel free to send your thanks to Mike Ouellette for yet another Ivy banner.
And feel free to send your thanks to Mike Ouellette for yet another Ivy banner.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: jaybert (---.atlsfl.adelphia.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:36PM
so theres no way that we can lose the ivy league title regardless of what happens tomorrow? I know we only needed 1 pt. this weekend to take the ECAC title
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:37PM
Clarkson/Gate ends in a tie. Gate now 0-1-1 this year against the Knights.
Dartmouth, especially with Jessimen back, could be a force this postseason. Dmouth with two OT wins at home against Cornell and Harvard this year.
Thanks Ben!
Dartmouth, especially with Jessimen back, could be a force this postseason. Dmouth with two OT wins at home against Cornell and Harvard this year.
Thanks Ben!
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: ben03 (---.rochester.res.rr.com)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:38PM
dartmouth v. brown has no impact on the Ivy
[www.ivyleaguesports.com]
[www.ivyleaguesports.com]
___________________________
Let's GO Red!!!
Let's GO Red!!!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2005 09:40PM by ben03.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:38PM
BC/UNH in OT also - UNH also tied it late
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: chris '06 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:41PM
mankato 5 DU 1 in the second period i think
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:52PM
BC/UNH tie at 3
Minn up 2-1 on SCSU early 3rd
UAF 3, UNO 2, 15:00 left
Minn up 2-1 on SCSU early 3rd
UAF 3, UNO 2, 15:00 left
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2005 09:52PM by DeltaOne81.
Minny just tied
Posted by: ithacat (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:53PM
...by SC St., early 3rd.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:59PM
SCSU scores!!
3-2 Huskies!
3-2 Huskies!
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: chris '06 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 09:59PM
Mankato 5 - DU 2
3:40 left in the 2nd
3:40 left in the 2nd
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: chris '06 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:01PM
scratch that 5-3 Mankato now
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: KenP (---.tu.ok.cox.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:03PM
Maine shuts out UMN 2-0. This is good -- keeping Maine in the Top15 preserves our RPI bonus.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:05PM
Minn ties it at 3... 11:00 to go
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: A-19 (---.ne.client2.attbi.com)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:10PM
by what magnitude do DU and Minny losses help our PWR?
looks like currently, without either of the above scores entered on uscho (but with ours), we have 4th seed above minny with a 5-3-1 bonus
looks like currently, without either of the above scores entered on uscho (but with ours), we have 4th seed above minny with a 5-3-1 bonus
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:12PM
Minn pulls ahead, 4-3 with a PPG
I just want to see Minn drop like the sucky team they are. Barely able to handle SCSU = not 5th in the nation.
And just not tonight, 1 point against UAA, etc
I just want to see Minn drop like the sucky team they are. Barely able to handle SCSU = not 5th in the nation.
And just not tonight, 1 point against UAA, etc
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: oceanst41 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:20PM
dump in by Mankato and it bounces off Mannino's(the goalie's) skate and in...seems like he was trying to call icing and it hit him
6-3 Mankato
6-3 Mankato
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:24PM
ENG by Minn from just over the redline - 5-3 - that seems like it'll do it, :40 left
SCSU scored, 5-4, but 3.8 seconds left, and they call a timeout!
but that'll do it
SCSU scored, 5-4, but 3.8 seconds left, and they call a timeout!
but that'll do it
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2005 10:26PM by DeltaOne81.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: oceanst41 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:27PM
another goal in the Mankato/DU game
DU gets it back to two goals 6-4
DU gets it back to two goals 6-4
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: A-19 (---.ne.client2.attbi.com)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:28PM
a DU loss, and a tough win tomorrow leave us competing for #1 idle colo college come monday
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: oceanst41 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:32PM
Now 6-5 Mankato - no one wants to take control of the game
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: oceanst41 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:33PM
Like I said, no one wants to take control
7-5 Mankato
7-5 Mankato
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: oceanst41 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:41PM
Yet another Mankato goal 8-5
I feel bad for this announcer, he never has time to catch his breath
I feel bad for this announcer, he never has time to catch his breath
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:41PM
Give the Cantabs credit: Box score says they got the tying goal with Dov pulled, at 18:46. Although it's not 100% clear what happened since the box also says Dov only played :04 less than the Dartmouth goalie. Was that a miracle-fast goal right off an offensive zone faceoff?
