Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
I always look forward to this stuff, especially this time of year.
I always look forward to this stuff, especially this time of year.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
- Thread starter lugnut92
- Start date
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
Just two weekends to go!
Projected Standings
1. Union (35)
2. Quinnipiac (30)
3. Colgate (28)
4. Cornell (25)
-----
5. Clarkson (24)
6. Yale (23)
7. RPI (22)
8. Brown (19)
-----
9. St. Lawrence (17)
10. Harvard (17)
11. Dartmouth (13)
12. Princeton (9)
Monte Carlo:
First Round Playoffs:
Just two weekends to go!
Projected Standings
1. Union (35)
2. Quinnipiac (30)
3. Colgate (28)
4. Cornell (25)
-----
5. Clarkson (24)
6. Yale (23)
7. RPI (22)
8. Brown (19)
-----
9. St. Lawrence (17)
10. Harvard (17)
11. Dartmouth (13)
12. Princeton (9)
Monte Carlo:
Code:
1,000,000 simulations (of 282,429,536,481 possibilities)
| KRACH | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 |Avg Rk |AvgPts
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Un | 358.9 | [B]97.7[/B] 2.2 0.1 x x x x x x x x x | 1.02 | 34.63
Qu | 310.0 | 1.9 [B]76.8[/B] 18.1 2.5 0.7 0.1 0.0 x x x x x | 2.23 | 30.16
Cg | 188.9 | 0.4 20.3 [B]67.6[/B] 8.3 2.6 0.7 0.1 x x x x x | 2.95 | 28.15
Cr | 203.8 | x 0.5 8.7 [B]47.2[/B] 27.0 12.7 3.6 0.2 0.0 0.0 x x | 4.54 | 25.24
Ck | 135.5 | x 0.2 2.8 22.7 [B]31.0[/B] 28.3 13.9 1.1 0.1 0.0 x x | 5.31 | 23.78
Ya | 166.0 | x 0.0 2.1 11.6 25.4 [B]34.8[/B] 21.9 3.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 x | 5.76 | 23.40
RP | 142.1 | x 0.0 0.6 7.6 12.9 20.7 [B]41.8[/B] 12.8 2.9 0.7 0.0 x | 6.49 | 22.18
Br | 116.6 | x x x 0.0 0.3 2.1 12.9 [B]49.3[/B] 22.3 11.8 1.3 0.0 | 8.31 | 18.85
SL | 104.4 | x x x 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.4 17.1 [B]45.3[/B] 31.2 3.7 0.1 | 9.16 | 17.42
Ha | 102.0 | x x x 0.0 0.1 0.5 3.4 15.5 26.9 [B]47.7[/B] 6.0 0.0 | 9.36 | 17.19
Da | 53.2 | x x x x x x 0.0 0.4 2.0 8.4 [B]84.3[/B] 4.9 | 10.91 | 13.24
Pr | 32.4 | x x x x x x x 0.0 0.0 0.2 4.8 [B]95.1[/B] | 11.95 | 9.78
[b]Bold[/b] is each team's most likely rank.
0.0 means the team did place in that position, but fewer than 500 times.
x means the team never finished in that position.First Round Playoffs:
Code:
| RP Br Ya Ck SL Cr Ha Da Pr | BYE
------------------------------------------------------------------
RP | 7.5 0.0 0.0 21.1 0.0 24.9 21.5 13.2 | 8.2
Br | 1.2 0.1 0.0 34.1 0.0 25.0 3.8 0.5 | 0.0
Ya | 0.1 4.3 0.0 10.8 0.0 11.7 33.6 25.3 | 13.7
Ck | 0.0 2.1 0.0 5.9 0.0 8.7 26.2 31.4 | 25.7
SL | 1.4 9.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 8.1 0.6 0.0 | 0.0
Cg | 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.7 2.5 | 96.6
Cr | 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 2.2 2.0 12.0 26.4 | 56.4
Ha | 1.0 11.1 0.2 0.0 5.9 0.0 1.1 0.1 | 0.0
Da | 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 | 0.0
Pr | 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0.0
Qu | 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 | 99.3
[U]Bye[/U]
Union
Hosts are listed top to bottom, visitors are across the top
(e.g., RPI has a 24.9% chance of hosting Harvard in the first round).FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
After 15 February:
UC 29 - 37 [1-3]
--- Bye Lock - 28+ () ---
QU 25 - 33 [1-6]
COL 23 - 31 [1-8]
--- Home Lock - 22+ () ---
CCT 20 - 28 [2-10]
COR 20 - 28 [2-10]
YAL 19 - 27 [2-11]
RPI 18 - 26 [2-11]
BRN 15 - 23 [3-12]
HVD 14 - 22 [4-12]
SLU 14 - 22 [4-12]
--- Bye Eligible - 21 () ---
