Out of town 10/13:
RPI 3 at Maine 6
Vermont 3 at St. Lawrence 1
(18) Penn State 4 at Clarkson 2
(5) Quinnipiac 3 at AIC 2 (ot)
Colgate 3 at Sacred Heart 2
Union 3 at Colorado College 7
2-4-0 15-24
Season:
5-8-1 35-44
Out of town 10/14:
AIC 0 at (5) Quinnipiac 8
Vermont 2 at Clarkson 3
(18) Penn State 4 at St. Lawrence 1
Colgate 6 at Sacred Heart 1
Union losing at CC, 2nd period
Out of town 10/20:
UConn 1 at Union 4
RPI 1 at #3 BC 6
#4 Quinnipiac 5 at UNH 2
Clarkson 1 at Merrimack 4
Lowell 4 at Colgate 2
UConn had 29 shots on Union goalie Kyle Chauvette in the first period today, and did not score.
Final was 5-0 UConn, with 66 shots.
Woof, we had an EZAC night:
UConn 5 at Union 0
RPI 2 at #10 Providence 4
#4 Quinnipiac 4 at UNH 5
Lowell 5 at Colgate 2
Unhelpful.
Quote from: TrotskyWoof, we had an EZAC night:
UConn 5 at Union 0
RPI 2 at #10 Providence 4
#4 Quinnipiac 4 at UNH 5
Lowell 5 at Colgate 2
Unhelpful.
At least our OOC opponents have done very well so far and should help our SOS.
"A gathering place for wanderers and a resting place for free spirits (https://ecachockey.com/news/2023/10/22/general-ecac-hockey-bluebird-by-lark-hotels-announce-partnership.aspx)"
This appears to be the latest owner of the hotel on the steep hill (Saranac Ave) perpendicular to the main street in Lake Placid, just opposite Black Bear (at the far end of the drag from the rink). If it's the one I am thinking of, it has gone through several iterations over the last 30 years.
I noticed on C HN and USCHO there has been almost no discussion of ECAC at all.
I did see a story on Dart, but no previews
Quote from: upprdeckI noticed on C HN and USCHO there has been almost no discussion of ECAC at all.
I did see a story on Dart, but no previews
Here are the CHN capsule previews (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2023/10/08_2023-24-ECAC-Team-Preview.php). They pick Cornell to finish second.
Quote from: dbilmesHere are the CHN capsule previews (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2023/10/08_2023-24-ECAC-Team-Preview.php). They pick Cornell to finish second.
And the Cornell preview contains some fantastic writing. ::wtf::
Quote from: College Hockey NewsWeakness: Experience. Although is not unlike most other college hockey teams.
The last sentence there sound like someone asked ChatGPT to talk like a caveman.
Quote from: Trotsky"A gathering place for wanderers and a resting place for free spirits (https://ecachockey.com/news/2023/10/22/general-ecac-hockey-bluebird-by-lark-hotels-announce-partnership.aspx)"
This appears to be the latest owner of the hotel on the steep hill (Saranac Ave) perpendicular to the main street in Lake Placid, just opposite Black Bear (at the far end of the drag from the rink). If it's the one I am thinking of, it has gone through several iterations over the last 30 years.
The Bluebird Lake Placid is the former Lake Placid Summit Hotel. It is on Main Street in Lake Placid, across the street from the HIgh Peaks Resort (Hilton in the Miracle on Ice Era). The facility feels as if it's been under renovation for 2 years. I believe, not sure, how much the exterior has been spiffed up because it previously had a motel feel. The hotel is at the opposite end of the main part of Main Street in LP, a 7-10 minute walk from the rinks.
The other renewed hotel to check out is the Grand Adirondack Hotel, also on Main Street, 3-4 minutes from the rink. It was a grand, a little aging, facility before as the Northwoods Inn. There was a disconnect between the raucous bar on the main floor and the rooms upstairs.
In flux is Airbnb-type short-term-rental lodging. LP like other resort towns believes if you renovate a house or half a house so it rents for $500 a night, it takes lodging away from hotel servers and bartenders, and ski resort workers who'd have trouble scaring up $500 a month for a shared bedroom. In downtown LP, there have been complaints about raucous lodgers in unhosted (no owner or manager on-site) facilities. See this story in the https://adirondackexplorer.org/stories/lake-placid-short-term-rentals
Resort towns exist by monetizing alcoholism and sexual assault. I'm not sure what they expected.
Jeez, the SLU color guy is a major homer.
And now time for a pointless shootout, as they tie 2-2 with MTU.
Nice to see Q and Clarkson lose in OT, and Harvard tie lowly Dartmouth.
The Harvard-Dartmouth shootout was hilarious (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/box/final/20231027/har/dar/).
Quote from: TrotskyThe Harvard-Dartmouth shootout was hilarious (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/box/final/20231027/har/dar/).
did they confiscate their sticks?
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: TrotskyThe Harvard-Dartmouth shootout was hilarious (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/box/final/20231027/har/dar/).
did they confiscate their sticks?
18 guys shot for each team. They each had at most 19 non-goalies dressed. What happens if all the non-goalies had shot? Do they start over...take the pads off a goalie? Seriously...what's the rule?
watching it live when the announcers had no idea how many shots they had gone thru I was also wondering if they started over.. do they make the goalies shoot which would be more fitting way to end it.
Looking at the Pairwise, once you eliminate the Ivy teams only 4 teams left without a loss already.
some lines for the NC on ecac teams
Quin 12-1
Harv 25-1
Cornell 50-1
Everyone else 300-1 ot higher
After the conference carnage last night, here are our PWRs:
2 Qpc
21 Cor
28 Drt
30 Hvd
32 Clk
42 Uni
46 Cgt
54 RPI
55 Brn
58 Prn
59 Yal
62 SLU
eeeeugggh
We'll see. Last year wasn't a good year for the ECAC either, but we somehow wound up with four teams in (well, three and an autobid).
That being said, holy crap that's awful.
A good thing we beat Minn Dul/BC and have Ariz St and UMass on the schedule so we a chance out of OC wins.
Super big weekend to get things back turned around.
Quote from: upprdeckA good thing we beat Minn Dul/BC and have Ariz St and UMass on the schedule so we a chance out of OC wins.
Super big weekend to get things back turned around.
Imagine! Beating BU and BC in a single weekend. FYP! ::doh::
Hopefully this is the last night we can say this: it's December and we have no home conference wins.
It better be the last, since otherwise we'll be saying: it's January and we have no home conference wins. Which BTW Harvard will be saying through at least 1/18/24.
Quinnipiac currently annihilating another ECAC opponent, this time Union. Maybe they'll get bored and leave for Hockey East and Cornell will be able to win the ECAC again. Or we can wait two more years for the fifth year eligibility rule to be gone so that we can be on a somewhat level playing field with them.
Holy smokes, this conference is a dumpster fire even by our usual standards. Pairwise rankings:
3
24
32
42
43
45
52
54
56
58
60
62
This conference sucks. Programs should be embarrassed by how much they have fallen since COVID. Yale, Princeton, Union and could go on, historically good programs who have just packed it in
Absolute joke
It's a down period, it oscillates. And we did produce the defending national champion.