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:42PM
[Q]oceanst41 Wrote: Yet another Mankato goal 8-5. I feel bad for this announcer, he never has time to catch his breath[/q]Yeah - Cornell PA announcer could go into a coma and if it weren't for the penalties, you'd never know he was off the air.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: oceanst41 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:43PM
4:08 left in the 3rd and the "overrated" chants are raining down on DU
although the way this game has gone I wouldn't feel too comfortable
although the way this game has gone I wouldn't feel too comfortable
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: Dart~Ben (66.240.10.---)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:45PM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
Give the Cantabs credit: Box score says they got the tying goal with Dov pulled, at 18:46. Although it's not 100% clear what happened since the box also says Dov only played :04 less than the Dartmouth goalie. Was that a miracle-fast goal right off an offensive zone faceoff? [/q]
Yes.
Yacey save. Harvard time out. Immediatly following said timeout Harvard pulled hyphen and scored right off the faceoff.
Give the Cantabs credit: Box score says they got the tying goal with Dov pulled, at 18:46. Although it's not 100% clear what happened since the box also says Dov only played :04 less than the Dartmouth goalie. Was that a miracle-fast goal right off an offensive zone faceoff? [/q]
Yes.
Yacey save. Harvard time out. Immediatly following said timeout Harvard pulled hyphen and scored right off the faceoff.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: oceanst41 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:48PM
PP DU with 45 seconds left - 3 goals down
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: ninian '72 (---.wdc2-4.15.103.5.wdc2.dsl-verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:50PM
Final: Mankato 8 DU 5
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: oceanst41 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: February 25, 2005 10:50PM
Game over at Mankato - 8-5 final for the Mavericks
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: jy3 (---.buff.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 25, 2005 11:07PM
PENDING (oops caps) alaska game...
3-2-1 Rk Team PWR Record RPI Rk W-L-T Win % Rk RPI 1 Colorado College 29 2 25-6-3 .7794 1 .5950 2 Denver 28 6 22-8-2 .7188 2 .5845 3 Cornell 27 1 21-4-3 .8036 3 .5812 4 Boston College 26 8 19-6-6 .7097 5 .5792 5 Minnesota 25 13 21-12-1 .6324 4 .5795 6 Michigan 24 3 24-7-3 .7500 7 .5726 7 Wisconsin 23 9 21-9-2 .6875 9 .5668 8t New Hampshire 20 4 22-7-4 .7273 8 .5683 8t Mass.-Lowell 20 11 19-8-4 .6774 10 .5632 10t Boston University 19 12 20-10-3 .6515 6 .5791 10t Harvard 19 10 18-8-2 .6786 11 .5622 12 Ohio State 18 5 23-8-3 .7206 12 .5548 13t North Dakota 17 23 16-13-3 .5469 13 .5515 13t Dartmouth 17 18 16-10-2 .6071 18 .5412 15t Maine 15 19 17-10-6 .6061 14 .5486 15t Colgate 15 7 22-8-3 .7121 15 .5450 17 Northern Michigan 14 16t 17-9-7 .6212 20 .5310 18 Michigan State 12 27 14-15-4 .4848 17 .5432 19 Vermont 11 16t 19-11-3 .6212 19 .5338 20 Minnesota State 10 39 11-16-6 .4242 21 .5174 21 Northeastern 8 29t 13-15-5 .4697 16 .5448 22t Bowling Green 7 20 16-11-4 .5806 22 .5108 22t Minnesota-Duluth 7 29t 13-15-5 .4697 28 .5047 24 Nebraska-Omaha 6 24 16-13-4 .5455 26 .5068 25 St. Cloud State 5 38 14-19-2 .4286 25 .5074 26t Alabama-Huntsville 4 14 15-8-4 .6296 24 .5076 26t Alaska-Anchorage 4 40t 10-16-4 .4000 30 .5021 28t Brown 2 22 14-11-3 .5536 29 .5029 28t Bemidji State 2 15 19-11-1 .6290 23 .5087 30 St. Lawrence 1 33 14-17-2 .4545 27 .5055
___________________________
LGR!!!!!!!!!!
jy3 '00
LGR!!!!!!!!!!
jy3 '00
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2005 11:08PM by jy3.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 26, 2005 02:04AM
In the last game of the night, UAA ties MTU 2-2, and UAA drops as a TUC, vaulting Minn back up to tied for 3rd with us. They take the head to head comparison so they're 3rd, we're 4th.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: A-19 (---.ne.client2.attbi.com)
Date: February 26, 2005 03:45AM
that these irrelevant games with obscure teams are impacting our quest for a #1 seed is absolutely ridiculous.
at this point though, we'll keep doing our part with the W's and prove to the committee we deserve it. if we win through the ECAC champs, that'd be a ridiculous unbeaten streak, and i would have to assume the committee would recognize the quality of play in the second half of the season to justify a #1 seed. then again, alot of distance from now til then, and some real quality opponents (probably clarkson in the playoffs @ lynah, dartmouth and 'gate/harvard in albany).
