Division I Rutter Computer Ranking Top Ten for Monday, October 8th

[LakersFan]

Rutter Division I Women's Ice Hockey Computer Ranking Top Ten

Through Games of Sunday, October 7th

Rating is based on wins, loses, and ties only. Margin of victory and game location are not included in the rating. A team's rating from the previous year is used as an initial weight using a Bayesian approach.

Rank Team Rating Record
1 Wisconsin 1.892 4-0-0
2 Mercyhurst 1.879 3-0-0
3 Dartmouth 1.510 0-0-0
4 Minnesota-Duluth 1.422 2-0-0
5 New Hampshire 1.382 1-1-0
6 St. Lawrence 1.327 1-1-0
7 Minnesota 1.282 2-0-0
8 Harvard 1.090 0-0-0
9 Boston College 1.000 1-0-0
10 Clarkson 0.750 2-0-0

For more information, visit http://math.bd.psu.edu/faculty/rutter/WomensRankings.html

Copyright 2007 Michael A. Rutter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/; or, (b) send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 2nd Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.

[spike]

Rutter Division I Women's Ice Hockey Computer Ranking Top Ten

Through Games of Sunday, October 7th

Rating is based on wins, loses, and ties only. Margin of victory and game location are not included in the rating. A team's rating from the previous year is used as an initial weight using a Bayesian approach.

Rank Team Rating Record
1 Wisconsin 1.892 4-0-0
2 Mercyhurst 1.879 3-0-0
3 Dartmouth 1.510 0-0-0
4 Minnesota-Duluth 1.422 2-0-0
5 New Hampshire 1.382 1-1-0
6 St. Lawrence 1.327 1-1-0
7 Minnesota 1.282 2-0-0
8 Harvard 1.090 0-0-0
9 Boston College 1.000 1-0-0
10 Clarkson 0.750 2-0-0

For more information, visit http://math.bd.psu.edu/faculty/rutter/WomensRankings.html

Copyright 2007 Michael A. Rutter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/; or, (b) send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 2nd Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.

Please clarify this ranking for me. When I see the term "computer ranking" I assume (right or wrong) that it is based on things like strength of schedule and opponent's strength of schedule, etc. If true, how does Dartmouth and Harvard get ranked when they haven't played yet?

[dave1381]

Please clarify this ranking for me. When I see the term "computer ranking" I assume (right or wrong) that it is based on things like strength of schedule and opponent's strength of schedule, etc. If true, how does Dartmouth and Harvard get ranked when they haven't played yet?
He already did.
A team's rating from the previous year is used as an initial weight using a Bayesian approach.
The importance of the weight then declines as the season progresses.

[spike]

He already did.

The importance of the weight then declines as the season progresses.

Thanks, I guess it always pays to read the whole thing before asking questions.