DC 11 - 19 [7-12]
PU 8 - 16 [8-12]
--- Home Eligible - 16 () ---
Remaining LEAGUE schedules:
UC: CCT, SLU, @YAL, @BRN
QU: COR, COL, @SLU, @CCT
COL: @PU, @QU, HVD, DC
CCT: @UC, @RPI, PU, QU
COR: @QU, @PU, DC, HVD
YAL: @HVD, @DC, UC, RPI
RPI: SLU, CCT, @BRN, @YAL
BRN: @DC, @HVD, RPI, UC
HVD: YAL, BRN, @COL, @COR
SLU: @RPI, @UC, QU, PU
DC: BRN, YAL, @COR, @COL
PU: COL, COR, @CCT, @SLU
Tie-breaks (3pts or more):
UC: COR, RPI, HVD, DC, PU
QU: YAL, RPI, HVD, DC,
COL: UC, CCT, COR, SLU,
CCT: BRN, SLU,
COR: YAL, BRN, SLU,
YAL: COL, SLU, PU
RPI: COL, COR, DC,
BRN: SLU,
HVD: RPI, PU
SLU: HVD,
DC:
PU:
Tiebreak Procedure: H2H, #Wins, Record v Top4, Record v Top8
Lowball specials:
QU: In order to try to get QU to 7th, RPI would need to win out, but then all Yale can do is get to a tie, and given the tiebreaks, QU cannot finish 7th. There are several ways to get Quinnipiac to 6th.
COL: There are several ways to get them to 8th, and it would require a tie with Brown, but with Brown having more wins (11-10), they take the tiebreak.
YAL: Yale would need to get into a tie with Dartmouth, and Dartmouth would take the tiebreaker due to Dartmouth's previous win over Yale. There are several ways to do this.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their lowball alone.
Highball specials:
PU: Getting to 8th would result in a tie with Brown that they would take on the number of wins; it would require the Brown/Harvard game to end in a tie.
DC: Dartmouth cannot finish 6th because RPI and Yale still must play. There are several ways to get them to 7th.
BRN: This would require a tie with Colgate, once again, Brown has more wins.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their highball alone.
Bye Lock: Several ways exist for 28 to be 5th; it involves a tie between CCT and Cornell; the tie-break would go to CCT due to the number of wins.
Home Lock: A tie for 22 can happen. Brown would own any tie-break should they finish in a tie for 8th. A three-way for 8th is not possible because Harvard and Brown have a game to play.
Bye Eligible: 20 can't happen because RPI/CCT and RPI/Yale still must play. There are several ways to get 21 points and the bye with CCT alone.
Home Eligible: 15 can't happen because Harvard and Brown must still play. With a tie between Brown and Harvard, there are ways for 16 alone to be home eligible.
After 15 February:
UC 29 - 37 [1-3]
--- Bye Lock - 28+ () ---
QU 25 - 33 [1-6]
COL 23 - 31 [1-8]
--- Home Lock - 22+ () ---
CCT 20 - 28 [2-10]
COR 20 - 28 [2-10]
YAL 19 - 27 [2-11]
RPI 18 - 26 [2-11]
BRN 15 - 23 [3-12]
HVD 14 - 22 [4-12]
SLU 14 - 22 [4-12]
--- Bye Eligible - 21 () ---
DC 11 - 19 [7-12]
PU 8 - 16 [8-12]
--- Home Eligible - 16 () ---
Remaining LEAGUE schedules:
UC: CCT, SLU, @YAL, @BRN
QU: COR, COL, @SLU, @CCT
COL: @PU, @QU, HVD, DC
CCT: @UC, @RPI, PU, QU
COR: @QU, @PU, DC, HVD
YAL: @HVD, @DC, UC, RPI
RPI: SLU, CCT, @BRN, @YAL
BRN: @DC, @HVD, RPI, UC
HVD: YAL, BRN, @COL, @COR
SLU: @RPI, @UC, QU, PU
DC: BRN, YAL, @COR, @COL
PU: COL, COR, @CCT, @SLU
Tie-breaks (3pts or more):
UC: COR, RPI, HVD, DC, PU
QU: YAL, RPI, HVD, DC,
COL: UC, CCT, COR, SLU,
CCT: BRN, SLU,
COR: YAL, BRN, SLU,
YAL: COL, SLU, PU
RPI: COL, COR, DC,
BRN: SLU,
HVD: RPI, PU
SLU: HVD,
DC:
PU:
Tiebreak Procedure: H2H, #Wins, Record v Top4, Record v Top8
Lowball specials:
QU: In order to try to get QU to 7th, RPI would need to win out, but then all Yale can do is get to a tie, and given the tiebreaks, QU cannot finish 7th. There are several ways to get Quinnipiac to 6th.