-mike
at this point though, we'll keep doing our part with the W's and prove to the committee we deserve it. if we win through the ECAC champs, that'd be a ridiculous unbeaten streak, and i would have to assume the committee would recognize the quality of play in the second half of the season to justify a #1 seed. then again, alot of distance from now til then, and some real quality opponents (probably clarkson in the playoffs @ lynah, dartmouth and 'gate/harvard in albany).
-mike
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: Will (---.cable.mindspring.com)
Date: February 26, 2005 03:53AM
The committee will believe a #1 seed is justified if the math in the Pairwise Rankings supports us being there, plain and simple. And really, that's the way it should be.
___________________________
Is next year here yet?
Is next year here yet?
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: February 26, 2005 07:32AM
[Q]A-19 Wrote:
that these irrelevant games with obscure teams are impacting our quest for a #1 seed is absolutely ridiculous.[/q]
Irritating, but not ridiculous. PWR is particularly clunky, with the artificial distinctions of TUC and record against common opponents, but even a more sophisticated system would have this effect. There are no irrelevant games. Every decision between every pair of teams bends and shapes the positioning of every team relative to every other. That's as it should be.
that these irrelevant games with obscure teams are impacting our quest for a #1 seed is absolutely ridiculous.[/q]
Irritating, but not ridiculous. PWR is particularly clunky, with the artificial distinctions of TUC and record against common opponents, but even a more sophisticated system would have this effect. There are no irrelevant games. Every decision between every pair of teams bends and shapes the positioning of every team relative to every other. That's as it should be.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: KenP (---.abrfc.noaa.gov)
Date: February 26, 2005 07:46AM
Even though I understand the math, it is ridiculous that Cornell's aspirations for a #1 seed hinge upon Western Michigan and Lake Superior State slugging it out to determine if WMU is just above average or just below average. The "math" would be better served by changing TUC qualification to RPI (KRACH) over 0.5000 (100) AND a winning record.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: ninian '72 (---.dalect01.va.comcast.net)
Date: February 26, 2005 10:22AM
Up to a point. The .500 cutoff is arbitrary and a bit of a blunt instrument. A better algorithm would not allow subtle shifts across an arbitrary criterion to have this kind of an impact. However, an alternative - such as weighting wins/losses by the RPI of an opponent - may be too mathematically impenetrable for lay users of this stuff.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: Josh '99 (---.nyc.rr.com)
Date: February 26, 2005 10:40AM
[Q]KenP Wrote:
Even though I understand the math, it is ridiculous that Cornell's aspirations for a #1 seed hinge upon Western Michigan and Lake Superior State slugging it out to determine if WMU is just above average or just below average. The "math" would be better served by changing TUC qualification to RPI (KRACH) over 0.5000 (100) AND a winning record.[/q](RPI > .5000 and Win% > .5000) is just as sharp a cutoff, and would produce the exact same type of situations, as just using (RPI > .5000). (For instance, Brown has Win% > .500, and will likely finish that way, but their TUC status depends on just as many seemingly extraneous factors as that of WMU and UAA.)
Even though I understand the math, it is ridiculous that Cornell's aspirations for a #1 seed hinge upon Western Michigan and Lake Superior State slugging it out to determine if WMU is just above average or just below average. The "math" would be better served by changing TUC qualification to RPI (KRACH) over 0.5000 (100) AND a winning record.[/q](RPI > .5000 and Win% > .5000) is just as sharp a cutoff, and would produce the exact same type of situations, as just using (RPI > .5000). (For instance, Brown has Win% > .500, and will likely finish that way, but their TUC status depends on just as many seemingly extraneous factors as that of WMU and UAA.)
