Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

pairwise -- post jan 8th

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ticapnews
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    Originally posted by UML Puck Hawk View Post
    What do you think the effect will be of the addition of another autobid (the B1G) on that top-12 statistic?
    None. For the first eight seasons of this current format we had the CHA taking up a spot. For those eight seasons the top 12 teams qualified for 89 of 96 spots (92.7%). For the three seasons without the conference it was 34 of 36 spots (94.4%).

    Leave a comment:


  • walrus655321
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    There were 6 autobids back when the CHA existed, so the "extra" autobid isn't exactly unprecedented

    Leave a comment:


  • Shirtless Guy
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    Originally posted by UML Puck Hawk View Post
    What do you think the effect will be of the addition of another autobid (the B1G) on that top-12 statistic?
    Its unlikely it creates a large increase in teams outside the top 16 earning autobids so not much?

    Leave a comment:


  • UML Puck Hawk
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    Originally posted by ticapnews View Post
    PairWise Update

    Some highlights: 93% of teams ranked 1-12 on March 1 make the tournament
    In the past 10 years only the #1 (6 times) or #2 (4 times) team has finished #1 overall
    Teams that aren't already on the bubble probably aren't going to get there in the three remaining weeks
    What do you think the effect will be of the addition of another autobid (the B1G) on that top-12 statistic?

    Leave a comment:


  • ticapnews
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    PairWise Update

    Some highlights: 93% of teams ranked 1-12 on March 1 make the tournament
    In the past 10 years only the #1 (6 times) or #2 (4 times) team has finished #1 overall
    Teams that aren't already on the bubble probably aren't going to get there in the three remaining weeks

    Leave a comment:


  • LTsatch
    replied
    Originally posted by JimDahl View Post
    My PWR outlook for the upcoming weekend...

    http://collegehockeyranked.com/2016/...n-pwr-outlook/

    I'll try to pop in more in coming weeks when I have useful new updates, but I'll post lots more trivial stuff there.
    Thanks Jim, love your work this time of year. It will be interesting to see what the result of Yale QU this weekend has on this years PWR.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimDahl
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    My PWR outlook for the upcoming weekend...

    http://collegehockeyranked.com/2016/...n-pwr-outlook/

    I'll try to pop in more in coming weeks when I have useful new updates, but I'll post lots more trivial stuff there.

    Leave a comment:


  • UMICH
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    http://www.collegehockeynews.com/new...ry_edition.php

    Way too early bracketology....

    Leave a comment:


  • Shirtless Guy
    replied
    Originally posted by TheRevengeance View Post
    The home tie road win is slightly (and I do mean slightly) more valuable. Because the road wins are worth more, you want the win on the road where it gets multiplied by the biggest factor.

    Example for this week's UNH and UConn Home-and-home

    Current RPI:
    UNH .4852

    UNH Road Tie Home Win
    .4880 (+ .0028)

    UNH Home Tie Road Win
    .4881 (+.0029)

    Current RPI:
    UConn .4635

    UConn Road Tie Home Win
    .4683 (+.0048)

    UConn Home Tie Road Win
    .4684 (+.0049)
    Now do the same for MTU vs NMU to end the season...

    Leave a comment:


  • TheRevengeance
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    The home tie road win is slightly (and I do mean slightly) more valuable. Because the road wins are worth more, you want the win on the road where it gets multiplied by the biggest factor.

    Example for this week's UNH and UConn Home-and-home

    Current RPI:
    UNH .4852

    UNH Road Tie Home Win
    .4880 (+ .0028)

    UNH Home Tie Road Win
    .4881 (+.0029)

    Current RPI:
    UConn .4635

    UConn Road Tie Home Win
    .4683 (+.0048)

    UConn Home Tie Road Win
    .4684 (+.0049)
    Last edited by TheRevengeance; 02-22-2016, 06:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shirtless Guy
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    Question for the group, in a home and home weekend series, which do you think would be more valuable to a team's RPI a Home Win/Road Tie or a Home Tie/Road Win?

    Leave a comment:


  • Siouxfaninseattle
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    If you are wondering what your team has to do to remain in the running for an at-large bid, here is a good analysis, courtesy of Jim Dahl:

    http://collegehockeyranked.com/2016/...ed-to-get-hot/

    Leave a comment:


  • TonyTheTiger20
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    Originally posted by Shirtless Guy View Post
    Is there anyone out there that can help me?
    I have been using Air Force as my test case because it comes 1st alphabetically and doesn't have any negative impact wins.
    I cannot for the life of me, verify how to determine a team's Opp Opp Win% based on this page:
    http://siouxsports.com/hockey/rankin....php?teamid=27

    Weighted Win% on the top (0.5954) is based on Weighted Win dived by Weighted GP in the completed contests data

    Opp Win% on the top (0.4475) is based on sumproduct of Weighted GP and Win% vs others divided by sum of Weighted GP

    I would assume that Opp Opp Win% on the top (0.4721) would be sumproduct of Weighted GP and Opp' Win% divided by sum of Weighted GP but that doesn't work?
    Is it a rounding error?

    Help!
    I had my own project the last couple years working on the women's PWR so I've been on this same journey.

    I haven't done any for men's, but could it be that OOW% shouldn't be weighted games played but just regular games played? Fortunately I don't have that issue in women's.

    Feel free to email me if you want -- grant dot salzano at gmail.

    Leave a comment:


  • ticapnews
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    http://www.uscho.com/bracketology/20...en-ncaa-locks/

    Leave a comment:


  • Shirtless Guy
    replied
    Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

    Is there anyone out there that can help me?
    I have been using Air Force as my test case because it comes 1st alphabetically and doesn't have any negative impact wins.
    I cannot for the life of me, verify how to determine a team's Opp Opp Win% based on this page:
    http://siouxsports.com/hockey/rankin....php?teamid=27

    Weighted Win% on the top (0.5954) is based on Weighted Win dived by Weighted GP in the completed contests data

    Opp Win% on the top (0.4475) is based on sumproduct of Weighted GP and Win% vs others divided by sum of Weighted GP

    I would assume that Opp Opp Win% on the top (0.4721) would be sumproduct of Weighted GP and Opp' Win% divided by sum of Weighted GP but that doesn't work?
    Is it a rounding error?

    Help!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X