P
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.
John t whelan ranking simulator
- Thread starter Numbers
- Start date
Patman
Rodent of Unusual Size
Thanks for downloading and I'm glad you enjoy it thus far. Conference tournaments is something I will consider putting in automatically, but for the time being, the games would need to be entered manually. It would require me to do some reformulation including with the data file because I do not include in what league each team plays, nor do I give any consideration to a shootout, which is used in calculating the league points for several leagues. It is something that I am willing to work on, as one of my goals was to actually run through scenarios automatically.
Obviously this is sort of a work in progress, but given the absence of another tool out there, I have decided to introduce this tool to all of you.
The main reason I haven't even tried to broach it is dealing with tie-breakers. I'm a math guy, I'm not trained in algorithms and I can get lost in indexing
Even in season tournaments are easier to handle, in my opinion
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
I noticed a difference between USCHO's and my calculations for RatingsPI, and could be a big difference as to why some of these numbers seem messed up. As my example, I'd like you to take a look at AIC's rating. I have them listed as 57.00, while USCHO has them listed as 75.00. Let's break it down.
WP: AIC has played one game vs. Providence and lost. Doesn't really matter where it is, that will be 0.00.
OWP: Providence has played two other games, each against Mankato, both of which Providence won. That will be 21.00.
OOWP: All we need to do is calculate Providence's OWP, and that's two parts Mankato, one part AIC. Where USCHO and I differ is that USCHO does not take opponents' games against AIC into account when calculating AIC's OOWP. There is some conflicting information, as the definition for OOWP I have, although sourced as being related to basketball so I don't know if the definition holds for college hockey, is that the team's OOWP includes games against the original team. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rating_Percentage_Index Mankato won all of their other games thus far. If you include AIC, it becomes 36.00, while if you do not include them, it becomes 54.00.
Of course, now I see information at http://rpiratings.com/WhatisRPI.php that you don't include games against the original team. Hello, confusion!
I noticed a difference between USCHO's and my calculations for RatingsPI, and could be a big difference as to why some of these numbers seem messed up. As my example, I'd like you to take a look at AIC's rating. I have them listed as 57.00, while USCHO has them listed as 75.00. Let's break it down.
WP: AIC has played one game vs. Providence and lost. Doesn't really matter where it is, that will be 0.00.
OWP: Providence has played two other games, each against Mankato, both of which Providence won. That will be 21.00.
OOWP: All we need to do is calculate Providence's OWP, and that's two parts Mankato, one part AIC. Where USCHO and I differ is that USCHO does not take opponents' games against AIC into account when calculating AIC's OOWP. There is some conflicting information, as the definition for OOWP I have, although sourced as being related to basketball so I don't know if the definition holds for college hockey, is that the team's OOWP includes games against the original team. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rating_Percentage_Index Mankato won all of their other games thus far. If you include AIC, it becomes 36.00, while if you do not include them, it becomes 54.00.
Of course, now I see information at http://rpiratings.com/WhatisRPI.php that you don't include games against the original team. Hello, confusion!
Patman
Rodent of Unusual Size
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
I tried brandishing a PWR probability thing. Got all sorts of things wrong that I was doing daily corrections.
You can use all the words one wants to use, but something always pops up when you're working with plain language.
I tried brandishing a PWR probability thing. Got all sorts of things wrong that I was doing daily corrections.
You can use all the words one wants to use, but something always pops up when you're working with plain language.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
Very true. I'm still trying to get some of these figured out. I wonder how USCHO is calculating the weighting, because I'm trying to get to RPI's RatingsPI according to USCHO (even off by a factor of any multiple of .0025 to account for a mistake in the quality wins).; using it because they've both won and lost games, and there's no adjustment for negative effect.