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: jtwcornell91 (---.no.no.cox.net)
Date: February 26, 2005 11:12AM
[Q]Trotsky Wrote:
A-19 Wrote:
that these irrelevant games with obscure teams are impacting our quest for a #1 seed is absolutely ridiculous.[/Q]
Irritating, but not ridiculous. PWR is particularly clunky, with the artificial distinctions of TUC and record against common opponents, but even a more sophisticated system would have this effect. There are no irrelevant games. Every decision between every pair of teams bends and shapes the positioning of every team relative to every other. That's as it should be.[/q]
Yeah, but the derivative d(significance)/d(RPI) shouldn't blow up at .500.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: KenP (---.abrfc.noaa.gov)
Date: February 26, 2005 11:22AM
Okay, John, you're starting to sway me towards a KRACH-only method. That would combine the RPI issue (additive not multiplicative), TUC issue (meaningless breakpoints), and COP issue (teams play COP different numbers of times). But one thing I like about PWR is it's strong weighting of head-to-head results. If the #4 ranked team was 0-2-1 against the #5 team, wouldn't you feel the #5 team deserves the higher seed? (Note, I used "feel" instead of "think".)
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: jkahn (---.client.comcast.net)
Date: February 26, 2005 11:42AM
[Q]KenP Wrote:
If the #4 ranked team was 0-2-1 against the #5 team, wouldn't you feel the #5 team deserves the higher seed? (Note, I used "feel" instead of "think".)
[/q]
No. The H-to-H games do have a fairly significant effect on the teams' relative KRACH which needed to be made up elsewhere for Team #4 to be ahead of Team #5. By way of example, if baseball team A was 13-6 vs. Team B but finished 2 games behind Team B in the division, would you feel that Team A deserved first place?
If the #4 ranked team was 0-2-1 against the #5 team, wouldn't you feel the #5 team deserves the higher seed? (Note, I used "feel" instead of "think".)
[/q]
No. The H-to-H games do have a fairly significant effect on the teams' relative KRACH which needed to be made up elsewhere for Team #4 to be ahead of Team #5. By way of example, if baseball team A was 13-6 vs. Team B but finished 2 games behind Team B in the division, would you feel that Team A deserved first place?
___________________________
Jeff Kahn '70 '72
Jeff Kahn '70 '72
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: jtwcornell91 (---.no.no.cox.net)
Date: February 26, 2005 11:49AM
[Q]KenP Wrote:
Okay, John, you're starting to sway me towards a KRACH-only method. That would combine the RPI issue (additive not multiplicative), TUC issue (meaningless breakpoints), and COP issue (teams play COP different numbers of times). But one thing I like about PWR is it's strong weighting of head-to-head results. If the #4 ranked team was 0-2-1 against the #5 team, wouldn't you feel the #5 team deserves the higher seed? (Note, I used "feel" instead of "think".)
[/q]
Well, if you really wanted to capture the spirit of a league playoff seeding, you could use KRACH with some sort of a PWC "tie-breaker" if two teams are close in RRWP and/or HHWP. The trick would be how to handle a chain of "almost ties". Suppose the #4 team is close to the #3 team, and the #5 team is close to the #4 team, but the distance between #5 and #3 is greater than your threshhold. You don't want a three-team tiebreaker since #5 should not pass #3, but which tie do you break first? If #4 wins the tiebreak with #3 you never evaluate the tiebreak between #4 and #5. But then the same thing comes up in any tie-breaker system.
Okay, how's this. Rank teams by KASA. If a team's KASA RRWP is less than .0125 above the team below them (one tie in a 40-game schedule), throw the teams into a tie-breaker using
1) head-to-head record
2) head-to-head home ice disadvantage (e.g., if you tied them in their barn you win the tiebreak)
3) KASA
So here we go [www.uscho.com]
1. CC .8585
2. Denver .8320
3T. Wisconsin .7962
3T. Minnesota .7935
Tiebreaker:
Minnesota is 3-1 vs Wisconsin
3. Minnesota .7935
4T. Wisconsin .7962
4T. Michigan .7872
Tiebreaker:
Wisconsin is 1-0 vs Michigan
4. Wisconsin .7962
5. Michigan .7872
6T. Cornell .7733
6T. BC .7716
Tiebreaker:
BC is 1-0 vs Cornell
6. BC .7716
7T. Cornell .7733
7T. UNH .7617
Tiebreaker:
Cornell and UNH have not played; keep the KASA ordering
7. Cornell .7733
8T. UNH .7617
8T. BU .7501
Tiebreaker:
UNH is 1-0 vs BU
8. UNH .7617
9. BU .7501
10. OSU .7332
11T. UML .7173
11T. North Dakota .7102
Tiebreaker:
UML and NoDak have not played; keep the KASA ordering
11. UML .7173
12. UND .7102
13T. Harvard .6852
13T. NMU .6845
Tiebreaker:
NMU and Harvard tied on neutral ice; keep the KASA ordering
13. Harvard .6852
14. NMU .6845
Okay, John, you're starting to sway me towards a KRACH-only method. That would combine the RPI issue (additive not multiplicative), TUC issue (meaningless breakpoints), and COP issue (teams play COP different numbers of times). But one thing I like about PWR is it's strong weighting of head-to-head results. If the #4 ranked team was 0-2-1 against the #5 team, wouldn't you feel the #5 team deserves the higher seed? (Note, I used "feel" instead of "think".)