COL: There are several ways to get them to 8th, and it would require a tie with Brown, but with Brown having more wins (11-10), they take the tiebreak.
YAL: Yale would need to get into a tie with Dartmouth, and Dartmouth would take the tiebreaker due to Dartmouth's previous win over Yale. There are several ways to do this.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their lowball alone.
Highball specials:
PU: Getting to 8th would result in a tie with Brown that they would take on the number of wins; it would require the Brown/Harvard game to end in a tie.
DC: Dartmouth cannot finish 6th because RPI and Yale still must play. There are several ways to get them to 7th.
BRN: This would require a tie with Colgate, once again, Brown has more wins.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their highball alone.
Bye Lock: Several ways exist for 28 to be 5th; it involves a tie between CCT and Cornell; the tie-break would go to CCT due to the number of wins.
Home Lock: A tie for 22 can happen. Brown would own any tie-break should they finish in a tie for 8th. A three-way for 8th is not possible because Harvard and Brown have a game to play.
Bye Eligible: 20 can't happen because RPI/CCT and RPI/Yale still must play. There are several ways to get 21 points and the bye with CCT alone.
Home Eligible: 15 can't happen because Harvard and Brown must still play. With a tie between Brown and Harvard, there are ways for 16 alone to be home eligible.
Last edited:
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
After 21 February:
UC 31 - 37 [1-2]
--- Bye Lock - 28 () ---
QU 25 - 31 [2-6]
COL 25 - 31 [1-6]
COR 22 - 28 [2-7]
--- Home Lock - 21+ () ---
YAL 21 - 27 [2-9]
CCT 20 - 26 [3-9]
RPI 18 - 24 [4-11]
--- Bye Eligible - 22+ () ---
SLU 16 - 22 [5-11]
BRN 15 - 21 [6-11]
HVD 14 - 20 [6-11]
DC 13 - 19 [7-12]
--- Home Eligible - 16+ () ---
PU 8 - 14 [11-12]
Remaining LEAGUE schedules:
UC: SLU, @YAL, @BRN
QU: COL, @SLU, @CCT
COL: @QU, HVD, DC
COR: @PU, DC, HVD
YAL: @DC, UC, RPI
CCT: @RPI, PU, QU
RPI: CCT, @BRN, @YAL
SLU: @UC, QU, PU
BRN: @HVD, RPI, UC
HVD: BRN, @COL, @COR
DC: YAL, @COR, @COL
PU: COR, @CCT, @SLU
Tie-breaks (3pts or more):
UC: CCT, COR, RPI, HVD, DC, PU
QU: YAL, RPI, HVD, DC,
COL: UC, CCT, COR, SLU, PU
COR: YAL, BRN, SLU,
YAL: COL, HVD, SLU, PU
CCT: BRN, SLU,
RPI: COL, COR, DC,
SLU: HVD,
BRN: SLU,
HVD: RPI, PU
DC:
PU:
H2H, #Wins, Record v Top4, Record v Top8
Lowball specials:
UC: Colgate and Quinnipiac must still play each other, so Union cannot finish third. They can still get second because Colgate owns the tiebreak.
COR: Cornell wins the tiebreak over SLU and cannot finish last in any 3+ combination, so Cornell cannot go to 8th. There are several ways to get them to 7th.
YAL: If Yale and Brown tie for 8th, Brown gets the tiebreak on number of wins.
CCT: Clarkson wins the tiebreak on number of wins vs. Harvard, and cannot finish last in a 3-way, so cannot finish 10th. There are several way sto get them to 9th.
HVD: Harvard owns the tie over Princeton, so cannot finish last.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their lowball alone.
Highball specials:
PU: As previously described, no way for Princeton to finish over Harvard and Dartmouth; they cannot get 10th. There are several ways for them to get 11th.
HVD: The way for Harvard to get to 6th is a three-way tie with CCT and RPI. They would win it, 6-4-2. They would lose a two-way on number of wins.
BRN: Brown cannot finish in a tie for 5th because of the CCT/RPI game. There are several ways for them to get 6th.
SLU: SLU cannot win any tiebreaks for 4th. They can get to 5th, but would require RPI to beat or tie CCT with subsequent win out/lose out.
CCT: CCT cannot win any form of tie for 2nd. There are several ways for them to get 3rd.
COL: In a tie for 1st, because of the season series, Colgate can finish above Union.
QU: If QU were to share the Cleary Cup, they cannot finish in first because Union has more wins. There is no possibility for a three-way. There are several ways for them to get 2nd.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their highball alone.
Bye Lock: The highest possibility for 5th is 27.
Home Lock: A tie for 21 can happen. Brown would own any tie-break should they finish in a tie for 8th.
Bye Eligible: 22 can happen with a tie-break alone, as explained in SLU's highball.
