John t whelan ranking simulator

[Numbers]

Quick question for all my friends who enjoy the PWR conversations - Priceless and the gang.

I checked the site we were referred to last year, where elynah was hosting Whelan's very helpful set of pages for the PWR in which one can enter his own results of games not yet played. Unfortunately, it appears to be updated to the new year yet.

Does anyone know anything about this?

Thanks...

[Patman]

Re: John t whelan ranking simulator

Quick question for all my friends who enjoy the PWR conversations - Priceless and the gang.

I checked the site we were referred to last year, where elynah was hosting Whelan's very helpful set of pages for the PWR in which one can enter his own results of games not yet played. Unfortunately, it appears to be updated to the new year yet.

Does anyone know anything about this?

Thanks...

E-mail Whelan or Wodon at CHN.

Otherwise I got nothing. JTW is an active research scientist in physics so he may get to it when he gets to it.

[joecct]

E-mail Whelan or Wodon at CHN.

Otherwise I got nothing. JTW is an active research scientist in physics so he may get to it when he gets to it.

Quantum Mechanic?

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: John t whelan ranking simulator

I have a RPI and PWR calculator available at wa2aea.com . Download the Java program, as well as the associated file with all of the games (I'll update this as the season goes on), and you'll be able to play with that.

[HarleyMC]

Re: John t whelan ranking simulator

Quantum Mechanic?

No, quark queer.

[LynahFan]

Re: John t whelan ranking simulator

Quantum Mechanic?

Last I knew for sure, he was working on Gravitational Waves, which are anathema to quantum mechanics - they're predicted by General Relativity instead...

Or were you just trying to make a joke?

[Priceless]

Re: John t whelan ranking simulator

I have a RPI and PWR calculator available at wa2aea.com . Download the Java program, as well as the associated file with all of the games (I'll update this as the season goes on), and you'll be able to play with that.

So if I'm doing this right, Michigan, Notre Dame, Lake State and Northeastern are your #1 seeds as of now

[Ralph Baer]

Re: John t whelan ranking simulator

So if I'm doing this right, Michigan, Notre Dame, Lake State and Northeastern are your #1 seeds as of now

Is that the Northeastern with the #52 RPI? http://www.uscho.com/rankings/rpi/d-i-men/. Did all of their victories bring down their RPI? Strange!

[Priceless]

Is that the Northeastern with the #52 RPI? http://www.uscho.com/rankings/rpi/d-i-men/. Did all of their victories bring down their RPI? Strange!

They are 4-0 but none of their wins count towards RPI because each one would lower their rating. Same with 3-0 Providence, who is tied for fourth in the pairwise.

[Ralph Baer]

Re: John t whelan ranking simulator

They are 4-0 but none of their wins count towards RPI because each one would lower their rating. Same with 3-0 Providence, who is tied for fourth in the pairwise.

Lower it from zero?

[Priceless]

Lower it from zero?

The teams they beat REALLY suck!

[Numbers]

Re: John t whelan ranking simulator

I have a RPI and PWR calculator available at wa2aea.com . Download the Java program, as well as the associated file with all of the games (I'll update this as the season goes on), and you'll be able to play with that.

Thanks flag dude. I haven't yet downloaded, and probably won't until January. No need until then - Priceless starts his yearly reports of who has fallen in or out of the field in past years about that time, and until then the different pieces of the PWR are too volatile.

My question for you: If I download this Java and the associated file with the results, does the file automatically sync as you update, or do I need to re-download every weekend?

And, I am running XP Home and Chrome for a browser, and I can't find a way to download the data file. Look at it, yes. Download, no. Any help?

Thanks.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: John t whelan ranking simulator

Something seems to be amiss with someone's calculation, whether it be mine, USCHO's, or someone else, and I think I know where it is. I'm going to take the Northeastern example given earlier.

Northeastern has won four games: ALH, ALH, HLC, HLC. Three were home, one (HLC) was away, meaning out of a possible 3.6 points, they have gained 3.6. Divide into it for 1.00, and multiply by the factor of 25 for 25.00.

Let's now take a look at the teams they have played:
Alabama Huntsville (ALH) has not yet had any other opponents, therefore the Opponent's Winning Percentage (OWP) part from that team is 0 out of a possible 0, meaning it is indeterminate because of the existence of 0/0. Remember that the OWP parts do NOT count the two particular teams in question, i.e. any games between ALH and NE are thrown out.
Holy Cross (HLC) has had one opponent in Boston University, and BU won. Therefore, it is 0 out of a possible 1, or 0.00. Remember, weights do not apply to OWP or OOWP.
I add all of this up for indeterminate + indeterminate + 0.00, divide by the number of games which is 3, and multiply by the factor of 21.

To take a team's Opponents of Opponents Winning Percentage (OOWP), for each of the team's games, you must at each part take your opponent's OWP.
For ALH, it's two parts Northeastern. With Northeastern, they have played Holy Cross twice and won, making 2 out of a possible 2. Therefore, ALH's OWP is 1.000.
For HLC, it's one part BU, two parts Northeastern. With BU, they have had three other games at home, and have won two (beat UMA and WIS, lost to RPI) for 0.667. As we saw earlier with Northeastern, take the games with Alabama Huntsville, 2 out of 2. I add this all up for 0.667 + 1 + 1, divide by the number of games which is 3, for 0.889.
Now, let's put the OOWP together: ALH 1.000 + ALH 1.000 + HLC 0.889 + HLC 0.889 = 3.778, divide by four games for a total of 0.9445, multiply by a factor of 54 for 51.00.

Therefore, BEFORE the quality wins bonus, the RatingsPI of Northeastern I have at 76.00. I don't see why they would remove any of the games from Northeastern's consideration. MAYBE remove Holy Cross games because of the dip in OOWP. I'll check the formula I use and adjust it accordingly. If USCHO did that, then USCHO probably had the divide by zero issue I spoke of earlier, and so they removed the ALH games as well. We'll have a better calculation come November 1st.

[Patman]

Re: John t whelan ranking simulator

Other than checking each other's programs, the pre-season is completely worthless. This is why I prefer a predictive approach, no matter how weak the results are.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: John t whelan ranking simulator

Thanks flag dude. I haven't yet downloaded, and probably won't until January. No need until then - Priceless starts his yearly reports of who has fallen in or out of the field in past years about that time, and until then the different pieces of the PWR are too volatile.

My question for you: If I download this Java and the associated file with the results, does the file automatically sync as you update, or do I need to re-download every weekend?

And, I am running XP Home and Chrome for a browser, and I can't find a way to download the data file. Look at it, yes. Download, no. Any help?

Thanks.

Thank you for the download; I really do appreciate it.

I do not have automatic sync built in as of yet. For now, you will need to either re-download the file or fill in the games as you go. If you select a game in the games list, you have the ability to put in there who won the game, and you may also add, modify, or delete games as necessary (something I will do for tournaments). So long as the game is listed as "No Contest", it will not be included in the calculation. I will, however, look into programming a feature that will allow you to download the file from my website.

As for downloading the data file, is your browser perhaps opening the file internally? If so, you should be able to right click anywhere on the page and select "Save As".

Once again, thank you for the download. Without all of you on the USCHO Forums, I wouldn't have a reason to put this together.