Quote from: Big DingusThis conference sucks. Programs should be embarrassed by how much they have fallen since COVID. Yale, Princeton, Union and could go on, historically good programs who have just packed it in
Absolute joke
The conference sucked before COVID, too. As far as why things are currently particularly bad, i think the issue is the transfer portal. The Ivies basically can't take transfers, so they are at a huge disadvantage compared to everyone else. A couple of additional reasons: RPI canceled the 20-21 season like the Ivies, and then continued banning fans from attending in 21-22 for some reason. Union fired their coach and their best players (including Seger) transferred out.
Quote from: BearLoverand then continued banning fans from attending in 21-22 for some reason.
To keep them alive?
It is great that in the event that was probably an over reaction, but far better that than reigniting a public health emergency (https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/2020/05/22/second-wave-coronavirus-spanish-flu-1918-philadelphia-st-louis-influenza-deaths-covid-19/3085405001/).
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: BearLoverand then continued banning fans from attending in 21-22 for some reason.
To keep them alive?
It is great that in the event that was probably an over reaction, but far better that than reigniting a public health emergency (https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/2020/05/22/second-wave-coronavirus-spanish-flu-1918-philadelphia-st-louis-influenza-deaths-covid-19/3085405001/).
The vaccines had been widely available for months by that point. Banning fans from the games made no difference. Fans can make their own decisions whether to go to the grocery store, get on public transportation, attend any sporting event (RPI or otherwise). The administration banning them from choosing to attend a hockey game likely had zero effect on anything. By that logic, Lynah shouldn't allow fans ever again.
No need to relitigate this. The point is that many at RPI took the administration's decision to indicate that it didn't care about athletics. I'm sure the decision hurt recruiting.
keeping them from games made the whole mask policy issue and the crowding of public spaces thing easier to deal with.
and you still have to staff those things in a time where many staff were told to stay home.
when 40% of the country was ignoring the issue and helping the spread playing sports was always a dumb thing, but money talks.
Hindsight is always 20/20 -- what I remember from those days is marveling at how little anyone actually knew about the virus and the consequences of group behavior. It was perfectly acceptable to me to go into isolation even when it was difficult to do and painful. Because the worst-case scenario was being dead, and I will take unhappy over dead any day of the week.
So looking back, a lot of things could have been done differently but at the time, decisionmakers had to work with what they had.
jesus christ can we not talk about this again? whatever the decision-making process was for public health, it's beside the point being made about the impact on hockey fandom.
28 days until the next Cornell game. Talk about anything you want.
The conference sucked before COVID? So you clearly didn't watch the ECAC before. Bearlover you have no idea what you're talking about lol
Quote from: Big DingusThe conference sucked before COVID? So you clearly didn't watch the ECAC before. Bearlover you have no idea what you're talking about lol
Ugh, I can't keep getting tricked like this. Here I thought I'd been avidly following the ECAC (.409 interconference win% in 2019-20, .481 in 2018-19, .457 in 2017-18, very similar to the post-COVID numbers), when in fact I was confused and actually had been watching Atlantic Hockey the whole time!
And remember, those numbers include Cornell—for our purposes (judging the quality of our opposition), those win% are actually considerably lower!
Just do a pairwise comparison pre covid to now... Its not even close
Clarkson
Union
Princeton
Yale
Were all strong solid teams, now they are low every year in pairwise post covid
Quote from: Big DingusJust do a pairwise comparison pre covid to now... Its not even close
Clarkson
Union
Princeton
Yale
Were all strong solid teams, now they are low every year in pairwise post covid
By overall record:
Clarkson: bad 2009-2013, good 2016-2022
Union: bad 1998-2007, good 2008-2019, bad 2020-
Princeton: bad 2012-2023 except 2018
Yale: bad 1999-2007, good 2008-2016, mediocre 2017-2020, bad 2022-
This reminds me to do final PWR position for all ECAC team for as many years as we have history. Anybody who wants to, I would appreciate it. Otherwise, I'll do it tonight.
All yours Bearlover
ECAC Final PWR (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ecac_History/ecac_PWR.html) by Year, since 2001
0-5 OOC night (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/schedules/scoreboard.php) for the ECAC.
ECAC teams in the PWR bands:
1-16: 1
17-32: 3
33-48: 3
49-64: 5
For comparison, HE:
1-16: 6
17-32: 4
33-48: 1
49-64: 0
The only good thing about the ECAC being so mediocore this year is that with the exception of games involving Q, there is a lot of parity in the league. Friday night, for example, Yale gave up the tying goal late to RPI in the third period only to respond with the winning goal just 40 seconds later. Brown, meanwhile, tied Union on an extra-attacker goal with just 26 seconds remaining and then won the game in OT.
It wasn't an ECAC game, but if Cornell ends up sneaking into the NCAAs by a few hundredths of a point in the PWR, that might be because UConn somehow failed to score on a 2-on-0 breakaway against UMass in OT. Although UConn won the ensuing shootout, that won't have an effect on the PWR. UMass didn't get the win, but at least it didn't get a loss either.
Quote from: dbilmesThe only good thing about the ECAC being so mediocore this year is that with the exception of games involving Q, there is a lot of parity in the league. Friday night, for example, Yale gave up the tying goal late in the third period only to respond with the winning goal just 40 seconds later. Brown, meanwhile, tied RPI on an extra-attacker goal with just 26 seconds remaining and then won the game in OT.
It wasn't an ECAC game, but if Cornell ends up sneaking into the NCAAs by a few hundredths of a point in the PWR, that might be because UConn somehow failed to score on a 2-on-0 breakaway against UMass in OT. Although UConn won the ensuing shootout, that won't have an effect on the PWR. UMass didn't get the win, but at least it didn't get a loss either.
Yes, except Brown did that to Union and Yale had RPI.
If the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell's odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell's odds of beating (for example) Union, we'd rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell's RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.
The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell's recruiting. It doesn't seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it's not worth relitigating.)
Quote from: BearLoverIf the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell's odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell's odds of beating (for example) Union, we'd rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell's RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.
The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell's recruiting. It doesn't seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it's not worth relitigating.)
That's a good point about doing better in a weaker conference, but I think with in-conference coaches knowing each other better, you get a little more parity in in-conference games. Kind of like how divisional NFL games always seem more random than non-divisional.
Point taken, though. We are having a real weird one where we are doing very well out of conference and kinda badly so far in conference.
Because this is always such a popular feature, Cornell currently has a 15% chance of winning the title in Lake Placid, and a 23% chance of making the NC$$ tournament, according to PlayoffStatus.com (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecacstandings.html).
PlayoffStatus.com: because that aneurism isn't going to trigger itself.
If you hate Union like, oh I dunno, this friend of mine, you enjoyed (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/box/final/20240105/brn/uni/) this weekend (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/box/final/20240106/yal/uni/).
Quote from: BearLoverIf the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell's odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell's odds of beating (for example) Union, we'd rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell's RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.
