Page 8 of 24 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415161718 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 465

Thread: 2017 Pairwise thread

  1. #141
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Waltham, MA
    Posts
    6,871

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    This many affect the WMU getting a #2/#3 seed issue.



  2. #142
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    788

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Much better from CHN now.

    Jim Dahl,
    I have a question for you. Do Thursday's results offer any possibility of definite conclusions? In other words, Do PSU and OSU both winning shut AFA out of an at-large bid? Or, some other such thing?

  3. #143
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    222

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
    I can't get to work, either. I looked at Harvard's schedule, and chose everyone on their schedule to lose . . .
    I hope nothing quite so drastic as that occurs. Other than the #4/#5 swapping we've seen recently, it seems like the top 4 tier is pretty well set, with reasonably different RPIs. Though with 3 of the 4 teams playing each other, clearly some losses are inevitable. For obvious reasons, I am rooting for Minnesota to move up to #4 by week's end.

    Down lower, of course, the RPIs are so packed together that larger than I'd expect moves can happen based on just a game or two. I am surprised, for example, by the contention (above) that North Dakota not only falls out of the #3 seed level, but all the way out, if it does not win its tournament. I would argue that if you can win the NCHC tournament, your team is about the best there is. I don't want to see North Dakota fall into the #4 seed level, again because of what happens to the Crimson travel plans, and was starting to think they were pretty securely in the 9-12 group unless they decide to lose 2 this weekend. But perhaps not.
    Last edited by Crimson on the Glass; 03-13-2017 at 11:19 AM.

  4. #144
    Super Serial
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Back to Comm. Ave
    Posts
    2,728

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Crimson on the Glass View Post
    I hope nothing quite so drastic as that occurs. Other than the #4/#5 swapping we've seen recently, it seems like the top 4 tier is pretty well set, with reasonably different RPIs. Though with 3 of the 4 teams playing each other, clearly some losses are inevitable. For obvious reasons, I am rooting for Minnesota to move up to #4 by week's end.

    Down lower, of course, the RPIs are so packed together that larger than I'd expect moves can happen based on just a game or two. I am surprised, for example, by the contention (above) that North Dakota not only falls out of the #3 seed level, but all the way out, if it does not win its tournament. I would argue that if you can win the NCHC tournament, your team is about the best there is. I don't want to see North Dakota fall into the #4 seed level, again because of what happens to the Crimson travel plans, and was starting to think they were pretty securely in the 9-12 group unless they decide to lose 2 this weekend. But perhaps not.
    Harvard would only go west to play UND if all three of WMU, DU, and UMD are 1s. If BU or Minnesota finish on the 1 line and UND on the 4, Harvard likely stays east unless it swaps BU and Harvard for attendance purposes.
    I was formerly a tasty 7-11 beverage. Now I'm a fan of defunct hockey teams.

  5. #145
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    222

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by brassbonanza View Post
    Harvard would only go west to play UND if all three of WMU, DU, and UMD are 1s.
    Yes, am aware! It seems less like a perfect storm these days, and more like something that could actually happen.

    I can't imagine anyone making an informed decision about attendance that would favor Harvard staying close to home. BU and UML outdraw the Crimson at Bright-Landry, regrettably.
    Last edited by Crimson on the Glass; 03-13-2017 at 11:34 AM.

  6. #146
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,295

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Tater View Post
    Technically possible since CHN Probability Matrix gives Lowell 0.8% chance of getting a 4th but extremely unlikely. The following scenario where BU, Minnesota, Western Michigan (loses 2 games), and Union all lose. UML is still in 5th, but only by 0.0001 RPI. You can tinker and I'm sure find how UML makes up that small deficit, but I wouldn't place any bets on this.

    http://pwp.uscho.com/rankings/pairwi..._58c6b44dadeb5
    http://pwp.uscho.com/rankings/pairwi..._58c60859c2e90
    BS UMass Lowell 2015
    PhD Georgia Institute of Technology 20(19?)



    Quote Originally Posted by BUtogether View Post
    And I'd be giving BJ's to any kid
    RIP KRoy4Hobey, Gone, but probably Gr8Sk8M8

  7. #147
    Super Serial
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Back to Comm. Ave
    Posts
    2,728

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Crimson on the Glass View Post
    Yes, am aware! It seems less like a perfect storm these days, and more like something that could actually happen.

    And I really can't imagine anyone making a decision about attendance that would favor Harvard staying close to home. BU and UML outdraw the Crimson at Bright-Landry, regrettably.
    What would also throw a wrench into that is if Wisconsin or (far less likely) one of the Michigans wins the B1G, then UND missing completely becomes a real possibility, in the scenario that UND loses two and falls to the 4 line territory.
    I was formerly a tasty 7-11 beverage. Now I'm a fan of defunct hockey teams.

  8. #148
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Hockeytown,USA
    Posts
    2,609

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread


  9. #149
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Posts
    5,550

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by JimDahl View Post
    Ok, I'm working on it with CHN. I'm going to keep somewhat quiet until we've got it figured out for sure and agree, but meanwhile here's a preview of what I'm seeing:

    http://collegehockeyranked.com/forecast/pwrtournament/
    Does a loss and a tie by North Dakota change the numbers at all?
    That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

  10. #150
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Posts
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by SJHovey View Post
    Does a loss and a tie by North Dakota change the numbers at all?
    Absolutely. Unfortunately, I keep those records by number of wins, so the 0 win scenario includes both loss+loss and loss+tie. Let me think if I can come up with an easy way to tease out that information.

