FanLax Forum Poll

[DU-fan]

I think it is well known that RPI only makes when the number of games is much higher than we have in lacrosse and teams play similar tier competition. But, despite all the complaints no one has come up with a better objective calculation that has been adopted.

• 25 percent of the team's winning percentage

• 50 percent of its opponents' average winning percentage

• 25 percent of its opponents' opponents' average winning percentage

It is even more misleading when teams play lower tier competition that having great records records and compete in less competitive conferences.

Harvard is getting the benefit of playing teams with good records, with the exception of NJIT and Colgate, and winning.

[Wheels]

Lax Ref will say using strength of record is better than the RPI: https://lacrossereference.com/stats/str ... rd-d1-men/. But he can probably come on here to say that!! And probably will!

[rolldodge]

Where are you getting your laxpower rankings?
I am using: http://college.laxpower2.com/menx/rating01.php

Thanks for the link. I think I was using Fanlax rankings and got them mixed up. Will use these next week. And also take a look at Lax Ref SOR as well!

[drunkmonkey30]

It is interesting that our poll is almost the same as the media poll, with the exception that the media has more love for Notre Dame (15 vs. 20).

I am a bit surprised with the high ranking of Harvard in both polls.

I believe the Ivy league is the top league in front of the ACC an B1G this year. Penn, Princeton, Cornell, and Yale have significant wins and clearly deserve to be in the top 10 in my opinion.

But, Harvard's biggest win is Boston U. They lost to OSU. I don't get why people are ranking them in the top 10. I don't care if a team is 6-1 and they beat NJIT, Fairfield, Michigan, Brown, and Dartmouth. I feel they are a top 15 team, but I think they are floating to the top because people are punishing teams for losing. It will sort itself out when they play Cornell, Penn, Princeton, and Yale to close out the season.

Don't want to pick a fight, and we're all entitled to our own opinion, but.....following that logic, how do you rank ND (2-4 with wins over Michigan and Detroit Mercy; loss to the same Ohio State team+ losses to top 5 teams) above Harvard? or rank them at all for that matter? 6 games left (5 of which are ACC). If they go 4-2, they'd still need to make the ACC tourney final game to be NCAA eligible.

there is no acc tourney this year.

Ouch.. didn't realize there is no ACC tourney this year. Guess that's why they have 2 games against both Duke and Syracuse remaining on the schedule. Duke 2x, Syracuse 2x, UNC and Marquette. Going 4-2 is going to be tough. They'd need 2 additional games on the schedule if they manage 3-3 in that stretch.....seem to recall an ACC team adding a late game a few years ago to be NCAA eligible, but 2 would be a stretch (if even allowed to play that many). Would love to see them do it, ND is the only ACC team I don't actively root against.

[wgdsr]

It is interesting that our poll is almost the same as the media poll, with the exception that the media has more love for Notre Dame (15 vs. 20).

I am a bit surprised with the high ranking of Harvard in both polls.

I believe the Ivy league is the top league in front of the ACC an B1G this year. Penn, Princeton, Cornell, and Yale have significant wins and clearly deserve to be in the top 10 in my opinion.

But, Harvard's biggest win is Boston U. They lost to OSU. I don't get why people are ranking them in the top 10. I don't care if a team is 6-1 and they beat NJIT, Fairfield, Michigan, Brown, and Dartmouth. I feel they are a top 15 team, but I think they are floating to the top because people are punishing teams for losing. It will sort itself out when they play Cornell, Penn, Princeton, and Yale to close out the season.

Don't want to pick a fight, and we're all entitled to our own opinion, but.....following that logic, how do you rank ND (2-4 with wins over Michigan and Detroit Mercy; loss to the same Ohio State team+ losses to top 5 teams) above Harvard? or rank them at all for that matter? 6 games left (5 of which are ACC). If they go 4-2, they'd still need to make the ACC tourney final game to be NCAA eligible.

there is no acc tourney this year.

Ouch.. didn't realize there is no ACC tourney this year. Guess that's why they have 2 games against both Duke and Syracuse remaining on the schedule. Duke 2x, Syracuse 2x, UNC and Marquette. Going 4-2 is going to be tough. They'd need 2 additional games on the schedule if they manage 3-3 in that stretch.....seem to recall an ACC team adding a late game a few years ago to be NCAA eligible, but 2 would be a stretch (if even allowed to play that many). Would love to see them do it, ND is the only ACC team I don't actively root against.

i can't help you with your rooting preferences, but i can say with relative confidence no one is giving nd a late game out of any charity to allow them to be eligible. also that happened during covid 2021 as a way to replace cancelled games, but i don't recall that happening pre-2020. the acc conference had a handshake agreement with the ivy or maybe just penn to play the odd man out team from acc conference tourney, and the details got worked late once, i believe.

anyway, they gots to go 4 and 2 and even then that may not be nearly enough. ivy is stacking top 8 teams and now playing each other.