I think USCHO is calculating the weighting wrong. The OWP and OOWP deifnitely add up to .42375, and you have to get to something ending in 81, 31, 56, or 06 to account for quality wins as RPI is listed as .6581; this means you must shoot for something ending in 44, 94, 19, or 69 (while accounting for some rounding). What USCHO did to get there was that they counted away games as 1.2 and home game as 0.8, regardless of result. This is NOT the case, according to how RatingsPI is handled for weighting. http://rpiratings.com/WhatisRPI.php If you win away or lose at home, the weight of 1.2 is used. If you lose away or win at home, the weight of 0.8 is used. Going back to my example of RPI... If you do it according to the site I cited, it is 3.2/4.0, or .2000. If you count the Sacred Heart game in Bridgeport as neutral site, it's 3/3.8, or .19736 points. The way USCHO did it (including Sacred Heart in Bridgeport as away) is 3.2/4.4, or .18181. Looking at the rules for neutral site as of 2007-08, if Atlantic Hockey refs were provided and SHU did all the hosting duties, that should be an away game for RPI.
Very true. I'm still trying to get some of these figured out. I wonder how USCHO is calculating the weighting, because I'm trying to get to RPI's RatingsPI according to USCHO (even off by a factor of any multiple of .0025 to account for a mistake in the quality wins).; using it because they've both won and lost games, and there's no adjustment for negative effect.
I think USCHO is calculating the weighting wrong. The OWP and OOWP deifnitely add up to .42375, and you have to get to something ending in 81, 31, 56, or 06 to account for quality wins as RPI is listed as .6581; this means you must shoot for something ending in 44, 94, 19, or 69 (while accounting for some rounding). What USCHO did to get there was that they counted away games as 1.2 and home game as 0.8, regardless of result. This is NOT the case, according to how RatingsPI is handled for weighting. http://rpiratings.com/WhatisRPI.php If you win away or lose at home, the weight of 1.2 is used. If you lose away or win at home, the weight of 0.8 is used. Going back to my example of RPI... If you do it according to the site I cited, it is 3.2/4.0, or .2000. If you count the Sacred Heart game in Bridgeport as neutral site, it's 3/3.8, or .19736 points. The way USCHO did it (including Sacred Heart in Bridgeport as away) is 3.2/4.4, or .18181. Looking at the rules for neutral site as of 2007-08, if Atlantic Hockey refs were provided and SHU did all the hosting duties, that should be an away game for RPI.
Last edited:
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
I have a headache.
So much for Simple Math (tm).
I have a headache.
So much for Simple Math (tm).
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
If they're going to call it RPI, we might as well own up to it.
If they're going to call it RPI, we might as well own up to it.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
Version 0.2 of the RPI and PWR Calculator is now available for download at wa2aea.com . See the site for information on what has been updated. I did include something in Numbers' wish list, where you don't have to download the teams file anymore; you'll be able to get it from the application itself.
Version 0.2 of the RPI and PWR Calculator is now available for download at wa2aea.com . See the site for information on what has been updated. I did include something in Numbers' wish list, where you don't have to download the teams file anymore; you'll be able to get it from the application itself.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
Am I doing something wrong or are the csv files blank?
Am I doing something wrong or are the csv files blank?
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
They shouldn't be blank. What version of Java are you running? There is an incompatibility with Win7 and a certain version. I just rechecked my FTP area and none of the CSV files are blank.
They shouldn't be blank. What version of Java are you running? There is an incompatibility with Win7 and a certain version. I just rechecked my FTP area and none of the CSV files are blank.
Last edited:
P
Priceless
Guest
Will check when I get home. Maybe I should try rebooting once in a while too
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
Some of the users of my other applications have experienced an issue with some of the recent versions of Java in that the readers and writers built into the programs have issues. Once you get me your Java version as well as what operating system you are using, and I check this against the other users who reported problems, I will submit a bug report to Solaris in the hopes that they will fix the bug. I assure you, though, the most recent data file is 50.4 KB.
Also, I'm not sure if you downloaded version 0.2 or 0.3, but 0.3 is up.
Some of the users of my other applications have experienced an issue with some of the recent versions of Java in that the readers and writers built into the programs have issues. Once you get me your Java version as well as what operating system you are using, and I check this against the other users who reported problems, I will submit a bug report to Solaris in the hopes that they will fix the bug. I assure you, though, the most recent data file is 50.4 KB.
Also, I'm not sure if you downloaded version 0.2 or 0.3, but 0.3 is up.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
I just downloaded .3 today. It is a problem with the path.
The actual link is http://wa2aea.com/products/NCAARPIPWR/NCAARPIPWRHockey20131027.csv
but on the website it is listed as http://wa2aea.com/products/NCAARPIPWRHockey20131027.csv
The /NCAARPIPWR isn't included.