[/q]
Well, if you really wanted to capture the spirit of a league playoff seeding, you could use KRACH with some sort of a PWC "tie-breaker" if two teams are close in RRWP and/or HHWP. The trick would be how to handle a chain of "almost ties". Suppose the #4 team is close to the #3 team, and the #5 team is close to the #4 team, but the distance between #5 and #3 is greater than your threshhold. You don't want a three-team tiebreaker since #5 should not pass #3, but which tie do you break first? If #4 wins the tiebreak with #3 you never evaluate the tiebreak between #4 and #5. But then the same thing comes up in any tie-breaker system.
Okay, how's this. Rank teams by KASA. If a team's KASA RRWP is less than .0125 above the team below them (one tie in a 40-game schedule), throw the teams into a tie-breaker using
1) head-to-head record
2) head-to-head home ice disadvantage (e.g., if you tied them in their barn you win the tiebreak)
3) KASA
So here we go [www.uscho.com]
1. CC .8585
2. Denver .8320
3T. Wisconsin .7962
3T. Minnesota .7935
Tiebreaker:
Minnesota is 3-1 vs Wisconsin
3. Minnesota .7935
4T. Wisconsin .7962
4T. Michigan .7872
Tiebreaker:
Wisconsin is 1-0 vs Michigan
4. Wisconsin .7962
5. Michigan .7872
6T. Cornell .7733
6T. BC .7716
Tiebreaker:
BC is 1-0 vs Cornell
6. BC .7716
7T. Cornell .7733
7T. UNH .7617
Tiebreaker:
Cornell and UNH have not played; keep the KASA ordering
7. Cornell .7733
8T. UNH .7617
8T. BU .7501
Tiebreaker:
UNH is 1-0 vs BU
8. UNH .7617
9. BU .7501
10. OSU .7332
11T. UML .7173
11T. North Dakota .7102
Tiebreaker:
UML and NoDak have not played; keep the KASA ordering
11. UML .7173
12. UND .7102
13T. Harvard .6852
13T. NMU .6845
Tiebreaker:
NMU and Harvard tied on neutral ice; keep the KASA ordering
13. Harvard .6852
14. NMU .6845
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 26, 2005 12:03PM
How about we just KRACHify the PWR and get it done with. That gets rid of RPI problems, lessens the TUC problem by weighting the lower teams less anyway, and eliminates the lack of SOS in the CoP. Keep the head-to-head, although I feel it should probably only be worth 1 anyway, and tada!
List everything in RRWP, and if there's a tie in that (about as likely as a tie in RPI), then deal with it.
Your math above still picks an "arbitrary" cutoff for what is a tie. Not too much better (well, okay, better, but still arbitrary).
List everything in RRWP, and if there's a tie in that (about as likely as a tie in RPI), then deal with it.
Your math above still picks an "arbitrary" cutoff for what is a tie. Not too much better (well, okay, better, but still arbitrary).
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: jtwcornell91 (---.no.no.cox.net)
Date: February 26, 2005 12:21PM
[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:
How about we just KRACHify the PWR and get it done with. That gets rid of RPI problems, lessens the TUC problem by weighting the lower teams less anyway, and eliminates the lack of SOS in the CoP. Keep the head-to-head, although I feel it should probably only be worth 1 anyway, and tada![/q]
You mean like this?
[slack.net]
BTW, I just fixed a bug that was keeping the "count H2H as one criterion" option not work. Now it does.
How about we just KRACHify the PWR and get it done with. That gets rid of RPI problems, lessens the TUC problem by weighting the lower teams less anyway, and eliminates the lack of SOS in the CoP. Keep the head-to-head, although I feel it should probably only be worth 1 anyway, and tada![/q]
You mean like this?
[slack.net]
BTW, I just fixed a bug that was keeping the "count H2H as one criterion" option not work. Now it does.
Re: Friday 2/25 other scores
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 26, 2005 12:30PM
I am aware of your script and yup, like that.
I realize it doesn't produce vastly different results, but it does at least produce them in a way that is less prone to swings and turns and random stupidities.
I realize it doesn't produce vastly different results, but it does at least produce them in a way that is less prone to swings and turns and random stupidities.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.