[HillsLax]

I am baffled by the way Notre Dame is selected for any ranking, and yet Massey (#7) and Lax Reference/RPI (#16). Based on these ratings, ND would make the playoffs today--with just one "signature" win, against Michigan. The team has not accomplished much, so why such high placements?

[10stone5]

laf / Laxpower has already started up his
Tournament Odds rankings,

ND is way down on that list,

http://college.laxpower2.com/menx/odds01.php

[HGK]

Notre Dame has lost to the 1, 2 and 3 team in the polls in fairly good games. Also, their Maryland game was closer than any team has played the Terps this year. I am not an ND fan by any means but this “you are what your record is”, IMO is a joke. If they played Michigan’s schedule and then lost to UVA i bet they’d be ranked top 7 or so because they’d be 7-1. I agree their tournament chances are slipping quickly and they have one semi quality win, but to question them being a good team is beyond ridiculous IMO. The polls are to rank the best teams. Not to play selection committee for May. Very different agendas.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Notre Dame has lost to the 1, 2 and 3 team in the polls in fairly good games. Also, their Maryland game was closer than any team has played the Terps this year. I am not an ND fan by any means but this “you are what your record is”, IMO is a joke. If they played Michigan’s schedule and then lost to UVA i bet they’d be ranked top 7 or so because they’d be 7-1. I agree their tournament chances are slipping quickly and they have one semi quality win, but to question them being a good team is beyond ridiculous IMO. The polls are to rank the best teams. Not to play selection committee for May. Very different agendas.

ND can earn their way back into my top 20 with a win. Can climb if they continue to win.

[Wheels]

laf / Laxpower has already started up his
Tournament Odds rankings,

ND is way down on that list,

http://college.laxpower2.com/menx/odds01.php

So right now, if I'm reading this correctly and taking the highest ranked team in each conference as the AQ:

AQs: 1) America East - Vermont, 2) ASUN - Utah, 3) Big East - Georgetown, 4) Big Ten - Maryland, 5) CAA - UMAss, 6) Ivy - Princeton, 7) MAAC - St. Bonaventures, 8) NEC - St. Joseph's, 9) Patriot - Boston U, 10) SoCon - Jacksonville

At-Large: 1) UVA, 2) Harvard, 3) Rutgers, 4) Penn, 5) Cornell, 6) UNC, 7) OSU, 8) Yale

Conference breakdown is Ivy (5), Big Ten (3), ACC (2), and everye other conference with 1 bid.

[HillsLax]

I am not sure anyone can say ND is a good team without any quality wins. Playing close might get a participation ribbon, but that does not count for much, except, it seems, in certain polls. They play Syracuse at home this week, so that should/will tell us something about both teams. For what it's worth, Draft Kings has ND at -235 and Cuse at +180.

[xxxxxxx]

BU at 15 in the polls is questionable to me. Wins over UMass and Bucknell, a loss to Harvard, I feel like they are pretty hyped, however, with Navy, Yale and Princeton coming up we will soon find out how real they are.

[HGK]

I am not sure anyone can say ND is a good team without any quality wins. Playing close might get a participation ribbon, but that does not count for much, except, it seems, in certain polls. They play Syracuse at home this week, so that should/will tell us something about both teams. For what it's worth, Draft Kings has ND at -235 and Cuse at +180.

Maybe they are favored because they are a good team that has simply lost to very very good teams.

[wgdsr]

BU at 15 in the polls is questionable to me. Wins over UMass and Bucknell, a loss to Harvard, I feel like they are pretty hyped, however, with Navy, Yale and Princeton coming up we will soon find out how real they are.

boston's at large case is getting interesting. they're going to pack a lot of teams with for now good records on the back half of the schedule and get a boost by having 3 top ivies for the year. looks like a loyola schedule for strength.

if they can finish with just 4 (or even 5) losses they may be right there with the bubble teams.

[xxxxxxx]

Does a "good" loss help a team's RPI/Ranking/At Large Chances? By good I mean a close loss to a highly ranked team, obviously it is helping ND in the rankings right now but does it matter at the end? I've always believed a loss is a loss.

[wgdsr]

Does a "good" loss help a team's RPI/Ranking/At Large Chances? By good I mean a close loss to a highly ranked team, obviously it is helping ND in the rankings right now but does it matter at the end? I've always believed a loss is a loss.

different answers to all 3, depending on what you believe.

as far as rpi? at an extreme it could, but that would more likely be a team who has a poor opponents' record that would be significantly boosted. possible it could help very slightly a team who's got an otherwise .550 - .600 opp record if the team they lost to also carried a significantly higher opp' opp' record than those already on losing team's rpi. but that's likely to be much more muted than, say, a team carrying an .850+ record.

then again, your definition of good loss = "close"? rpi doesn't care about game scores.

as far as at large selection, we'll find out in may whether the committee cares about anything other than rpi.