The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell's recruiting. It doesn't seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it's not worth relitigating.)
I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn't realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.
Quote from: chimpfoodQuote from: BearLoverIf the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell's odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell's odds of beating (for example) Union, we'd rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell's RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.
The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell's recruiting. It doesn't seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it's not worth relitigating.)
I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn't realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.
That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: chimpfoodQuote from: BearLoverIf the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell's odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell's odds of beating (for example) Union, we'd rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell's RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.
The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell's recruiting. It doesn't seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it's not worth relitigating.)
I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn't realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.
That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.
yeah good point, I don't really know what I'm saying, I'm just biased toward whatever will help Cornell.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: chimpfoodQuote from: BearLoverIf the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell's odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell's odds of beating (for example) Union, we'd rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell's RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.
The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell's recruiting. It doesn't seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it's not worth relitigating.)
I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn't realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.
That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.
No! The good teams don't "adjust" to play bad teams. Sure, you prepare for specific opponents but to the extent that bad teams adjust to good teams in hockey, the idea is to make the game a slog, maybe a violent one. You can't really "adjust" to that so much as endure it. The good teams usually win anyway because ... they are the good teams.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: chimpfoodQuote from: BearLoverIf the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell's odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell's odds of beating (for example) Union, we'd rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell's RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.
The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell's recruiting. It doesn't seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it's not worth relitigating.)
I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn't realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.
That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.
No! The good teams don't "adjust" to play bad teams. Sure, you prepare for specific opponents but to the extent that bad teams adjust to good teams in hockey, the idea is to make the game a slog, maybe a violent one. You can't really "adjust" to that so much as endure it. The good teams usually win anyway because ... they are the good teams.
That may be easier said than done. Cornell probably would have liked to make their game against BU this year a slog, but they couldn't, because BU is too fast and skilled. So BU ended up getting like 12 grade-A chances and a ton of O-zone time (luckily only one goal went in).
It seems like almost every year, it's easy for the best ECAC team to dominate the weaker teams. For example, this season Quinnipiac is 7-0-1 in the ECAC, outscoring its opponents 43-14.
so far cornell has played Quin/Mass/Ariz st/Bu and only 1 game did they really lose control
Lets see what happens again vs ASU.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: ugarteQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: chimpfoodQuote from: BearLoverIf the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell's odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell's odds of beating (for example) Union, we'd rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell's RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.
The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell's recruiting. It doesn't seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it's not worth relitigating.)
I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn't realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.
That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.
No! The good teams don't "adjust" to play bad teams. Sure, you prepare for specific opponents but to the extent that bad teams adjust to good teams in hockey, the idea is to make the game a slog, maybe a violent one. You can't really "adjust" to that so much as endure it. The good teams usually win anyway because ... they are the good teams.
That may be easier said than done. Cornell probably would have liked to make their game against BU this year a slog, but they couldn't, because BU is too fast and skilled. So BU ended up getting like 12 grade-A chances and a ton of O-zone time (luckily only one goal went in).
It seems like almost every year, it's easy for the best ECAC team to dominate the weaker teams. For example, this season Quinnipiac is 7-0-1 in the ECAC, outscoring its opponents 43-14.
If the BU announcers were to be believed, the size, grit, and defensive effort of BU was up against the firepower of Cornell.
Quote from: chimpfoodQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: chimpfoodQuote from: BearLoverIf the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell's odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell's odds of beating (for example) Union, we'd rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell's RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.
The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell's recruiting. It doesn't seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it's not worth relitigating.)
I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn't realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.
That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.
yeah good point, I don't really know what I'm saying, I'm just biased toward whatever will help Cornell.
Bear eats Chimp
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: ugarteQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: chimpfoodQuote from: BearLoverIf the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell's odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell's odds of beating (for example) Union, we'd rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell's RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.
The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell's recruiting. It doesn't seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it's not worth relitigating.)
I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn't realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.
That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.
No! The good teams don't "adjust" to play bad teams. Sure, you prepare for specific opponents but to the extent that bad teams adjust to good teams in hockey, the idea is to make the game a slog, maybe a violent one. You can't really "adjust" to that so much as endure it. The good teams usually win anyway because ... they are the good teams.
That may be easier said than done. Cornell probably would have liked to make their game against BU this year a slog, but they couldn't, because BU is too fast and skilled. So BU ended up getting like 12 grade-A chances and a ton of O-zone time (luckily only one goal went in).
That's MY point! They don't "know how to play against the bad teams," they are "better at hockey than the bad teams."
First weekend with all 12 ECAC teams playing each other in quite a while.
There's 14 games to go, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses.
Cornell is the CHN Team of the Week. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2024/01/17_Team-of-the-Week-Cornell.php)
That was, unexpectedly, a good article. Bravo CHN.
It was written by Jane, the Cornell student who reached out to eLynah about the hockey coverage. Kudos to her.
She's also on the field hockey team. Props to anyone who can balance classes, a varsity sport and the Sun.
Quote from: TrotskyThere's 14 games to go, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses.
Hit it!
this 3 losses are really the killers to the season.
just winning 2 and we are top 10 in PWR and 2nd in the league with games in hand
Quote from: upprdeckthis 3 losses are really the killers to the season.
just winning 2 and we are top 10 in PWR and 2nd in the league with games in hand
Against Harvard and Princeton we had the better of the play, so us not winning was as much bad luck as anything. On the other hand, by far the most inexcusable game this season was the Colgate game at home. Colgate, a poor team in the first place, was so banged up they could only dress 4 defensemen. And yet, play was even. It was the last game before break, in our rink, and we laid an egg. Awful.
Quote from: upprdeckthis 3 losses are really the killers to the season.
just winning 2 and we are top 10 in PWR and 2nd in the league with games in hand
Its not really fair for us to turn around the results of those games without at least getting rid of the BU win. Sure we outplayed Princeton and harvard pretty significantly but the same can be said for BU vs us.
i didnt think BU outplayed us in a big way.. They out shot us for sure in the 3rd period.
Quote from: upprdecki didnt think BU outplayed us in a big way.. They out shot us for sure in the 3rd period.
I remember someone posted the expected goals for each team on the game thread and it was rough.
Quote from: upprdeckthis 3 losses are really the killers to the season.
just winning 2 and we are top 10 in PWR and 2nd in the league with games in hand
One problem with having a lot of bad teams in conference is it increases the likelihood of a stinker severely punishing us in PWR.
All we can do is play our game the next 14. As Schafer says in the article: play a faceless opponent. Take care of what we can control and que sera sera.
Quote from: chimpfoodQuote from: upprdecki didnt think BU outplayed us in a big way.. They out shot us for sure in the 3rd period.
I remember someone posted the expected goals for each team on the game thread and it was rough.
I bet if you did that for the ASU game we scored about half the expected goals.. Breakaways and off man rushes and high quality shots are not our strength.
The other reality is that we have really only given up goals a couple games so may expected goals allowed vs us is lower and our expected goals for is lower because we cant shoot.