Home Eligible: 16 can't happen alone because Harvard and Brown must still play. With a tie between Brown and Harvard, there are ways for a tie for 16 to be home eligible.
After 21 February:
UC 31 - 37 [1-2]
--- Bye Lock - 28 () ---
QU 25 - 31 [2-6]
COL 25 - 31 [1-6]
COR 22 - 28 [2-7]
--- Home Lock - 21+ () ---
YAL 21 - 27 [2-9]
CCT 20 - 26 [3-9]
RPI 18 - 24 [4-11]
--- Bye Eligible - 22+ () ---
SLU 16 - 22 [5-11]
BRN 15 - 21 [6-11]
HVD 14 - 20 [6-11]
DC 13 - 19 [7-12]
--- Home Eligible - 16+ () ---
PU 8 - 14 [11-12]
Remaining LEAGUE schedules:
UC: SLU, @YAL, @BRN
QU: COL, @SLU, @CCT
COL: @QU, HVD, DC
COR: @PU, DC, HVD
YAL: @DC, UC, RPI
CCT: @RPI, PU, QU
RPI: CCT, @BRN, @YAL
SLU: @UC, QU, PU
BRN: @HVD, RPI, UC
HVD: BRN, @COL, @COR
DC: YAL, @COR, @COL
PU: COR, @CCT, @SLU
Tie-breaks (3pts or more):
UC: CCT, COR, RPI, HVD, DC, PU
QU: YAL, RPI, HVD, DC,
COL: UC, CCT, COR, SLU, PU
COR: YAL, BRN, SLU,
YAL: COL, HVD, SLU, PU
CCT: BRN, SLU,
RPI: COL, COR, DC,
SLU: HVD,
BRN: SLU,
HVD: RPI, PU
DC:
PU:
H2H, #Wins, Record v Top4, Record v Top8
Lowball specials:
UC: Colgate and Quinnipiac must still play each other, so Union cannot finish third. They can still get second because Colgate owns the tiebreak.
COR: Cornell wins the tiebreak over SLU and cannot finish last in any 3+ combination, so Cornell cannot go to 8th. There are several ways to get them to 7th.
YAL: If Yale and Brown tie for 8th, Brown gets the tiebreak on number of wins.
CCT: Clarkson wins the tiebreak on number of wins vs. Harvard, and cannot finish last in a 3-way, so cannot finish 10th. There are several way sto get them to 9th.
HVD: Harvard owns the tie over Princeton, so cannot finish last.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their lowball alone.
Highball specials:
PU: As previously described, no way for Princeton to finish over Harvard and Dartmouth; they cannot get 10th. There are several ways for them to get 11th.
HVD: The way for Harvard to get to 6th is a three-way tie with CCT and RPI. They would win it, 6-4-2. They would lose a two-way on number of wins.
BRN: Brown cannot finish in a tie for 5th because of the CCT/RPI game. There are several ways for them to get 6th.
SLU: SLU cannot win any tiebreaks for 4th. They can get to 5th, but would require RPI to beat or tie CCT with subsequent win out/lose out.
CCT: CCT cannot win any form of tie for 2nd. There are several ways for them to get 3rd.
COL: In a tie for 1st, because of the season series, Colgate can finish above Union.
QU: If QU were to share the Cleary Cup, they cannot finish in first because Union has more wins. There is no possibility for a three-way. There are several ways for them to get 2nd.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their highball alone.
Bye Lock: The highest possibility for 5th is 27.
Home Lock: A tie for 21 can happen. Brown would own any tie-break should they finish in a tie for 8th.
Bye Eligible: 22 can happen with a tie-break alone, as explained in SLU's highball.
Home Eligible: 16 can't happen alone because Harvard and Brown must still play. With a tie between Brown and Harvard, there are ways for a tie for 16 to be home eligible.
Last edited:
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
Midweek update:
Expected Standings
1. Union (35)
2. Quinnipiac (29)
3. Colgate (29)
4. Cornell (27)
-----
5. Yale (24)
6. Clarkson (23)
7. RPI (21)
8. St. Lawrence (19)
-----
9. Brown (17)
10. Harvard (16)
11. Dartmouth (14)
12. Princeton (9)
Monte Carlo:
Playoffs:
My imperfect tie-breaking is rearing its ugly head. Princeton shouldn't be able to take 10th, but they did 20 times in my sim. Not sure what's wrong, but I'm looking into it.