  11. #151
    Opposite Girl
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Meffa, MA
    Posts
    28,655

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by SJHovey View Post
    Does a loss and a tie by North Dakota change the numbers at all?
    How can they tie? Aren't we at a point in the season where it's either win or lose?

  12. #152
    cetihcra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Denver, Colorado -- VT awhile back
    Posts
    2,420

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlet View Post
    How can they tie? Aren't we at a point in the season where it's either win or lose?
    NCHC has a third place game, which can end in a tie.

    r

  13. #153
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,295

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlet View Post
    How can they tie? Aren't we at a point in the season where it's either win or lose?
    Question for pairwise people. In postseason tournaments with continuous OT isn't the game still considered a tie if it is scoreless after 5 min for pairwise purposes? I feel like for the sake of fairness that must be true, but I haven't seen it discussed anywhere.
    BS UMass Lowell 2015
    PhD Georgia Institute of Technology 20(19?)



    Quote Originally Posted by BUtogether View Post
    And I'd be giving BJ's to any kid
    RIP KRoy4Hobey, Gone, but probably Gr8Sk8M8

  14. #154
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    22

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by brassbonanza View Post
    Harvard would only go west to play UND if all three of WMU, DU, and UMD are 1s. If BU or Minnesota finish on the 1 line and UND on the 4, Harvard likely stays east unless it swaps BU and Harvard for attendance purposes.
    What happens to BU if they lose to BC on Friday? I assume BC is out if they lose?

  15. #155
    Opposite Girl
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Meffa, MA
    Posts
    28,655

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by UML Puck Hawk View Post
    Question for pairwise people. In postseason tournaments with continuous OT isn't the game still considered a tie if it is scoreless after 5 min for pairwise purposes? I feel like for the sake of fairness that must be true, but I haven't seen it discussed anywhere.
    Huh? You mean if a game goes into double OT and one team wins it, because neither team scored within the first five minutes of the first OT the game counts as a tie?? That's truly ridiculous if that's the case. Why bother playing OT then?

  16. #156
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    187

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by UML Puck Hawk View Post
    Question for pairwise people. In postseason tournaments with continuous OT isn't the game still considered a tie if it is scoreless after 5 min for pairwise purposes? I feel like for the sake of fairness that must be true, but I haven't seen it discussed anywhere.
    I feel like I would have read that somewhere over the last 15 years or so and I've definitely never heard of that being a thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by meauxmo View Post
    What happens to BU if they lose to BC on Friday? I assume BC is out if they lose?
    Jim Dahl's chart has an extremely slim chance they make it in without winning one game this weekend. I've been playing with the predictor and can't find a way to make it happen yet. The big sticking point is that somehow they have to get past Penn State and Ohio State and I can't figure out how to get that to happen.
    Last edited by tape; 03-13-2017 at 03:44 PM.

  17. #157
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,295

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlet View Post
    Huh? You mean if a game goes into double OT and one team wins it, because neither team scored within the first five minutes of the first OT the game counts as a tie?? That's truly ridiculous if that's the case. Why bother playing OT then?
    Because tournaments need a winner. But the Pairwise doesn't?

    Why in the eyes of a computer should the games played this weekend (and any game 3's of series) count more than a game earlier in the season. Seems weird to me to count a win now if it wouldn't have counted two weeks ago...
    BS UMass Lowell 2015
    PhD Georgia Institute of Technology 20(19?)



    Quote Originally Posted by BUtogether View Post
    And I'd be giving BJ's to any kid
    RIP KRoy4Hobey, Gone, but probably Gr8Sk8M8

  18. #158
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Agganis 115
    Posts
    337

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by UML Puck Hawk View Post
    Question for pairwise people. In postseason tournaments with continuous OT isn't the game still considered a tie if it is scoreless after 5 min for pairwise purposes? I feel like for the sake of fairness that must be true, but I haven't seen it discussed anywhere.
    No. In the postseason there are no ties. You could go 7 OT, and the winner is still the winner, including for PWR purposes.

  19. #159
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,295

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhett Hot View Post
    No. In the postseason there are no ties. You could go 7 OT, and the winner is still the winner, including for PWR purposes.
    Except in consolation games...

    Can you link to any actual statement which backs this up, because I can't find one anywhere.
    BS UMass Lowell 2015
    PhD Georgia Institute of Technology 20(19?)



    Quote Originally Posted by BUtogether View Post
    And I'd be giving BJ's to any kid
    RIP KRoy4Hobey, Gone, but probably Gr8Sk8M8

  20. #160
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    187

    Re: 2017 Pairwise thread

    Quote Originally Posted by UML Puck Hawk View Post
    Except in consolation games...

    Can you link to any actual statement which backs this up, because I can't find one anywhere.
    Honestly I think your side of the argument is the one that needs positive proof. I don't know how logic suggests that there be a tie for ranking purposes when there is no possibility a given game ends in a tie.

    I think the reason you haven't seen it discussed anywhere is because that's not how it works.
    Last edited by tape; 03-13-2017 at 03:48 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •