Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

[Umileated]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

This thread has gotten harder to find since it got "sticky". I am used to seeing "sticky" threads that I ignore, about USCHO hiring and HOF nominations.

I always use the "thread tools" on the right above the top post to add and manage subscribed threads. The list of subscribed can be accessed by the "quick links" just above that and center-left

[kingdobbs]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

Also remember, though, that the basketball selection is still subjective. They could very well say SEC winner and SEC loser for two of the spots. Because hockey is entirely mathematical, you can't exactly do that.

My recollection being potentially faulty is a possibility, but I also recall neither team would have failed to make it as an at-large, so the only thing it *might* have changed was seeding. Other leagues at the low-end of things were simply slotted in such that the only thing that mattered in the long run was the identity of the team filling that #16 slot.

The broader point being, the NCAA will likely know going into Sunday almost everything they need to know to seed and bracket the tournament, to the point that it barely matters what the CCHA final result is. For example, if it's a Miami/WMU final, there may not be much difference in where people go. Slot in a Miami-Bowling Green final, and all you have to do is an if/then with whoever ends up being "last in"; Bowling Green-Michigan State? Then it literally doesn't matter.

[brassbonanza]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

Also remember, though, that the basketball selection is still subjective. They could very well say SEC winner and SEC loser for two of the spots. Because hockey is entirely mathematical, you can't exactly do that.

But at the same time, because the PWR is completely mathematical, if the theoretical CCHA championship game went to 10 OT's, and into the selection show, they could create two brackets and say, if the result is this, here's the bracket, if the result is this, here's the bracket. ESPN sure as hell isn't going to wait for the CCHA game to finish, and I can't imagine the NCAA is terribly thrilled that the CCHA moved their game to Sunday, either so I can't imagine them saying sure, we'll push back our selection show to midnight!

[Patman]

If one could find a composite result data file, it could be massaged into the same form as the hockey one is.

The guy that does the DOS based sim games usually computes a pair wise for other sports... IIRC, it ain't pretty

[Patman]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

Here we go...

http://www.dolphinsim.com/ratings/ncaa_mbb/

[Ralph Baer]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

The guy that does the DOS based sim games usually computes a pair wise for other sports... IIRC, it ain't pretty

In what sense isn't it pretty? I would think that in many cases the common opponent criteria would rely on just one or two games which wouldn't be good, but RPI and TUC should be similar to hockey. Am I wrong?.

[Ralph Baer]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

Here we go...

http://www.dolphinsim.com/ratings/ncaa_mbb/

I wonder what he is doing to get his Pairwise. It can't be the same as what we call PWR since he gets values for teams with RPI<.5.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

I wonder what he is doing to get his Pairwise. It can't be the same as what we call PWR since he gets values for teams with RPI<.5.

He probably does a Top ###.

[Patman]

I wonder what he is doing to get his Pairwise. It can't be the same as what we call PWR since he gets values for teams with RPI<.5.

And I'm not saying somebody else couldn't do it... If you have PWR coded up then its just a matter of processing a different set of team names.

--

As to the other comment, I've seen it in the past and I think when I did look at it, it was a bit messed up, IIRC.

[Ralph Baer]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

And I'm not saying somebody else couldn't do it... If you have PWR coded up then its just a matter of processing a different set of team names.

Agreed.

[UnionHockeyManiac]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

Which teams are 100% in right now? For the teams that are not 100%, can someone put approximate percentages on all other teams who have a chance?

[LTsatch]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

Which teams are 100% in right now? For the teams that are not 100%, can someone put approximate percentages on all other teams who have a chance?

From reading what the experts have to say on here, you will most likely have to wait until after this weekend to get those percentages, too many variables at this point.

[Numbers]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

From reading what the experts have to say on here, you will most likely have to wait until after this weekend to get those percentages, too many variables at this point.

LT is correct. And, this is why:
Remember the 4 pieces of each comparison. RPI, TUC, ComOpp, H2H. At this point, there is likely to be only slight movement in the CommOpp and H2H part of any particular comparison.

However, a team's RPI can move perhaps +/- .100 this weekend, and, in the case of ECAC teams, the same next weekend if they get that far. That has 2 effects: It affects how their RPI stacks up against other teams, and it affects which teams are TUCs.

There are a few schools whose TUC status apparently makes a big difference in the at-large field. Among these are
Michigan (because of Notre Dame)
Merrimack (because of BU)
Colorado College (because of Wisconsin)

That being said, Priceless has remarked that it seems that
Quinnipiac and Minnesota are at this point locks for the field.

I assume the poster from 2 posts up is a Union backer. Without doing a full up recreation of this weekend, I would say that Union has to win this weekend, or it's hard for them, because Dartmouth would likely pass them in the PWR. And, it could be that they also will have to not lose 2 games next weekend. But, that's sort of a "Having looked at this many times before, this is my guess" calculation.

[Patman]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

The reality is from Lowell on down it is bunched up in that a couple of losses can lead to a significant fall. Some teams are more proofed than others but it may depend on the minutiae of other results.

[kingdobbs]

Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition

LT is correct. And, this is why:
Remember the 4 pieces of each comparison. RPI, TUC, ComOpp, H2H. At this point, there is likely to be only slight movement in the CommOpp and H2H part of any particular comparison.

However, a team's RPI can move perhaps +/- .100 this weekend, and, in the case of ECAC teams, the same next weekend if they get that far. That has 2 effects: It affects how their RPI stacks up against other teams, and it affects which teams are TUCs.

There are a few schools whose TUC status apparently makes a big difference in the at-large field. Among these are
Michigan (because of Notre Dame)
Merrimack (because of BU)
Colorado College (because of Wisconsin)

UConn as well. UConn becoming a TUC gives Niagara *just enough* games vs. TUCs to turn some comparisons from null, and a 60% win percentage is enough to win a sufficient number to insulate the Purps against losing the league tourney.