Midweek update:
Expected Standings
1. Union (35)
2. Quinnipiac (29)
3. Colgate (29)
4. Cornell (27)
-----
5. Yale (24)
6. Clarkson (23)
7. RPI (21)
8. St. Lawrence (19)
-----
9. Brown (17)
10. Harvard (16)
11. Dartmouth (14)
12. Princeton (9)
Monte Carlo:
Code:
1,000,000 simulations (of 387,420,489 possibilities)
| KRACH | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 |Avg Rk |AvgPts
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Un | 372.4 | [B]99.9[/B] 0.1 x x x x x x x x x x | 1.00 | 35.25
Qu | 279.2 | x [B]57.4[/B] 31.5 9.4 1.5 0.2 x x x x x x | 2.56 | 28.83
Cg | 192.1 | 0.1 41.0 [B]46.3[/B] 10.2 2.3 0.1 x x x x x x | 2.74 | 28.59
Cr | 226.7 | x 1.5 19.6 [B]63.9[/B] 11.4 3.5 0.2 0.0 x x x x | 3.96 | 26.51
Ya | 176.5 | x 0.1 1.9 9.9 [B]48.6[/B] 33.2 6.1 0.2 0.0 x x x | 5.32 | 24.25
Ck | 131.9 | x 0.0 0.7 6.2 30.7 [B]49.6[/B] 12.1 0.7 0.0 x x x | 5.68 | 23.23
RP | 130.9 | x x x 0.5 5.4 12.6 [B]58.7[/B] 16.0 6.1 0.6 0.0 x | 7.05 | 20.96
SL | 114.7 | x x x 0.0 0.0 0.5 12.9 [B]49.9[/B] 30.3 5.7 0.7 x | 8.30 | 18.67
Br | 106.3 | x x x x x 0.2 8.5 25.5 [B]36.5[/B] 24.4 5.0 x | 8.92 | 17.48
Ha | 95.4 | x x x x x 0.0 1.5 6.8 22.8 [B]44.8[/B] 24.1 0.0 | 9.83 | 16.31
Da | 59.7 | x x x x x x 0.0 1.0 4.2 24.6 [B]70.1[/B] 0.1 | 10.64 | 14.61
Pr | 31.4 | x x x x x x x x x 0.0 0.1 [B]99.9[/B] | 12.00 | 9.32
[b]Bold[/b] is each team's most likely rank.
0.0 means the team did place in that position, but fewer than 500 times.
x means the team never finished in that position.Playoffs:
Code:
| RP Br Ya Ck SL Ha Da Pr | BYE
------------------------------------------------------------
RP | 23.1 0.0 0.0 9.6 32.3 22.4 5.5 | 0.5
Br | 2.7 0.0 0.0 21.0 6.5 3.9 0.0 | 0.0
Ya | 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.7 11.1 24.2 48.6 | 11.9
Ck | 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.9 16.1 39.4 30.7 | 6.9
SL | 2.9 29.8 0.0 0.0 24.8 5.8 0.0 | 0.0
Cg | 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.3 | 97.6
Cr | 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 2.6 11.4 | 85.0
Ha | 1.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.4 0.0 | 0.0
Da | 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 | 0.0
Qu | 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.5 | 98.3
[u]Bye[/u]
Union
Hosts are listed top to bottom, visitors are across the top
(e.g., RPI has a 23.1% chance of hosting Brown in the first round).My imperfect tie-breaking is rearing its ugly head. Princeton shouldn't be able to take 10th, but they did 20 times in my sim. Not sure what's wrong, but I'm looking into it.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
Something tells me you have the "winner of the tiebreak" backwards, seeing as how you also have Cornell finishing in 8th, and they can only go as low as 7th.
Something tells me you have the "winner of the tiebreak" backwards, seeing as how you also have Cornell finishing in 8th, and they can only go as low as 7th.
hockeyenthusiast
Registered User
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
According to your expected standings, who would beat Colgate? And if the answer is Quinnipiac, then who would in turn beat them?
According to your expected standings, who would beat Colgate? And if the answer is Quinnipiac, then who would in turn beat them?
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
I think lugnut's simulation has Q beating Colgate, then losing to SLU with Colgate sweeping next weekend. Q would get the #2 seed based on a head-to-head sweep of Colgate.
I think lugnut's simulation has Q beating Colgate, then losing to SLU with Colgate sweeping next weekend. Q would get the #2 seed based on a head-to-head sweep of Colgate.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
Lugnut's scenario is not one specific scenario, but rather the expected points based upon the KRACH method of ranking and "retodicting" (see page 1).
Lugnut's scenario is not one specific scenario, but rather the expected points based upon the KRACH method of ranking and "retodicting" (see page 1).