ETA: Providence, Brown, Minnesota and Miami are the #1 seeds.
I just downloaded .3 today. It is a problem with the path.
The actual link is http://wa2aea.com/products/NCAARPIPWR/NCAARPIPWRHockey20131027.csv
but on the website it is listed as http://wa2aea.com/products/NCAARPIPWRHockey20131027.csv
The /NCAARPIPWR isn't included.
ETA: Providence, Brown, Minnesota and Miami are the #1 seeds.
Last edited:
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
D'oh! Try it again. Either tha,t or hit the Load Web File button in the application.
D'oh! Try it again. Either tha,t or hit the Load Web File button in the application.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
Top 16:
Minnesota
St Cloud
Quinnipiac
Providence
Boston College
Lowell
Miami
Michigan
Wisconsin
North Dakota
St Lawrence
Ferris State
Lake Superior
Vermont
Boston U
Northeastern
(top AHA team is #36 Air Force)
I won't start bothering with bracketology until the new year.
Top 16:
Minnesota
St Cloud
Quinnipiac
Providence
Boston College
Lowell
Miami
Michigan
Wisconsin
North Dakota
St Lawrence
Ferris State
Lake Superior
Vermont
Boston U
Northeastern
(top AHA team is #36 Air Force)
I won't start bothering with bracketology until the new year.
P
Priceless
Guest
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
I should hasten to note that Priceless's list is accurate as of the end of Saturday's games. At the end of Sunday's game, it is:
Minnesota
St. Cloud State
Boston College
Quinnipiac
Providence
Miami
North Dakota
Michigan
Northeastern
Wisconsin
LSSU
Boston University
UMASS Lowell
St. Lawrence
Ferris State
Atlantic Winner (Air Force expected)
In addition, these are the twenty teams currently worth Quality Wins Bonus points, should you beat or tie them:
5.00 Minnesota
4.75 St. Cloud State
4.50 Quinnipiac
4.25 Northeastern
4.00 Providence
3.75 Michigan
3.50 Ferris State
3.25 LSSU
3.00 Miami
2.75 North Dakota
2.50 Bowling Green
2.25 Wisconsin
2.00 Boston College
1.75 UMASS Lowell
1.50 Vermont
1.25 Bemidji State
1.00 Brown
0.75 Maine
0.50 Minnesota State
0.25 Western Michigan
I should hasten to note that Priceless's list is accurate as of the end of Saturday's games. At the end of Sunday's game, it is:
Minnesota
St. Cloud State
Boston College
Quinnipiac
Providence
Miami
North Dakota
Michigan
Northeastern
Wisconsin
LSSU
Boston University
UMASS Lowell
St. Lawrence
Ferris State
Atlantic Winner (Air Force expected)
In addition, these are the twenty teams currently worth Quality Wins Bonus points, should you beat or tie them:
5.00 Minnesota
4.75 St. Cloud State
4.50 Quinnipiac
4.25 Northeastern
4.00 Providence
3.75 Michigan
3.50 Ferris State
3.25 LSSU
3.00 Miami
2.75 North Dakota
2.50 Bowling Green
2.25 Wisconsin
2.00 Boston College
1.75 UMASS Lowell
1.50 Vermont
1.25 Bemidji State
1.00 Brown
0.75 Maine
0.50 Minnesota State
0.25 Western Michigan
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
ETA: Just did it again and now I have Michigan #6, Miami #7 and Lowell #8
I input MSU as the winner of the Sunday game. May want to double check that functionality if the list is different...
ETA: Just did it again and now I have Michigan #6, Miami #7 and Lowell #8
Last edited:
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: John t whelan ranking simulator
Maybe my list didn't include it. There's no reason, at least I don't see, why you and I would be getting different lists. I got your exact list with my web-load and not including the Sunday game. I'll make sure it is re-calculating, as it should be.
EDIT: Just checked again, and it re-calculates appropriately.
Maybe my list didn't include it. There's no reason, at least I don't see, why you and I would be getting different lists. I got your exact list with my web-load and not including the Sunday game. I'll make sure it is re-calculating, as it should be.
EDIT: Just checked again, and it re-calculates appropriately.
Last edited: