BU/BC

Section A · February 10, 2003, 10:36:24 PM

Indeed it is, BU wins the Beanpot again. Good for...us :-)

Tub(a) · February 10, 2003, 10:36:30 PM

BU 3
BC 2

Everything tonight went as planned

DeltaOne81 · February 10, 2003, 10:37:44 PM

Heh, so the BU win pushes us up 0.0006 and pulls Minny down 0.0001, giving us the extra comparison and third place in the PWR outright. Can't explain why it had such a bigger effect on us than Minn. Maybe JTW has an idea.

JordanCS · February 10, 2003, 11:11:47 PM

BTW, What is up with the PWR? How is it humanly possible for BU and St Cloud to be tied in the PWR, when BU has a higher RPI, and a considerably better winning percentage? Isn't something a bit messed up here? Michigan's much, much better record should be enough to overcome the slightly better RPI of St. Cloud, don't you think? I know it's a numerical formula, but it kinda seems odd when the numbers work out like this.

BC dropped all the way to T-6th from the loss...that's pretty huge, don't you think?

Jordan

jtwcornell91 · February 10, 2003, 11:18:21 PM

If you go to the individual comparisons table at

http://uscho.com/polls/pwrcomps.php?type=1m

you can click on the "BU" in the "St. Cloud" row and see the breakdown of that pairwise comparison.

Tom Pasniewski 98 · February 10, 2003, 11:21:40 PM

Probably not so much the BU win as both the BU and Harvard wins improve the winning percentages of our opponents which is 50% of RPI. Minnesota has only BC as a common opponent and they lost so that 50% of RPI drops for them but 25% of RPI is winning percentage of your opponents opponents and BC has played Harvard and BU so the wins by those two schools helped Minnesota. Thus almost canceling each other out.

In any event, Cornell now wins the comparison with Minnesota and stands alone in 3rd winning 25 of a possible 27 comparisons but this comparison is subject to change as all of Cornell's remaining opponents have weaker winning percentages than them which is offset by improving your own winning percentage by beating those teams but just win and root for the teams that Cornell has beaten especially twice to win (as contrary as that seems) and the statistics will take care of themselves.

DeltaOne81 · February 10, 2003, 11:35:04 PM

[Q]pulls Minny down 0.0001[/Q]
Wait, I take that back, it pulled them down by 0.0005... still makes as little since though, since they only played them once, but now it doesn't make sense the other way around (feels like when i do an engineering problem set).

Greg Berge · February 10, 2003, 11:41:28 PM

> Don't we have something of a long losing streak against BC? Just wondering.

7 straight, dating back to 1983.

rhovorka · February 11, 2003, 12:18:08 AM

For me, this is a fun time to look at these comparisons. Everyone has played enough games for the numbers to be meaningful.

It's interesting to see that the Beanpot results have given us a "2 comparison" cushion ahead of #4 UNH. It's pretty neat to examine the difference between UNH and BC. After tonight, they both have identical 18-7-3 overall records. In league play, BC is 13-4-1, while UNH is 12-5-1. In PWR comparisons, UNH is #4 with 23 comparisons and BC is #6 with 21 comparisons (BC loses comparisons with lower ranked Ferris St. and OSU). In the comparison with each other, it's as close as can be: 2-2. UNH wins the TUC by the margin of 1 fewer tie (13-6-2 vs. 13-6-3), and BC wins the tie-breaking RPI .5953 to .5911. Even in the KRACH, the 2 are toe-to-toe. I can't remember seeing 2 teams from the same league being so statistically close. Looking at their schedules, they each have lesser teams ahead until the last week of the regular season when they square off twice head-to-head. That could be a huge weekend in both Hockey East and PWR.

Mark · February 11, 2003, 10:20:53 AM

Always nice to beat the school from the north end of Comm. Ave, especially under a more intense media glare. But of course this Beanpot title won't mean a thing once league play resumes this weekend.

Hopefully, this will be the first step in the stretch drive to Worcester for the Terriers (although there's plenty of potholes remaining on the schedule), and perhaps even a third and final confrontation with Murray's Marauders? If that does come to pass, it would be nice if BU at least makes Cornell break a sweat this time around.

Good luck to the Big Red down the stretch.

DeltaOne81 · February 11, 2003, 10:30:26 AM

[Q]BTW, What is up with the PWR? How is it humanly possible for BU and St Cloud to be tied in the PWR, when BU has a higher RPI, and a considerably better winning percentage? Isn't something a bit messed up here? Michigan's much, much better record should be enough to overcome the slightly better RPI of St. Cloud, don't you think? I know it's a numerical formula, but it kinda seems odd when the numbers work out like this.[/Q]
Okay, so I took a peak. First off, win % doesn't mean anything except when it plays into RPI. And BU's RPI is only a bit better than SCSU's - about 0.0080. It makes a difference, but seeing as BU is 8th in RPI and SCSU is 9th, it'd not that big :-).

It could also have something to do with BU's less than stellar 12-10-1 record against TUCs. SCSU has a slightly better 12-9-3 . So BU's RPI is slightly better, SCSU's record vs. TUC's is slightly better, hence, they're tied. Neither of their TUC records are that great though, which is why they both slip below Ferris State and Ohio State - 10 and 11 on the RPI list.

jtwcornell91 · February 11, 2003, 10:48:40 AM

DeltaOne81 '03 wrote:

QuoteOkay, so I took a peak.

PEEK! PEEK! You took a peek! A peak is what's at the top of the mountain. ::help:: (Sorry, just seen that misspelling one time too many.)

We now return you to your regularly scheduled cricket coverage. :-))

Jim Hyla · February 11, 2003, 05:31:42 PM

So, since John started it, (nice to have someone to blame isn't it?:-) ) how about Tom's sentence/paragraph?[Q]In any event, Cornell now wins the comparison with Minnesota and stands alone in 3rd winning 25 of a possible 27 comparisons but this comparison is subject to change as all of Cornell's remaining opponents have weaker winning percentages than them which is offset by improving your own winning percentage by beating those teams but just win and root for the teams that Cornell has beaten especially twice to win (as contrary as that seems) and the statistics will take care of themselves.[/Q] ::nut::

Al DeFlorio · February 11, 2003, 06:27:10 PM

Jim Hyla '67 wrote:

QuoteSo, since John started it, (nice to have someone to blame isn't it?:-) ) how about Tom's sentence/paragraph?[Q]In any event, Cornell now wins the comparison with Minnesota and stands alone in 3rd winning 25 of a possible 27 comparisons but this comparison is subject to change as all of Cornell's remaining opponents have weaker winning percentages than them which is offset by improving your own winning percentage by beating those teams but just win and root for the teams that Cornell has beaten especially twice to win (as contrary as that seems) and the statistics will take care of themselves.[/Q] ::nut::

Myself and Jim agree on that one.:-P

Tom Pasniewski 98 · February 12, 2003, 01:23:53 PM

Me thinks your write. The sentence was weigh two short. Thats the last thyme I rite after eleven on a weaknight.:-P