Quote from: chimpfoodQuote from: upprdecki didnt think BU outplayed us in a big way.. They out shot us for sure in the 3rd period.
I remember someone posted the expected goals for each team on the game thread and it was rough.
That was me. It was like 5 for BU to 2 for Cornell, and tbh I thought that was pretty evident from watching the game.
Quote from: TrotskyThat was, unexpectedly, a good article. Bravo CHN.
no one accepts kudos, when you preface with "unexpectedly"
Quote from: adamwQuote from: TrotskyThat was, unexpectedly, a good article. Bravo CHN.
no one accepts kudos, when you preface with "unexpectedly"
(https://media2.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExdmZwN29va21vaGl5MWE0bTEzc2YzdWk1b2VraDhxbG0weHhnMWhzOCZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/1zR9xtZfWu4e7qq9Oo/giphy.gif)
In retrospect, it being by Jane, I am not surprised at all. She is a fine writer which, in sports journalism, may make her the first ever.
I didn't want to start another thread, but feel free to move if in the wrong space:
NCAA Hockey Regionals to Home Sites (https://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/und-hockey/why-its-time-to-move-ncaa-mens-hockey-regionals-to-home-sites)
Quote from: The RancorI didn't want to start another thread, but feel free to move if in the wrong space:
NCAA Hockey Regionals to Home Sites (https://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/und-hockey/why-its-time-to-move-ncaa-mens-hockey-regionals-to-home-sites)
QuoteIt started with a game between Minnesota State and Harvard in Albany, N.Y. The crowd was sparse enough to count by hand — in a venue that seats more than 10,000. Pandemic-restricted crowds were larger.
But this was a Covid restricted event. We had to show proof of a negative Covid test to get in. The mask police were out in force and we had to sit with space between "parties".
(I do agree the regional games do not draw well and I'd be OK with college venues.)
Quote from: The RancorI didn't want to start another thread, but feel free to move if in the wrong space:
NCAA Hockey Regionals to Home Sites (https://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/und-hockey/why-its-time-to-move-ncaa-mens-hockey-regionals-to-home-sites)
I agree in theory, but as the only person rooting for us to get placed in Sioux Falls, I'm not sure I agree in practice.
Quote from: The RancorI didn't want to start another thread, but feel free to move if in the wrong space:
NCAA Hockey Regionals to Home Sites (https://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/und-hockey/why-its-time-to-move-ncaa-mens-hockey-regionals-to-home-sites)
Moved to 2024 NCAAs thread (http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,248962).
Pct in conference (by Derp Points) after tonight:
1. Qpc .806
2. Clk .667
3. Cgt .600
[color=#b31313]4. Cor .567[/color]
------------
5. Uni .556
6. SLU .533
7. Brn .487
8. Drt .394
------------
9. Hvd .389
10. Yal .385
11. Prn .359
12. RPI .333
ECAC Pct after 1/26:
1. Qpc .821
2. Clk .697
[color=#b31313]3. Cor .606[/color]
Cgt .606
------------
5. Uni .556
6. Brn .487
7. SLU .485
8. Drt .389
------------
9. Hvd .359
Prn .359
11. Yal .357
12. RPI .333
Despite the disappointment tonight, if we take 6 points next weekend we will be alone in 2nd.
Let's go Red!
we now control our own destiny. Thats about all you can ask..
I'm feeling good about Cornell's chances in the ECAC tournament: the ability to have a first-round bye, then home ice at Lynah for the quarterfinals March 15-17, then second or third seeding in the semifinals (and 7:30 not 4 pm faceoff in Lake Placid March 22 to make it easier to drive up Friday).
Quinnipiac would need a historic meltdown to not be seeded first. Woe unto whoever comes into LP with the low seed and plays them. There's not much difference being the second vs. third seed in LP; for either, Quinnipiac is not a problem until Saturday, and there's always the chance of an upset by the #4 team. Q has been beaten by Colgate, by Cornell (OT) and by Dartmouth (OT shootout).
We (and Colgate) are done playing Q, have both the home and away Clarkson and St. Lawrence games remaining, ditto RPI and Union; plus singles with Brown and Yale. Union and Clarkson both have their second Quinnipiac game to play, as does St. Lawrence.
Q in ECAC has lost only to Cornell (OT), Colgate 2-1, and Dartmouth (OT shootout).
We battle Clarkson, Colgate, Union, and St. Lawrence for 2nd through 6th, with 6 of those 8 games still to play. By NC record, we and Clarkson are the lead pair.
Make that happen:
(1) win the games we should (cough, like at Dartmouth)
(2) beat Clarkson in Lake Placid
(3) beat Quinnipiac in Lake Placid
ECAC Hockey Tournament Probabilities (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecachockeypostseasonprob.html)[b]
SF F Title[/b]
Qpc .96 .74 .45
[color=#b31313]Cor .91 .65 .35[/color]
Cgt .59 .18 .06
Clk .41 .13 .05
Quote from: TrotskyECAC Hockey Tournament Probabilities (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecachockeypostseasonprob.html)[b]
SF F Title[/b]
Qpc .96 .74 .45
[color=#b31313]Cor .91 .65 .35[/color]
Cgt .59 .18 .06
Clk .41 .13 .05
I wonder what chance Colgate had of winning the tournament a year ago at this time.
Quote from: dbilmesI wonder what chance Colgate had of winning the tournament a year ago at this time.
We should be wary. After all, just two years ago they came into Lynah for the QF and knocked us out (http://www.tbrw.info/?/games/cornell_Playoff_Games.html).
Quote from: TrotskyECAC Hockey Tournament Probabilities (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecachockeypostseasonprob.html)[b]
SF F Title[/b]
Qpc .96 .74 .45
[color=#b31313]Cor .91 .65 .35[/color]
Cgt .59 .18 .06
Clk .41 .13 .05
This season I will not say a word about how these "predictions" have zero predictive value because they are entirely derived from a ranking which is not predictive. I will stay silent about the fact these rankings are not backtested at all to improve accuracy but instead use the same rudimentary formula every year with no attempt to improve them. And I will certainly keep quiet about how these "predictions" dupe so many well meaning fans into citing them. I have resigned myself to the fact that people just love "trash in, trash out" predictions of things, no matter how useless they are. As such, I will avoid this topic entirely this year.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyECAC Hockey Tournament Probabilities (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecachockeypostseasonprob.html)[b]
SF F Title[/b]
Qpc .96 .74 .45
[color=#b31313]Cor .91 .65 .35[/color]
Cgt .59 .18 .06
Clk .41 .13 .05
This season I will not say a word about how these "predictions" have zero predictive value because they are entirely derived from a ranking which is not predictive. I will stay silent about the fact these rankings are not backtested at all to improve accuracy but instead use the same rudimentary formula every year with no attempt to improve them. And I will certainly keep quiet about how these "predictions" dupe so many well meaning fans into citing them. I have resigned myself to the fact that people just love "trash in, trash out" predictions of things, no matter how useless they are. As such, I will avoid this topic entirely this year.