[CU77]

"Good" losses definitely help RPI, and especially help SOS (strength of schedule), which is an official NCAA selection criterion (while RPI is not): SOS doesn't take into account whether you won or lost those games at all.

Prior to 2009, SOS was officially the MOST IMPORTANT selection criterion (which is how in 2007 undefeated Cornell, with a win over Duke at Duke, wound up as the #4 seed while Duke was #1). Since 2009, the committee selections and seedings have been IMO defensible, if still arguable (because any outcome is arguable ...).

[wgdsr]

"Good" losses definitely help RPI, and especially help SOS (strength of schedule), which is an official NCAA selection criterion (while RPI is not): SOS doesn't take into account whether you won or lost those games at all.

Prior to 2009, SOS was officially the MOST IMPORTANT selection criterion (which is how in 2007 undefeated Cornell, with a win over Duke at Duke, wound up as the #4 seed while Duke was #1). Since 2009, the committee selections and seedings have been IMO defensible, if still arguable (because any outcome is arguable ...).

no, they don't. run a math problem on it and you'll see what i see.

2017, 2018, and 2019 were straight rpi. then the chairman came out and said they put the top 8 rpi's on the board as selections and they asked "does anything look out of whack". confirming. it was already done.
there are no official selection criteria, as they have abandoned it.

they'd already chosen it by doing nothing for 3 years. if it's anything other than straight rpi, i'll be shocked.

[CU77]

I have run a ton of math on RPI (and also a number of other ranking systems). Losing to a team with a very good record usually improves a team's RPI, and beating a team with a very poor recrod usually decreases a team's RPI.

Here is something I posted on laxpower in 2015:

As the season winds down, where teams will end up on the RPI list becomes important. A full calculation takes a computer, but there is a fairly simple formula for how much a team's RPI will change from its next game.

Suppose Team A is going to play Team B. Define some numbers:

AG = number of games played by A to date (not including the upcoming game with B)
ARPI = A's current RPI
BWPxA = B's current winning percentage, excluding any prior games against A
WAB = 1 if A beats B, 0 if A loses to B

Then the change in A's RPI after playing B is approximately

ΔARPI = [(1/4)WAB + (1/2)BWPxA + (1/8) - ARPI] / (AG+1)

This should be accurate to within +/- 0.002 in most cases.

An additional correction can reduce the error to +/- 0.001 in most cases:

ΔΔARPI = [(1/2)BRPI - (1/8)BWP - (3/16)] / (AG+1)

where

BRPI = B's current RPI
BWP = B's current winning percentage (including any prior games against A)

ΔΔARPI should be added to ΔARPI to get a more accurate estimate for the change in A's RPI.

The error estimates apply to late in the season, today they would be higher.

[joewillie78]

I have run a ton of math on RPI (and also a number of other ranking systems). Losing to a team with a very good record usually improves a team's RPI, and beating a team with a very poor recrod usually decreases a team's RPI.

Here is something I posted on laxpower in 2015:

As the season winds down, where teams will end up on the RPI list becomes important. A full calculation takes a computer, but there is a fairly simple formula for how much a team's RPI will change from its next game.

Suppose Team A is going to play Team B. Define some numbers:

AG = number of games played by A to date (not including the upcoming game with B)
ARPI = A's current RPI
BWPxA = B's current winning percentage, excluding any prior games against A
WAB = 1 if A beats B, 0 if A loses to B

Then the change in A's RPI after playing B is approximately

ΔARPI = [(1/4)WAB + (1/2)BWPxA + (1/8) - ARPI] / (AG+1)

This should be accurate to within +/- 0.002 in most cases.

An additional correction can reduce the error to +/- 0.001 in most cases:

ΔΔARPI = [(1/2)BRPI - (1/8)BWP - (3/16)] / (AG+1)

where

BRPI = B's current RPI
BWP = B's current winning percentage (including any prior games against A)

ΔΔARPI should be added to ΔARPI to get a more accurate estimate for the change in A's RPI.

The error estimates apply to late in the season, today they would be higher.

I have to admit 77 two things about what you posted back in 2015:
1. You are one very smart guy with obviously a very high IQ
2. I obviously must have slept through my statistics, calculus and any other math related courses as that stuff above makes little to no sense to me.

I hope Cornell doesn't contact me rescinding my degree after admitting my obvious lack of understanding your equations.
GOBIGRED
Joewillie78