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
After 22 February:
UC 33 - 37 [1]
COL 27 - 31 [2-4]
--- Bye Lock - 26+ () ---
QU 25 - 29 [2-6]
COR 24 - 28 [2-6]
YAL 22 - 26 [3-7]
CCT 21 - 25 [3-8]
--- Home Lock - 20+ () ---
--- Bye Eligible - 24+ () ---
RPI 19 - 23 [5-9]
BRN 17 - 21 [7-11]
SLU 16 - 20 [7-11]
HVD 14 - 18 [8-11]
DC 14 - 18 [8-11]
--- Home Eligible - 17 () ---
PU 8 - 12 [12]
Remaining LEAGUE schedules:
UC: @YAL, @BRN
QU: @SLU, @CCT
COL: HVD, DC
COR: DC, HVD
YAL: UC, RPI
CCT: PU, QU
RPI: @BRN, @YAL
SLU: QU, PU
BRN: RPI, UC
HVD: @COL, @COR
DC: @COR, @COL
PU: @CCT, @SLU
Tie-breaks (3pts or more):
UC: CCT, COR, RPI, HVD, DC, PU
QU: YAL, RPI, HVD, DC,
COL: UC, CCT, COR, SLU, PU
COR: YAL, BRN, SLU, PU
YAL: COL, HVD, SLU, PU
CCT: RPI, BRN, SLU,
RPI: COL, COR, DC,
SLU: HVD,
BRN: SLU, HVD,
HVD: RPI, PU
DC: YAL,
PU:
H2H, #Wins, Record v Top4, Record v Top8
Union's and Princeton's spots are clinched.
Lowball specials:
QU: They can finish in a tie for 5th with CCT, and CCT would take the tiebreak on number of wins, so it is possible for Quinnipiac to get 6th.
CCT: In a tie for 8th with Brown, CCT gets the nod on season series. The same would occur in a three-way. CCT cannot finish 9th. There are several ways for them to get 8th.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their lowball alone.
Highball specials:
BRN: In a tie for 6th, CCT would take the tiebreak over Brown on season series, so they cannot finish 6th. There are several ways for them to get 7th.
CCT: As previously mentioned with the QU-CCT tiebreak, this is how CCT gets 3rd.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their highball alone.
Bye Lock: Because of the tibreaks with Yale, 26 points and a tiebreak are required to clinch the first round bye.
Home Lock: A tie for 20 can happen, depending on the team, to lock up home ice.
Bye Eligible: 24 can now be controlled by its own destiny.
Home Eligible: 17 can now be controlled by its own destiny.
After 22 February:
UC 33 - 37 [1]
COL 27 - 31 [2-4]
--- Bye Lock - 26+ () ---
QU 25 - 29 [2-6]
COR 24 - 28 [2-6]
YAL 22 - 26 [3-7]
CCT 21 - 25 [3-8]
--- Home Lock - 20+ () ---
--- Bye Eligible - 24+ () ---
RPI 19 - 23 [5-9]
BRN 17 - 21 [7-11]
SLU 16 - 20 [7-11]
HVD 14 - 18 [8-11]
DC 14 - 18 [8-11]
--- Home Eligible - 17 () ---
PU 8 - 12 [12]
Remaining LEAGUE schedules:
UC: @YAL, @BRN
QU: @SLU, @CCT
COL: HVD, DC
COR: DC, HVD
YAL: UC, RPI
CCT: PU, QU
RPI: @BRN, @YAL
SLU: QU, PU
BRN: RPI, UC
HVD: @COL, @COR
DC: @COR, @COL
PU: @CCT, @SLU
Tie-breaks (3pts or more):
UC: CCT, COR, RPI, HVD, DC, PU
QU: YAL, RPI, HVD, DC,
COL: UC, CCT, COR, SLU, PU
COR: YAL, BRN, SLU, PU
YAL: COL, HVD, SLU, PU
CCT: RPI, BRN, SLU,
RPI: COL, COR, DC,
SLU: HVD,
BRN: SLU, HVD,
HVD: RPI, PU
DC: YAL,
PU:
H2H, #Wins, Record v Top4, Record v Top8
Union's and Princeton's spots are clinched.
Lowball specials:
QU: They can finish in a tie for 5th with CCT, and CCT would take the tiebreak on number of wins, so it is possible for Quinnipiac to get 6th.
CCT: In a tie for 8th with Brown, CCT gets the nod on season series. The same would occur in a three-way. CCT cannot finish 9th. There are several ways for them to get 8th.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their lowball alone.
Highball specials:
BRN: In a tie for 6th, CCT would take the tiebreak over Brown on season series, so they cannot finish 6th. There are several ways for them to get 7th.
CCT: As previously mentioned with the QU-CCT tiebreak, this is how CCT gets 3rd.
There are several ways for each of the other teams to hit their highball alone.
Bye Lock: Because of the tibreaks with Yale, 26 points and a tiebreak are required to clinch the first round bye.
Home Lock: A tie for 20 can happen, depending on the team, to lock up home ice.
Bye Eligible: 24 can now be controlled by its own destiny.
Home Eligible: 17 can now be controlled by its own destiny.
