[pipsqueak]

OK, here we go again. I think this is about the 6th or 7th year I've done this. For those of you who are just tuning in, the basic idea is that I take the Albyn Jones ratings at face value - the ratings differetial of two teams can be converted by a fairly simple formula into the odds on a potential match between them (a 100 point rating differential gives 2:1 odds to the higher rated team, etc.). These odds can be translated into a winning probability for each team (2:1 odds => 67% winning probability, etc.) Once the brackets are set, the survival probability by round can be tabulated for each team in the field by compounding (multiplying) the conditional probabilities the ratings generate.

In previous years the actual outcomes have been remarkably close to the "predictions" in the sense that if you look at all the teams in a given round that are in a certain survival probability window (say 70%-80%) then the percentage of teams that actually survive is usually very close (7 out of 9 for instance).

If you look at the fine print you find that the published ratings actually come with a "standard error" (SE) which is a point range from the nomimal value in which the actual value (whatever that is) is expected to lie. Not surprisingly, the higher rated teams have ratings that are less certain because they have fewer losses that tie them into the web of actual game outcomes on which the ratings are computed. This year undefeated Stanford is almost 200 points clear of the field which translates into 4:1 odds of winning a potential matchup with UNC or UCLA. If you want to take Stanford at those odds, I'm willing to stand up right now and take your bets! (On the other hand, the last time a team was in the clear by 200 points going in was UNC in 2003, and I seem to recall that they went on to run the table without being scored on.)


team......................seed..rating...survival probability by round


Stanford....................1....2272.....0.969...0.907...0.707...0.618
North.Carolina..............1....2036.....0.875...0.727...0.476...0.114
Florida.State...............1....1934.....0.748...0.362...0.158...0.022
Portland....................2....2105.....0.898...0.516...0.151...0.105
UCLA........................1....2082.....0.908...0.457...0.121...0.080
Notre.Dame..................2....1975.....0.862...0.541...0.270...0.047
Wake.Forest.................3....1823.....0.571...0.137...0.043...0.003
Boston.College..............2....1906.....0.837...0.078...0.018...0.007
Wisconsin...................*....1670.....0.163...0.004...0.000...0.000
South.Carolina..............2....1782.....0.429...0.084...0.022...0.001
Oregon.State................*....1711.....0.138...0.032...0.005...0.000
Virginia....................*....1752.....0.092...0.011...0.001...0.000
Virginia.Tech...............3....1791.....0.102...0.016...0.001...0.000
Texas.A&M...................*....1777.....0.252...0.065...0.015...0.001
Maryland....................4....1755.....0.125...0.052...0.012...0.001
Santa.Clara.................*....1774.....0.031...0.011...0.001...0.000


In past years, the ratings have usually lumped teams into three groups which I call the "contenders", the "pretenders", and the "outsiders". The contenders form a handful of the heavyweights that are usually the top regional seeds and are not likely to be beaten by any team outside the group. The pretenders have a legitimate shot at beating a contender, but they usually have to it twice to be champs and are not likely to make it without benefit of some braket busting upsets (see Southern Cal/FSU a couple of years ago). The outsiders are good teams which deserve to be there, but which need major miracles (that have never happened so far) to survive four rounds with the top dogs. The elite programs all rotate through these groups through the years from contender to pretender (and even occasionally outsider) and back with the notable exception of UNC - which is always a contender. This year seems to be a little different with Stanford the clear favorite and Portland, UCLA, and UNC as "underdog" contenders. ND, BC, and FSU are basically only relevant for their upset potential.

My own estimates are probably no better than anyone elses, but I would knock Stanford down about 70 points just because I don't see them as that much above the other contenders. When I saw UNC early this year in their beat-downs of UCLA and ND, I thought they were ready to take on the USWNT. They showed their mortality in later games, but have rounded into form lately, and the AJ ratings I'm using came out before the ACC tournament so I'll knock them up about 75 points. (Heck, if trends continue this could still become the ACC tournament )

team......................seed..rating...survival probability by round

Stanford....................1....2200.....0.950...0.855...0.584...0.425
North.Carolina..............1....2110.....0.921...0.821...0.622...0.269
Florida.State...............1....1934.....0.748...0.362...0.114...0.022
Portland....................2....2105.....0.898...0.516...0.212...0.126
UCLA........................1....2082.....0.908...0.457...0.172...0.096
Notre.Dame..................2....1975.....0.862...0.541...0.200...0.048
Wake.Forest.................3....1823.....0.571...0.091...0.029...0.003
Boston.College..............2....1906.....0.837...0.121...0.028...0.008
Wisconsin...................*....1670.....0.163...0.006...0.000...0.000
South.Carolina..............2....1782.....0.429...0.055...0.014...0.001
Oregon.State................*....1711.....0.138...0.032...0.004...0.000
Virginia....................*....1752.....0.092...0.011...0.001...0.000
Virginia.Tech...............3....1791.....0.102...0.016...0.002...0.000
Texas.A&M...................*....1777.....0.252...0.065...0.010...0.001
Maryland....................4....1755.....0.079...0.033...0.007...0.001
Santa.Clara.................*....1774.....0.050...0.017...0.002...0.000

