Other ECAC 2-28-09

[Chris '03]

[quote Jim Hyla][quote nyc94]And Colgate wins it 3-2[/quote]And if we could have beaten Yale, we'd be in first.:`-([/quote]

Or not blown it vs. PU...

[Jim Hyla]

[quote Chris '03][quote Jim Hyla][quote nyc94]And Colgate wins it 3-2[/quote]And if we could have beaten Yale, we'd be in first.:`-([/quote]

Or not blown it vs. PU...[/quote]No, that wouldn't have been enough. We're 3 points behind. Beating Yale is a 4 point flip.

[Chris '03]

[quote Jim Hyla][quote Chris '03][quote Jim Hyla][quote nyc94]And Colgate wins it 3-2[/quote]And if we could have beaten Yale, we'd be in first.:`-([/quote]

Or not blown it vs. PU...[/quote]No, that wouldn't have been enough. We're 3 points behind. Beating Yale is a 4 point flip.[/quote]

That's right... duh. ::bang::

[Trotsky]

[quote Jim Hyla][quote nyc94]And Colgate wins it 3-2[/quote]And if we could have beaten Yale, we'd be in first.:`-([/quote]

If first place had been on the line, Yale probably would have won the Sunday game with Colgate 11-0.

[jtwcornell91]

[quote Chris 02]This probably helps Cornell's RPI very incrementally because we played Colgate 3 times.  Hard to say...[/quote]

Actually, you can check with http://slack.net/~whelan/tbrw/tbrw.cgi?2009/rankings.diy.shtml

It looks like switching the result to a Yale win would drop our strength of schedule from .4987 to .4986, but wouldn't be enough to impact our RPI, rounded to four decimal places, at .5464.  (Of course, it would bump Yale ahead of us in the RPI rankings.)  I think this reduced impact is in part because of the wacky 25/21/54 weightings they're using for RPI these days, since the switch would hurt our opponents' percentage but improve our opponents' opponents' percentage...