That would be too good to be true...sadly.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyECAC Hockey Tournament Probabilities (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecachockeypostseasonprob.html)[b]
SF F Title[/b]
Qpc .96 .74 .45
[color=#b31313]Cor .91 .65 .35[/color]
Cgt .59 .18 .06
Clk .41 .13 .05
This season I will not say a word about how these "predictions" have zero predictive value because they are entirely derived from a ranking which is not predictive. I will stay silent about the fact these rankings are not backtested at all to improve accuracy but instead use the same rudimentary formula every year with no attempt to improve them. And I will certainly keep quiet about how these "predictions" dupe so many well meaning fans into citing them. I have resigned myself to the fact that people just love "trash in, trash out" predictions of things, no matter how useless they are. As such, I will avoid this topic entirely this year.
Think of them as pointing backwards, not forwards.
If the top teams are as good as their records, here are the odds. Are they as good as their records? Stay tuned to find out.
They're fun. Sports is entertainment.
Article about our tournament chances on USCHO today
https://www.uscho.com/2024/02/06/tmq-how-high-will-the-pairwise-bubble-go-as-college-hockey-teams-keep-battling-for-ncaa-tournament-positioning/
If we peak at the right time...
(https://resizing.flixster.com/FG8ATMWSrLpXCyi-OVDfTgkacbs=/300x300/v2/https://resizing.flixster.com/-XZAfHZM39UwaGJIFWKAE8fS0ak=/v3/t/assets/p23055_v_v13_ah.jpg)
Quote from: Mr. NissArticle about our tournament chances on USCHO today
https://www.uscho.com/2024/02/06/tmq-how-high-will-the-pairwise-bubble-go-as-college-hockey-teams-keep-battling-for-ncaa-tournament-positioning/
It also pts out the issue of RPI having so much power in the rankings.
Quote from: upprdeckQuote from: Mr. NissArticle about our tournament chances on USCHO today
https://www.uscho.com/2024/02/06/tmq-how-high-will-the-pairwise-bubble-go-as-college-hockey-teams-keep-battling-for-ncaa-tournament-positioning/
It also pts out the issue of RPI having so much power in the rankings.
After Friday, you will know that RPI doesn't have much power, and the penalty kill is at the bottom of the NCAA. ;-)
Quote from: ursusminorAfter Friday, you will know that RPI doesn't have much power, and the penalty kill is at the bottom of the NCAA. ;-)
In other words, exactly the kind of team that Cornell fans should be worried about at this point. ::uhoh::
Quote from: Give My RegardsQuote from: ursusminorAfter Friday, you will know that RPI doesn't have much power, and the penalty kill is at the bottom of the NCAA. ;-)
In other words, exactly the kind of team that Cornell fans should be worried about at this point. ::uhoh::
RPI is due to upset someone. The only real upset so far this year was beating Clarkson in Potsdam, but RPI doesn't have the talent it had on 12/4/68 (or even 12/1/70), and nowhere near the fan support it had then.
Quote from: ursusminorQuote from: Give My RegardsQuote from: ursusminorAfter Friday, you will know that RPI doesn't have much power, and the penalty kill is at the bottom of the NCAA. ;-)
In other words, exactly the kind of team that Cornell fans should be worried about at this point. ::uhoh::
RPI is due to upset someone. The only real upset so far this year was beating Clarkson in Potsdam, but RPI doesn't have the talent it had on 12/4/68 (or even 12/1/70), and nowhere near the fan support it had then.
I remember reading this in the Troy Record in 1968.
Uh oh. They're multiplying. ;-)
Speaking of, does anybody know if ChiefAlbanyBear (?) is still around? I loved that guy, and now that we score goals he must be happy.
Quote from: TrotskyUh oh. They're multiplying. ;-)
Speaking of, does anybody know if ChiefAlbanyBear (?) is still around? I loved that guy, and now that we score goals he must be happy.
I'm in contact with him regularly. He's still loving life.
"SCORE MORE GOALS!"
Tell him to get his ass back here. He was a blast, and he's still younger than half of us.
ECAC Hockey Tournament Probabilities (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecachockeypostseasonprob.html)[b]
SF F Title[/b]
Qpc .94 .69 .39
[color=#b31313]Cor .92 .66 .38[/color]
Clk .47 .16 .06
Cgt .53 .16 .05
Since first of the year, Cornell is (if I'm counting correctly) averaging 4.2 goals a game (42 goals in 10 games) and giving up 1.4 goals/game (14 in 10) for a +2.8 goal differential. I would bet that's Cornell's best goal differential over 10 games in a long, long time.
And doing it without much from the PP..
when we get to 3 goals we are 13-1 great except Quin is 18-1-1.
Quote from: TrotskyThey're fun. Sports is entertainment.
A lot of wisdom in those five words.
Quote from: upprdeckAnd doing it without much from the PP..
when we get to 3 goals we are 13-1 great except Quin is 18-1-1.
That's how I've always thought about the best Schafer-coached teams: "If we score three goals, you lose".
I was fortunate enough to experience Cornell hockey at Lynah Rink form its first, Paul Patton days, and I cherish memories of the Ned Harkness days:
"You show up? You lose!"
win tomorrow and Union or Clark lose and home ice is locked.
Gabriel Seger Named 2024 ECAC Hockey Men's Scholar-Athlete of the Year (https://ecachockey.com/news/2024/2/23/mens-ice-hockey-gabriel-seger-named-2024-ecac-hockey-mens-scholar-athlete-of-the-year.aspx). Congratulations Gabe! Also interesting to note, Cornell alum, Ben Tupker '23, was Union's nominee.
Quote from: George64Gabriel Seger Named 2024 ECAC Hockey Men's Scholar-Athlete of the Year (https://ecachockey.com/news/2024/2/23/mens-ice-hockey-gabriel-seger-named-2024-ecac-hockey-mens-scholar-athlete-of-the-year.aspx). Congratulations Gabe! Also interesting to note, Cornell alum, Ben Tupker '23, was Union's nominee.
Often "scholar" athlete awards have more than a hint of bullshit about them, but from that article Seger certainly sounds like an impressive student.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: George64Gabriel Seger Named 2024 ECAC Hockey Men's Scholar-Athlete of the Year (https://ecachockey.com/news/2024/2/23/mens-ice-hockey-gabriel-seger-named-2024-ecac-hockey-mens-scholar-athlete-of-the-year.aspx). Congratulations Gabe! Also interesting to note, Cornell alum, Ben Tupker '23, was Union's nominee.
Often "scholar" athlete awards have more than a hint of bullshit about them, but from that article Seger certainly sounds like an impressive student.
Making his achievements even more impressive is that English is his second language.
Nothing against sever or student athletes in general, I know how hard it is to balance sports and school, but it's kinda funny that a 3.5 gpa wins scholar athlete of the year for the whole league.
Quote from: chimpfoodNothing against sever or student athletes in general, I know how hard it is to balance sports and school, but it's kinda funny that a 3.5 gpa wins scholar athlete of the year for the whole league.