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
Well, here we are. Looking at the last weekend of ECAC play. Most teams have narrowed their ranges to 4 or 5 possible positions. Let's see what KRACH thinks is going to happen:
Expected Standings
1. Union (36)
2. Colgate (30)
3. Quinnipiac (28)
4. Cornell (27)
-----
5. Yale (24)
6. Clarkson (23)
7. RPI (21)
8. Brown (18)
-----
9. St. Lawrence (18)
10. Harvard (15)
11. Dartmouth (15)
12. Princeton (9)
Monte Carlo (NOTE: IGNORE THIS, IT'S DUMB):
Playoffs (THIS TOO):
Trust FlagDUDE's ranges if they don't agree with mine. I have been unable to identify the tie-breaking problem so far.
Well, here we are. Looking at the last weekend of ECAC play. Most teams have narrowed their ranges to 4 or 5 possible positions. Let's see what KRACH thinks is going to happen:
Expected Standings
1. Union (36)
2. Colgate (30)
3. Quinnipiac (28)
4. Cornell (27)
-----
5. Yale (24)
6. Clarkson (23)
7. RPI (21)
8. Brown (18)
-----
9. St. Lawrence (18)
10. Harvard (15)
11. Dartmouth (15)
12. Princeton (9)
Monte Carlo (NOTE: IGNORE THIS, IT'S DUMB):
Code:
1,000,000 simulations (of 531,441 possibilities)
| KRACH | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 |Avg Rk |AvgPts
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Un | 390.2 | [B]100.0[/B] x x x x x x x x x x x | [B]1.00[/B] | 35.81
Cg | 211.0 | x [B]93.9[/B] 4.8 1.3 x x x x x x x x | 2.07 | 29.83
Qu | 256.0 | x 4.5 [B]58.3[/B] 31.8 4.5 0.8 x x x x x x | 3.39 | 27.61
Cr | 230.3 | x 1.7 36.3 [B]58.2[/B] 3.2 0.6 x x x x x x | 3.65 | 26.88
Ya | 170.2 | x x 0.2 2.9 [B]49.5[/B] 37.4 10.0 x x x x x | 5.54 | 23.77
Ck | 134.1 | x x 0.3 5.8 40.3 [B]49.8[/B] 3.8 0.1 x x x x | 5.51 | 23.27
RP | 131.2 | x x x x 2.4 11.3 [B]60.7[/B] 20.7 4.9 x x x | 7.14 | 20.94
Br | 114.8 | x x x x x 0.1 20.9 [B]43.6[/B] 32.7 2.6 0.1 x | 8.17 | 18.47
SL | 113.2 | x x x x x x 4.7 34.5 [B]55.4[/B] 4.6 0.7 x | 8.62 | 18.16
Ha | 87.8 | x x x x x x x 0.6 3.6 36.8 [B]59.0[/B] x | 10.54 | 15.26
Da | 62.5 | x x x x x x x 0.4 3.4 [B]56.0[/B] 40.1 x | 10.36 | 15.04
Pr | 30.5 | x x x x x x x x x x x [B]100.0[/B] | [B]12.00[/B] | 8.96
[b]Bold[/b] is each team's most likely rank.
0.0 means the team did place in that position, but fewer than 500 times.
x means the team never finished in that position.Playoffs (THIS TOO):
Code:
| RP Br SL Ha Da Pr | BYE
------------------------------------------------
RP | 3.9 20.4 29.3 39.1 2.4 | 0.0
Br | 2.7 38.8 9.5 13.6 0.0 | 0.0
Ya | 0.0 0.6 0.7 25.6 20.5 49.5 | 3.1
Ck | 0.0 0.2 0.6 30.7 22.1 40.3 | 6.1
SL | 2.1 29.9 3.4 3.8 0.0 | 0.0
Cr | 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 3.2 | 96.2
Ha | 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 | 0.0
Da | 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 | 0.0
Qu | 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.3 4.5 | 94.6
[u]Bye[/u]
Union
Colgate
Hosts are listed top to bottom, visitors are across the top
(e.g., RPI has a 20.4% chance of hosting SLU in the first round).Trust FlagDUDE's ranges if they don't agree with mine. I have been unable to identify the tie-breaking problem so far.