My adjustments still put Stanford as the heavy favorite, but at .425 you wouldn't take them against the field. UNC now shows at about 3:1 which feels right (and don't you know Anson just loves being the "underdog" for a change.) Portland is now 8:1 and UCLA 10:1. Again, these feel right when you consider the "death march" they both confront - the most likely path for the survivor of their pending match takes them through both Stanford and UNC.

[kolabear]

With or without your rating "adjustments" for Stanford & North Carolina, those two teams are the only overwhelming favorites to make it to the College Cup.

North Carolina's odds are even improved a little by the seeding of South Carolina as the #2 seed, meaning they will be at home against Wake Forest. It makes it a little more likely that the lower-rated team, South Carolina, instead of Wake will wind up facing North Carolina in the quarter-finals.

If all the #1 and #2 seeds advance to the quarterfinals, North Carolina will not only play the only team rated less than 1900, they will play a team rated more than 100 points below the next-lowest team. And not as the top seed either. (I didn't bring this up to make a big deal out of it but how DID that happen? RPI strikes again!?)

(I should probably add that there's a good chance South Carolina would be in the 1800s if the ratings were up to date. They won the SEC championship after the last Albyn Jones update - pretty much reversing their losses to the other SEC top teams, getting wins over Florida and Georgia and tying LSU & winning the championship on PKs. So now they have an even record against teams over 1700 - Florida, Georgia, LSU and UCF. They just had to play them twice to get there - whatever that means...)

[SCUFANTASTIC]

This sort of analysis will only make Santa Clara's ultimate victory all the sweeter.

[cpthomas]

Your handicapping is way beyond me, but here are RPI data (my numbers) and the probabilities, using the RPI's correlation with regular season game results during the 2008 season, for this weekend's games. This assumes, of course, that the RPI can be used to predict future outcome probabilities, which is not what the RPI is intended to do, whereas Jones is. (As a matter of interest, the RPI ratings correlate slightly better with prior game results than Jones.) Also, when I look at games, at this point in the season I look more at how teams have performed recently, which the RPI intentionally does not do (see Virginia, Oregon State, and Texas A&M).

Stanford v Santa Clara
0.7588 - 0.6386 = 0.1202 difference
93.1% Stanford win - 4.6% tie - 2.3% Santa Clara win

Boston College v Wisconsin
0.6535 - 0.6019 = 0.0516
67.9% - 14.3% - 17.9%

Portland v Virginia Tech
0.6856 - 0.6388 = 0.0468
67.5% - 14.8% - 17.7%

UCLA v Virginia
0.6947 - 0.6039 = 0.0908
77.6% - 9.0% - 13.5%

North Carolina v Maryland
0.7453 - 0.6207 = 0.1246
93.1% - 4.6% - 2.3%

South Carolina v Wake Forest
0.6526 - 0.6401 = 0.0125
58.6% - 16.1% - 25.4%

Notre Dame v Oregon State
0.6757 - 0.6150 = 0.0607
74.4% - 13.1% - 12.6%

Florida State v Texas A&M
0.6843 - 0.6134 = 0.0706
74.1% - 11.9% - 14.1%

[pipsqueak]

Originally Posted by cpthomas

Your handicapping is way beyond me, but here are RPI data (my numbers) and the probabilities, using the RPI's correlation with regular season game results during the 2008 season, for this weekend's games. This assumes, of course, that the RPI can be used to predict future outcome probabilities, which is not what the RPI is intended to do, whereas Jones is. (As a matter of interest, the RPI ratings correlate slightly better with prior game results than Jones.) Also, when I look at games, at this point in the season I look more at how teams have performed recently, which the RPI intentionally does not do (see Virginia, Oregon State, and Texas A&M).