3.5 in Engineering is like a 3.8 in another school though I think.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: George64Gabriel Seger Named 2024 ECAC Hockey Men's Scholar-Athlete of the Year (https://ecachockey.com/news/2024/2/23/mens-ice-hockey-gabriel-seger-named-2024-ecac-hockey-mens-scholar-athlete-of-the-year.aspx). Congratulations Gabe! Also interesting to note, Cornell alum, Ben Tupker '23, was Union's nominee.
Often "scholar" athlete awards have more than a hint of bullshit about them, but from that article Seger certainly sounds like an impressive student.
Making his achievements even more impressive is that English is his second language.
.
Reminds me of Joé Juneau. 4.0 GPA at RPI and got his aerospace engineering degree in 3 years despite not speaking English when he arrived.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: chimpfoodNothing against sever or student athletes in general, I know how hard it is to balance sports and school, but it's kinda funny that a 3.5 gpa wins scholar athlete of the year for the whole league.
3.5 in Engineering is like a 3.8 in another school though I think.
Ah, I didn't see that he was in engineering.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: chimpfoodNothing against sever or student athletes in general, I know how hard it is to balance sports and school, but it's kinda funny that a 3.5 gpa wins scholar athlete of the year for the whole league.
3.5 in Engineering is like a 3.8 in another school though I think.
IIRC, the GPA of my graduating class in Engineering in the late 1960s was 2.7.
Quote from: SwampyIIRC, the GPA of my graduating class in Engineering in the late 1960s was 2.7.
Different age. Grade Inflation isn't quite the mockery in STEM as in other programs, but it's there.
The curve used to be a Gaussian distribution.
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2011/07/13/business/economy/economix-13gradeinflation/economix-13gradeinflation-custom2.jpg)
so those of us who went to college in the 80s can say our B's are really A's?
so in the 60s the majority got Cs in the 80s Bs in the 2000s As.
Also could look at the courses being taught have changed a ton as well, the ability to game the system has gone way up, more interaction between students.
Quote from: scoop85Making his achievements even more impressive is that English is his second language.
Swedes, like other Scandinavians and their German and Dutch counterparts in Europe, are very proficient English speakers. If it were someone from places where English is not taught as well or as commonly in schools, like Brazil, then it would be another story
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: chimpfoodNothing against sever or student athletes in general, I know how hard it is to balance sports and school, but it's kinda funny that a 3.5 gpa wins scholar athlete of the year for the whole league.
3.5 in Engineering is like a 3.8 in another school though I think.
IIRC, the GPA of my graduating class in Engineering in the late 1960s was 2.7.
My GPA in ChemE was about 3.5. I was 4th in the graduating class.
So Seger's GPA is pretty damn impressive.
Quote from: SwampyIIRC, the GPA of my graduating class in Engineering in the late 1960s was 2.7.
In the early '60s, the all-men's average was about 2.7, the all-women's a bit higher. I recall scoring in the high 20s on an exam and beating the class average.
Quote from: George64Quote from: SwampyIIRC, the GPA of my graduating class in Engineering in the late 1960s was 2.7.
In the early '60s, the all-men's average was about 2.7, the all-women's a bit higher. I recall scoring in the high 20s on an exam and beating the class average.
Upper level math classes were fun in the mid 00s because you could get like a 36/100 and still get an A-.
Pretty sure the professors just cooked up monstrosities to see if the one or two geniuses in the class could still ace them. Said geniuses would score in the 90s, then everyone else waaaaaay below that.
I remember a physics course at my college where in the class of 60 only 10 of us got better than a zero.. made my 16 look pretty impressive as a solid B and I took it and was happy.
All I remember was looking at the questions with no idea what to do and when we got the answers back I was like why would I ever think to use some formula used in electricity to get to the answer on gravity/friction type question when we haven't even covered that in the course yet..
like use ohms law to figure out how fast a car would roll down an incline plane.
Quote from: upprdeckso those of us who went to college in the 80s can say our B's are really A's?
No. We can say that a lot of our B's were really C's, and a lot of our A's were really B's.
Quote from: George64I recall scoring in the high 20s on an exam and beating the class average.
To be fair, this happened to me in EE 230 in 1983 (my 17 on the midterm was in the first decile). Sometimes it's the class... sometimes it's the instructor.
Quote from: upprdecklike use ohms law to figure out how fast a car would roll down an incline plane.
When in doubt, use trig substitution (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLgZit1HTxA&ab_channel=jHan).
Quote from: DafatonePretty sure the professors just cooked up monstrosities to see if the one or two geniuses in the class could still ace them. Said geniuses would score in the 90s, then everyone else waaaaaay below that.
This makes sense for advanced mathematics. You aren't going into math as a field unless you are an absolute genius -- like, the kind of genius that makes it difficult to navigate in meat world (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andreas_Floer). So you might as well filter for them and hope you find, say, one a decade. The people there taking it to fulfill an Engineering requirement get the booby prize of making 60x as much in a field with 6000x the likelihood for employment.
But they, and we, will never hear the chimes at midnight.
Those impossible tests never made sense to me until a prof explained that if a student - any student - gets a 100 on a test, then you don't really know how much they know. You know they know at least as much as was covered on the test, but that's all you can say for sure. It's still useful to know on a test with a mean of 40, which genius gets the 85 and which one gets the 90. I was just glad those guys were there to increase the standard deviation!
I had one test in ChemE senior year where I got a 42 and that was the mean. Later in the semester, I ran into the prof (at a party) and asked him what he was trying to prove with that test. He said he wanted everyone to know that just because it was senior year, we weren't going to coast through his course. My response was, "Did you ever think that might turn us off to anything you have to say?" When he said he hadn't, I said he might want to think about it. Then I said, "Oh by the way, I'm going to ace your course." (Narrator: He did.)
I always thought that the exams in ChemE were designed to take 1-1/2 hours...but they only gave you an hour to take it. The trick was to figure out which were the easy questions - answer those first - then get as far on the really hard question as you could until time ran out.
Quote from: upprdeckI remember a physics course at my college where in the class of 60 only 10 of us got better than a zero.. made my 16 look pretty impressive as a solid B and I took it and was happy.
All I remember was looking at the questions with no idea what to do and when we got the answers back I was like why would I ever think to use some formula used in electricity to get to the answer on gravity/friction type question when we haven't even covered that in the course yet..
like use ohms law to figure out how fast a car would roll down an incline plane.
It's all differential equations, anyway.
Quote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: upprdeckI remember a physics course at my college where in the class of 60 only 10 of us got better than a zero.. made my 16 look pretty impressive as a solid B and I took it and was happy.
All I remember was looking at the questions with no idea what to do and when we got the answers back I was like why would I ever think to use some formula used in electricity to get to the answer on gravity/friction type question when we haven't even covered that in the course yet..
like use ohms law to figure out how fast a car would roll down an incline plane.
It's all differential equations, anyway.
I don't recall a lot of undergrad, but one thing that stuck with me was Prof Torrance (heat transfer) doing a derivation from the Fourier heat PDE to show that electricity flowing through an anisotropic medium (eg an insulated wire) is exactly the same equation, just that a ton of terms cancel out because the insulation (and surrounding air) are very nearly perfect insulators compared to the lousy thermal insulators that are available. After you chop it all the way down, you get....Ohm's law.