Last edited:
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
KRACH-weighted odds:
Playoffs:
KRACH-weighted odds:
Code:
EXHAUSTIVE (Every possible outcome (3^12) checked, weighted for odds of occurrence)
| KRACH | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 |Avg Rk |AvgPts
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Un | 390.2 | [B]100.0[/B] x x x x x x x x x x x | [B]1.00[/B] | 35.81
Cg | 211.0 | x [B]87.6[/B] 10.6 1.8 x x x x x x x x | 2.14 | 29.83
Qu | 256.0 | x 11.1 [B]58.1[/B] 25.4 4.6 0.9 x x x x x x | 3.26 | 27.61
Cr | 230.3 | x 1.3 30.7 [B]64.1[/B] 3.3 0.6 x x x x x x | 3.71 | 26.88
Ya | 170.2 | x x 0.4 3.3 [B]49.8[/B] 36.6 10.0 x x x x x | 5.53 | 23.77
Ck | 134.1 | x x 0.2 5.5 40.1 [B]49.9[/B] 4.2 0.1 x x x x | 5.53 | 23.27
RP | 131.2 | x x x x 2.2 12.0 [B]59.7[/B] 20.8 5.2 x x x | 7.14 | 20.95
Br | 114.8 | x x x x x 0.0 20.2 [B]43.7[/B] 33.0 2.9 0.1 x | 8.18 | 18.47
SL | 113.2 | x x x x x x 5.9 34.0 [B]53.8[/B] 5.6 0.6 x | 8.60 | 18.16
Ha | 87.8 | x x x x x x x 0.4 3.4 37.3 [B]58.9[/B] x | 10.55 | 15.26
Da | 62.5 | x x x x x x x 0.8 4.5 [B]54.3[/B] 40.4 x | 10.34 | 15.03
Pr | 30.5 | x x x x x x x x x x x [B]100.0[/B] | [B]12.00[/B] | 8.96
[b]Bold[/b] is each team's most likely rank.
0.0 means the team could place in that position, but there is less than 0.05% chance of that happening.
x means the team cannot place in that position.Playoffs:
Code:
| RP Br SL Ha Da Pr | BYE
------------------------------------------------
RP | 4.6 20.0 29.6 38.4 2.2 | x
Br | 3.4 38.2 9.0 13.5 x | x
Ya | x 0.6 0.7 25.1 20.2 49.8 | 3.7
Ck | x 0.3 0.6 30.8 22.5 40.1 | 5.7
SL | 1.8 29.8 4.2 4.1 x | x
Cr | x 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2 3.3 | 96.1
Ha | x 0.4 0.0 0.0 x | x
Da | x 0.3 0.5 0.0 x | x
Qu | x 0.0 x 0.5 0.4 4.6 | 94.6
[u]Bye[/u]
Union
Colgate
Hosts are listed top to bottom, visitors are across the top
(e.g., RPI has a 20.0% chance of hosting SLU in the first round).
Ralph Baer
Let's Go 'Tute!
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
Nothing like using 1,000,000 simulations of 531,441 possibilities.
Nothing like using 1,000,000 simulations of 531,441 possibilities.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
4 simulations of a coin flip is a bit scant...
Nothing like using 1,000,000 simulations of 531,441 possibilities.
4 simulations of a coin flip is a bit scant...
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
Ignore the Monte Carlo simulation, look at the exhaustive odds listed below. They're mostly the same, and obviously the simulation would eventually converge on the exhaustive odds if I had perfectly random numbers.
Nothing like using 1,000,000 simulations of 531,441 possibilities.
Ignore the Monte Carlo simulation, look at the exhaustive odds listed below. They're mostly the same, and obviously the simulation would eventually converge on the exhaustive odds if I had perfectly random numbers.
hockeyenthusiast
Registered User
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if Colgate wins at least one game this weekend and Cornell gets 2 points, Colgate would secure 2nd place right? On virtue of at worst holding the tiebreaker for record against top 4?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if Colgate wins at least one game this weekend and Cornell gets 2 points, Colgate would secure 2nd place right? On virtue of at worst holding the tiebreaker for record against top 4?
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
If Colgate get two points, the only team that can catch them is Quinnipiac. Number of wins would be exactly the same, so yes, we would go to top four. Union is 3-2 in favor of Colgate, and either Cornell OR CCT will give it to Colgate. If Yale gets the top 4, Quinnipiac is able to overtake. As Cornell holds the tiebreak over Yale, two points would give them the break over Yale and would overtake CCT, so you would be correct.
If Colgate get two points, the only team that can catch them is Quinnipiac. Number of wins would be exactly the same, so yes, we would go to top four. Union is 3-2 in favor of Colgate, and either Cornell OR CCT will give it to Colgate. If Yale gets the top 4, Quinnipiac is able to overtake. As Cornell holds the tiebreak over Yale, two points would give them the break over Yale and would overtake CCT, so you would be correct.
Last edited:
Ralph Baer
Let's Go 'Tute!
Re: ECAC Projected Standings 2013-2014
Am I correct that the Monte Carlo simulations does not take into account the likelihood of any occurrence. That is, are the odds of the favorite winning each game the same as the odds of the favorite losing each game? Otherwise I am surprised that the two sets of results are as different as they are. I realize that the averages points are very close.
Am I correct that the Monte Carlo simulations does not take into account the likelihood of any occurrence. That is, are the odds of the favorite winning each game the same as the odds of the favorite losing each game? Otherwise I am surprised that the two sets of results are as different as they are. I realize that the averages points are very close.