What's new
By:
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.

pairwise -- post jan 8th

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:
TheRevengeance said:
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)
Click to expand...
Now do the same for MTU vs NMU to end the season...
 
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
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

ticapnews said:
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
Click to expand...

What do you think the effect will be of the addition of another autobid (the B1G) on that top-12 statistic?
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

There were 6 autobids back when the CHA existed, so the "extra" autobid isn't exactly unprecedented
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

UML Puck Hawk said:
What do you think the effect will be of the addition of another autobid (the B1G) on that top-12 statistic?
Click to expand...

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%).
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

ticapnews said:
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%).
Click to expand...

Its a lot of nibbling at the margins anyhow. First we don't really have "enough" data... and I mean statistically enough... second... its harder to drop out at tournament time than it is to jump in.

Now, college with its best of 3 format does make it doable to drop two results without a win. However, a borderline team getting hot and going 4-1 (read as first round+ QF sweep+loss in SF) is possible. For any team the most games they can drop NET is two games. (Yes, a team can go 2-3 by playing two playoff series in sequence... but you get my point).

Nobody is "fire proof" per se... I wouldn't bet heavily on all teams 12th and above... but it isn't easy.
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

Patman said:
Its a lot of nibbling at the margins anyhow. First we don't really have "enough" data... and I mean statistically enough... second... its harder to drop out at tournament time than it is to jump in.

Now, college with its best of 3 format does make it doable to drop two results without a win. However, a borderline team getting hot and going 4-1 (read as first round+ QF sweep+loss in SF) is possible. For any team the most games they can drop NET is two games. (Yes, a team can go 2-3 by playing two playoff series in sequence... but you get my point).

Nobody is "fire proof" per se... I wouldn't bet heavily on all teams 12th and above... but it isn't easy.
Click to expand...
to be fair, a WCHA/NCHC team could go 4-0 over the next 2 weeks and be done for the season. Big Ten could go 0-7 starting friday...ECAC/HEA/AHA are the ones that are done...the west still has some regular season games.
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

Shirtless Guy said:
to be fair, a WCHA/NCHC team could go 4-0 over the next 2 weeks and be done for the season. Big Ten could go 0-7 starting friday...ECAC/HEA/AHA are the ones that are done...the west still has some regular season games.
Click to expand...

right... i'm just explaining general principle
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

Now I can't wait for the next bracketology to be released. :D
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

Playoffstatus.com has the top five teams as 100% locks even if they lose out the rest of the way, they also have 6-8 with a less than 1% chance of falling out even if they lose out the rest of the season.
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

LTsatch said:
Playoffstatus.com has the top five teams as 100% locks even if they lose out the rest of the way, they also have 6-8 with a less than 1% chance of falling out even if they lose out the rest of the season.
Click to expand...
unless they changed their method playoffstatus.com doesn't use pwr to rank teams and can't be trusted for NCAA tournament predicting.
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

Shirtless Guy said:
unless they changed their method playoffstatus.com doesn't use pwr to rank teams and can't be trusted for NCAA tournament predicting.
Click to expand...

I was wondering that when they had Yale at 7 instead of 8, i guess they use their own power rankings. That said, Yale just jumped over Michigan to 7 with the second Ohio State loss.
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

I would call the top 5 locks, and just added Denver to the list of teams I expect to see in the tournament:
http://collegehockeyranked.com/2016...-should-expect-to-see-in-the-ncaa-tournament/

It's tough to decide when to call these, though. Think of a presidential election. With 60% of the votes in, and 80% of them going to one candidate (assuming reasonable demographics distribution), do you say the candidate has won in a landslide or do you say it's not over because the loser can still win if he gets every single remaining vote? Obviously the former. Denver is that winning candidate--it's mathematically possible for them to miss, but I wouldn't worry about it.

After this weekend, things will be tight enough that I'll switch over to pure mathematical certainty.
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

JimDahl said:
I would call the top 5 locks, and just added Denver to the list of teams I expect to see in the tournament:
http://collegehockeyranked.com/2016...-should-expect-to-see-in-the-ncaa-tournament/

It's tough to decide when to call these, though. Think of a presidential election. With 60% of the votes in, and 80% of them going to one candidate (assuming reasonable demographics distribution), do you say the candidate has won in a landslide or do you say it's not over because the loser can still win if he gets every single remaining vote? Obviously the former. Denver is that winning candidate--it's mathematically possible for them to miss, but I wouldn't worry about it.

After this weekend, things will be tight enough that I'll switch over to pure mathematical certainty.
Click to expand...

#1-8 & #10 are 100% locks. #9 & #11 are 99%. So 1-11 are essentially locks and #12 Harvard is at 95%. CHN has done the math.

http://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/probabilityMatrix.php
 
Re: pairwise -- post jan 8th

Tater said:
#1-8 & #10 are 100% locks. #9 & #11 are 99%. So 1-11 are essentially locks and #12 Harvard is at 95%. CHN has done the math.

http://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/probabilityMatrix.php
Click to expand...

You didn't read the rules of what that link is did you? Not to mention anyone that can finish 11th could technically be bumped by 6 lower ranked teams winning their conference tournament.

While it's likely that those 20,000 simulations are the most of the highest likelihood outcomes, I wouldn't say anyone below #6 is actually a lock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top