Quote from: RobbQuote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: upprdeckI remember a physics course at my college where in the class of 60 only 10 of us got better than a zero.. made my 16 look pretty impressive as a solid B and I took it and was happy.
All I remember was looking at the questions with no idea what to do and when we got the answers back I was like why would I ever think to use some formula used in electricity to get to the answer on gravity/friction type question when we haven't even covered that in the course yet..
like use ohms law to figure out how fast a car would roll down an incline plane.
It's all differential equations, anyway.
I don't recall a lot of undergrad, but one thing that stuck with me was Prof Torrance (heat transfer) doing a derivation from the Fourier heat PDE to show that electricity flowing through an anisotropic medium (eg an insulated wire) is exactly the same equation, just that a ton of terms cancel out because the insulation (and surrounding air) are very nearly perfect insulators compared to the lousy thermal insulators that are available. After you chop it all the way down, you get....Ohm's law.
One of the classic problems in undergrad classical mechanics is the forced, damped harmonic oscillator. To get a linear differential equation you have to add a damping term which is proportional to the velocity, which is not how the "ordinary" friction works. So the usual story is to talk about a "dashpot" which no one has ever heard of at that point. The thing is, you get the same equations for a driven RLC circuit, with and the resistor really does give the desired simple linear damping term.
Quote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: RobbQuote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: upprdeckI remember a physics course at my college where in the class of 60 only 10 of us got better than a zero.. made my 16 look pretty impressive as a solid B and I took it and was happy.
All I remember was looking at the questions with no idea what to do and when we got the answers back I was like why would I ever think to use some formula used in electricity to get to the answer on gravity/friction type question when we haven't even covered that in the course yet..
like use ohms law to figure out how fast a car would roll down an incline plane.
It's all differential equations, anyway.
I don't recall a lot of undergrad, but one thing that stuck with me was Prof Torrance (heat transfer) doing a derivation from the Fourier heat PDE to show that electricity flowing through an anisotropic medium (eg an insulated wire) is exactly the same equation, just that a ton of terms cancel out because the insulation (and surrounding air) are very nearly perfect insulators compared to the lousy thermal insulators that are available. After you chop it all the way down, you get....Ohm's law.
One of the classic problems in undergrad classical mechanics is the forced, damped harmonic oscillator. To get a linear differential equation you have to add a damping term which is proportional to the velocity, which is not how the "ordinary" friction works. So the usual story is to talk about a "dashpot" which no one has ever heard of at that point. The thing is, you get the same equations for a driven RLC circuit, with and the resistor really does give the desired simple linear damping term.
Yup. Got burned by that, too. Didn't get around to taking my RLC circuits distribution until senior year, when I was already taking PhD level fluid mechanics courses. Got a 100 on the first prelim, got cocky, said "I know this math" and didn't study for the second one, forgetting that it was closed book. Hadn't had closed book exams since sophomore year! Oops..... Bombed that, then aced the final for a solid A-.
Wouldn't have been so bad, but the prof was my brother's masters project advisor that year, resulting in this conversation about halfway through the semester:
"So, I understand that your brother is in my circuits class this semester?"
"Well, not too often!"
Accurate, but thanks, bro!
it's all ball bearings nowadays
Quote from: adamwit's all ball bearings nowadays
Yeah, but I mean the very end, when he actually died. That was extremely sudden.
Goal differential in conference:
+54 Qpc
[color=#b31313]+28 Cor[/color]
+12 Cgt
+ 1 Drt
0 Uni
< 0 Everybody else
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: adamwit's all ball bearings nowadays
Yeah, but I mean the very end, when he actually died. That was extremely sudden.
Goal differential in conference:
+54 Qpc
[color=#b31313]+28 Cor[/color]
+12 Cgt
+ 1 Drt
0 Uni
< 0 Everybody else
It's our fault that Dartmouth is positive.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: adamwit's all ball bearings nowadays
Yeah, but I mean the very end, when he actually died. That was extremely sudden.
Goal differential in conference:
+54 Qpc
[color=#b31313]+28 Cor[/color]
+12 Cgt
+ 1 Drt
0 Uni
< 0 Everybody else
It's our fault that Dartmouth is positive.
As the resident guy who hates Dartmouth more than Harvard, this one hurts.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: ugarteQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: adamwit's all ball bearings nowadays
Yeah, but I mean the very end, when he actually died. That was extremely sudden.
Goal differential in conference:
+54 Qpc
[color=#b31313]+28 Cor[/color]
+12 Cgt
+ 1 Drt
0 Uni
< 0 Everybody else
It's our fault that Dartmouth is positive.
As the resident guy who hates Dartmouth more than Harvard, this one hurts.
In a somewhat contrary vein, I predict Cashman will have the Green in the top four next year and will enjoy success in Hanover until the dopes at PSU realize Gadowsky is fraud. Cashman will enjoy a chance to make Penn State a significantly BiG hockey program.
I said in another thread that I thought Dartmouth would be in contention for home ice in the first round but I never thought they'd actually sniff a bye. If it weren't for Harder's work at Colgate, Cashman would have a good case for ECAC coach of the year.
2 ties in derp points, for 9th (Princeton and Yale at 25) and 11th (Brown and RPI at 21). Not sure if I can trust the tie breakers on the sites, yet.
Princeton over Yale and RPI over Brown, both by head-to-head. We get SLU if chalk prevails.
I believe Brown beat Harvard in the shoot out, 2-0 in 3 rounds.
Quote from: TrotskyI believe Brown beat Harvard in the shoot out, 2-0 in 3 rounds.
Yes, BRUNO ESCAPES THE CELLAR!
To all who think Schafer has lost his edge, Cornell has finished the last 7 seasons at least 6 games over .500 in the ECAC. Our only prior streak of at least that length ended in 1975 (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_Bargraph_ECAC_500.html).
RPI finished dead last in the ECAC for the first time since 1967 (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ecac_History/ecac_Last_Place_Icon.html).
If one of the 5,6 or 7 seeds are upset we would play harvard which would be both exciting and scary as they are playing pretty well right now and got the better of us earlier this year.
I think I did this right.
16 permutations by upsets:
SLU {}
SLU 9
Prn 9, 10
Yal 9, 10, 11
Brn 9, 10, 11, 12
Yal 9, 10, 12
Prn 9, 11
Brn 9, 11, 12
Prn 9, 12
Hvd 10
Yal 10, 11
Brn 10, 11, 12
Yal 10, 12
Hvd 11
Brn 11, 12
Hvd 12
Scenarios per QF opponent:
SLU {}
SLU 9
Hvd 10
Hvd 11
Hvd 12
Prn 9, 10
Prn 9, 12
Prn 9, 11
Yal 9, 10, 11
Yal 9, 10, 12
Yal 10, 11
Yal 10, 12
Brn 9, 10, 11, 12
Brn 9, 11, 12
Brn 10, 11, 12
Brn 11, 12
Quote from: TrotskyRPI finished dead last in the ECAC for the first time since 1967 (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ecac_History/ecac_Last_Place_Icon.html).