Stanford v Santa Clara
0.7588 - 0.6386 = 0.1202 difference
93.1% Stanford win - 4.6% tie - 2.3% Santa Clara win

Boston College v Wisconsin
0.6535 - 0.6019 = 0.0516
67.9% - 14.3% - 17.9%

Portland v Virginia Tech
0.6856 - 0.6388 = 0.0468
67.5% - 14.8% - 17.7%

UCLA v Virginia
0.6947 - 0.6039 = 0.0908
77.6% - 9.0% - 13.5%

North Carolina v Maryland
0.7453 - 0.6207 = 0.1246
93.1% - 4.6% - 2.3%

South Carolina v Wake Forest
0.6526 - 0.6401 = 0.0125
58.6% - 16.1% - 25.4%

Notre Dame v Oregon State
0.6757 - 0.6150 = 0.0607
74.4% - 13.1% - 12.6%

Florida State v Texas A&M
0.6843 - 0.6134 = 0.0706
74.1% - 11.9% - 14.1%

Interesting. Your numbers are generally more pessimistic with respect to the higher seeded teams than AJ. They say, for instance, that the probability that ALL of the higher seeds advance to the quarter-finals is only 4% (25:1) whereas the AJ derived numbers have is at about 20% (4:1). To put it another way, my numbers say that an upset is likely; yours say that it is almost inevitable.

[gogogo]

Originally Posted by SCUFANTASTIC

This sort of analysis will only make Santa Clara's ultimate victory all the sweeter.

Nahhh - it's now clear to me that Notre Dame will beat Santa Clara in the Final 5-4 because Weissenhofer will make one more flip throw than Bosio.

[UPinSLC]

i still think its LAUGHABLE that portland managed to get a 2 seed despite being the number 1 scoring offense and number 2 defense (in all categories). its beyond me how they are considered the fourth most likely team to win the championship this year. based on statistics alone they should be either the favorite or close to the favorite to win the whole enchilada. thats not taking into account the sheer domination they displayed this year.

year after year portland is disrespected by being given a number 2 seed despite clear dominance. on top of that they have the best fanbase in the country and hold all attendance records. just another area that the ncaa is a complete joke at.

[UNC4EVER]

Originally Posted by UPinSLC

i still think its LAUGHABLE that portland managed to get a 2 seed despite being the number 1 scoring offense and number 2 defense (in all categories). its beyond me how they are considered the fourth most likely team to win the championship this year. based on statistics alone they should be either the favorite or close to the favorite to win the whole enchilada. thats not taking into account the sheer domination they displayed this year.

year after year portland is disrespected by being given a number 2 seed despite clear dominance. on top of that they have the best fanbase in the country and hold all attendance records. just another area that the ncaa is a complete joke at.

I'm not sure I understand your sense of outrage? It seems like Portland's seeding is not out of line with how it has done in the NCAA over the last decade? Even after the loss of Enyeart, I'm picking Portland for the final four, but there is (IMO) a fair amount of parity among the elite 8. Do you think it really matters much whether they have to get through UCLA or perhaps FSU on their road to TX?

Hate me for this(If you must): Portland almost always has a good team, but on the National scale, rarely a great one. I think they are fairly seeded. If they are the real deal this year, UCLA, Stanford is not a significantly worse draw than FSU, UNC. Game on.

[UPinSLC]

Originally Posted by UNC4EVER

I'm not sure I understand your sense of outrage? It seems like Portland's seeding is not out of line with how it has done in the NCAA over the last decade? Even after the loss of Enyeart, I'm picking Portland for the final four, but there is (IMO) a fair amount of parity among the elite 8. Do you think it really matters much whether they have to get through UCLA or perhaps FSU on their road to TX?

Hate me for this(If you must): Portland almost always has a good team, but on the National scale, rarely a great one. I think they are fairly seeded. If they are the real deal this year, UCLA, Stanford is not a significantly worse draw than FSU, UNC. Game on.

portland has been put at a real disadvantage having to travel around through the first two rounds (this year and every other year). its not fair to the team that they are consistently one of the top 4 teams in the country, but they have to travel half way across the country in the first few rounds. on top of that the school misses out on ticket sales they could get by hosting the first two rounds. thats thousands of the dollars that could go to the school guaranteed. on top of having to be a 2 seed they have a consistently more difficult route to the college cup every year, having to face a number 1 seed on their home turf (ie UCLA, USC the last few years).

oh and portland has been one of the best schools in the last 5-6 years easy, winning two college cups.

[Moist Pits]

Trust me. Everyone up here doesn’t whine, although it must seem to those on this forum that Portland is The Cry-Baby Capital of the World. Sorry, everyone!