RPI was tied with DC that season. It was the previous year that the Engineers were last alone. RPI did not play DC in 66-67, and I don't know if there were tie breakers. There were none needed since who made the playoffs was decided in a smoke-filled room.
Quote from: chimpfoodIf one of the 5,6 or 7 seeds are upset we would play harvard which would be both exciting and scary as they are playing pretty well right now and got the better of us earlier this year.
If there's any team I could see being upset in one game, it would be Harvard. IMO Brown would be the best match-up of all. They haven't looked good against Cornell in either game this season.
Quote from: IcebergQuote from: chimpfoodIf one of the 5,6 or 7 seeds are upset we would play harvard which would be both exciting and scary as they are playing pretty well right now and got the better of us earlier this year.
If there's any team I could see being upset in one game, it would be Harvard. IMO Brown would be the best match-up of all. They haven't looked good against Cornell in either game this season.
god, I forgot that the first round is one game now.
Quote from: chimpfoodQuote from: IcebergQuote from: chimpfoodIf one of the 5,6 or 7 seeds are upset we would play harvard which would be both exciting and scary as they are playing pretty well right now and got the better of us earlier this year.
If there's any team I could see being upset in one game, it would be Harvard. IMO Brown would be the best match-up of all. They haven't looked good against Cornell in either game this season.
god, I forgot that the first round is one game now.
And all on Friday, which seems less than ideal for attendance. Harvard ticket office sent out an email begging people to buy tickets for just ten bucks.
Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: chimpfoodQuote from: IcebergQuote from: chimpfoodIf one of the 5,6 or 7 seeds are upset we would play harvard which would be both exciting and scary as they are playing pretty well right now and got the better of us earlier this year.
If there's any team I could see being upset in one game, it would be Harvard. IMO Brown would be the best match-up of all. They haven't looked good against Cornell in either game this season.
god, I forgot that the first round is one game now.
And all on Friday, which seems less than ideal for attendance. Harvard ticket office sent out an email begging people to buy tickets for just ten bucks.
If some year, we were their opponent, the price would be $55 and you'd have to put a deposit down for the following year's season tickets.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: Chris '03Quote from: chimpfoodQuote from: IcebergQuote from: chimpfoodIf one of the 5,6 or 7 seeds are upset we would play harvard which would be both exciting and scary as they are playing pretty well right now and got the better of us earlier this year.
If there's any team I could see being upset in one game, it would be Harvard. IMO Brown would be the best match-up of all. They haven't looked good against Cornell in either game this season.
god, I forgot that the first round is one game now.
And all on Friday, which seems less than ideal for attendance. Harvard ticket office sent out an email begging people to buy tickets for just ten bucks.
If some year, we were their opponent, the price would be $55 and you'd have to put a deposit down for the following year's season tickets.
And the building would still be full of Cornell fans.
Quote from: Chris '03And all on Friday, which seems less than ideal for attendance. Harvard ticket office sent out an email begging people to buy tickets for just ten bucks.
The games at Appleton and Lynah East are on Friday. The other two games are the next day
Quote from: IcebergQuote from: Chris '03And all on Friday, which seems less than ideal for attendance. Harvard ticket office sent out an email begging people to buy tickets for just ten bucks.
The games at Appleton and Lynah East are on Friday. The other two games are the next day
They were all listed as Friday (on chn at least) as of the other day. But glad to see they aren't all Friday.
Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: IcebergQuote from: Chris '03And all on Friday, which seems less than ideal for attendance. Harvard ticket office sent out an email begging people to buy tickets for just ten bucks.
The games at Appleton and Lynah East are on Friday. The other two games are the next day
They were all listed as Friday (on chn at least) as of the other day. But glad to see they aren't all Friday.
Pretty sure we've had them listed as Saturday since at least last Sunday morning (since I did it), so - I dunno.
Home teams leading 1-0 after one period. Princeton had a penalty shot and missed
PU outshooting HU 22-11 but losing 1-0. SLU leads Y 4-2.
Final: Harvard 1 Princeton 0
First time Princeton was shut out all year. Harvard goalie played great.
If one of the games tomorrow is an upset we get harvard next week.
Quote from: dbilmesFirst time Princeton was shut out all year. Harvard goalie played great.
They otherwise looked sluggish.
Final: St. Lawrence 4 Yale 2
Union up 3-0 on Brown in the third, so we either host SLU or, if RPI upsets Clarkson, Harvard.
RPI scores in the first minute. That was quick
2-0 rpi after 2
Watching the RPI-Clarkson game reminds me of something I noticed when I watched Cornell play up there a few weeks ago. There was no real visitor's penalty box in Cheel Arena. They just opened up the door which led to the visiting team's locker room and the visiting player who was penalized had to stand there until he was released from the penalty box. However, it now looks like they have put a bench for the penalized visiting player to sit on. Maybe they had to add one for the playoffs.
Quote from: dbilmesWatching the RPI-Clarkson game reminds me of something I noticed when I watched Cornell play up there a few weeks ago. There was no real visitor's penalty box in Cheel Arena. They just opened up the door which led to the visiting team's locker room and the visiting player who was penalized had to stand there until he was released from the penalty box. However, it now looks like they have put a bench for the penalized visiting player to sit on. Maybe they had to add one for the playoffs.
I noticed that too! Weird.
Now 3-0. Looks like Sucks is coming back to Lynah.
3-1 2:30 to go, the RPI goalie just made about 7 rapid fire saves on Clarkson's extra attacker.
RPI fails to clear and Gosselin scores, 3-2.
3-2, reminding me of our choke there a few years ago.
Cheel is half empty. Lame.
3-2 with 2:09 to play.
:31.4 to go, Clarkson throwing everything at Watson.
8.7, faceoff in RPI end.
Gosselin just barely denied with 1 second to go. That guy, jeez.
Christ, and now Gosselin almost scores off the faceoff. What an ending.
When's the last time we had a home playoff series vs Harvard? Should be electric.
RPI looked overwhelmed in the last few minutes. Very fortunate to have the 3rd goal as a buffer because they were stuck in their zone at the end.
Quote from: chimpfoodWhen's the last time we had a home playoff series vs Harvard? Should be electric.
2010 (http://www.tbrw.info/?/games/cornell_Harvard_PS.html).
Quote from: TrotskyUnion up 3-0 on Brown in the third, so we either host SLU or, if RPI upsets Clarkson, Harvard.
Apparently a Union student somehow went into the Brown bench and taunted the players for some time until security got to him. I imagine some would say that's not a surprising occurrence at that rink, but it's hilariously fitting that Brown was the team involved given how the game (and really the past XXX seasons) went.
Quote from: IcebergQuote from: TrotskyUnion up 3-0 on Brown in the third, so we either host SLU or, if RPI upsets Clarkson, Harvard.
Apparently a Union student somehow went into the Brown bench and taunted the players for some time until security got to him. I imagine some would say that's not a surprising occurrence at that rink, but it's hilariously fitting that Brown was the team involved given how the game (and really the past XXX seasons) went.
probably worth 5 minutes to board the intruder