Pairwise Comparisons and PWR for D1 College Hockey (2010-2011)

© 1999-2011, Joe Schlobotnik (archives)

URL for this frameset: http://www.elynah.com/tbrw/tbrw.cgi?2011/pwr.shtml

Game results taken from College Hockey News's Division I composite schedule

Pairwise Comparisons (including games of 2011 March 19)

Pairwise Comparisons
Rk Team PWR RPI Comparisons Won
1 Yale  (ec) 29 .5790 ND BC Mm Mr Mi DU Un MD WM Nt NO NH CC RP Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
2 North Dakota  (wc) 28 .5873 BC Mm Mr Mi DU Un MD WM Nt NO NH CC RP Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
3 Boston Coll  (he) 27 .5821   Mm Mr Mi DU Un MD WM Nt NO NH CC RP Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
4 Miami  (cc) 26 .5620     Mr Mi DU Un MD WM Nt NO NH CC RP Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
5 Merrimack  (he) 24 .5520       Mi DU   MD WM Nt NO NH CC RP Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
6 Michigan  (cc) 24 .5565         DU Un MD WM Nt NO NH CC RP Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
7 Denver U  (wc) 23 .5562           Un MD WM Nt NO NH CC RP Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
8 Union  (ec) 22 .5526       Mr     MD   Nt NO NH CC RP Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
9 Minn-Duluth  (wc) 21 .5481               WM Nt NO NH CC RP Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
10 Western Mich  (cc) 19 .5302             Un       NH CC RP Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
11 Notre Dame  (cc) 18 .5429                 WM   NH CC   Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
12 NE-Omaha  (wc) 17 .5330                 WM Nt   CC   Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS   Cr Pn RT Qn
13 New Hampshire (he) 16 .5433                     NO CC   Da BU Me   AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
14 CO College  (wc) 16 .5264                         RP Da BU Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
15 RPI  (ec) 16 .5237                   Nt NO NH     BU   Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
16 Dartmouth  (ec) 14 .5285                           RP BU Me Mn AA   Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
17 Boston Univ  (he) 13 .5276                               Me Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
18 Maine  (he) 12 .5247                           RP     Mn AA SC Ak AF Wi   BS Cr Pn RT Qn
19 Minnesota  (wc) 12 .5178                       NH           AA SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
20 AK-Anchorage  (wc) 10 .5138                                     SC Ak AF Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
21 St Cloud  (wc) 9 .5113                             Da         Ak   Wi FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
22 AK-Fairbanks  (cc) 7 .5089                                         AF Wi FS   Cr Pn RT Qn
23 Air Force  (ah) 7 .5120                                       SC     FS BS Cr Pn RT Qn
24 Wisconsin  (wc) 6 .5205                                           AF FS BS Cr Pn RT  
25 Ferris State  (cc) 6 .5080                                 Me             BS Cr Pn RT Qn
26 Bemidji State (wc) 5 .5060                     NO                   Ak         Pn RT Qn
27 Cornell  (ec) 4 .5078                                                 BS Pn RT Qn
28 Princeton  (ec) 2 .5106                                                     RT Qn
29 RIT  (ah) 1 .5061                                                       Qn
30 Quinnipiac  (ec) 1 .5032                                             Wi          

Explanation of the Table

The table above lists all of the Teams Under Consideration (TUCs) for the NCAA tournament. This includes all tournament-eligible Division 1 teams with a Ratings Percentage Index (RPI) of .500 or above. Each team has been compared to each other team on the basis of the NCAA selection criteria. Those criteria are:

RPI
The Ratings Percentage Index, described in detail on our RPI page.
TUC
Record vs other Teams Under Consideration. Head-to-head games are explicitly excluded from this criterion, which is judged on straight Winning Percentage (with ties as always counting as half a win and half a loss) in the relevant games.
COp
Record vs Common Opponents. Again, this is resolved on the basis of Winning Percentage.
H2H
Head-to-head results. Each win in head-to-head competition carries the same weight as each of the other criteria.

A team gets one point towards the comparison for each of the first three criteria it wins, plus one point for each head-to-head victory. Whichever team has more points according to this method wins the criterion. In case of a tie, the team with the higher RPI wins the criterion.

In each team's row, in the "Comparisons Won" part of the grid, are listed the abbreviations of all the teams with which they win comparisons. Each of these cells is a link to a mini-table (which will appear in a pop-up window under most browser setups) detailing the results of the four criteria. The RPI row of the mini-table contains the overall record and RPI for each team, the TUC, and COp rows contain the record and winning percentage in the games relevant to each criterion, and the H2H row contains the head-to-head record of each team against the other.

The PWR column in the main table gives the total number of comparisons won by each team. The teams are ordered according the their PWR; if two or more teams are tied in the PWR, the tie is broken if possible according to the number of comparisons each wins against the other tied teams; if this fails to resolve the tie (which can be thought of a ro-sham-bo situation: Rock crushes Scissors, Scissors cut Paper, Paper covers Rock), the RPI is used to break the tie.

Breakdown of Criteria

The following table lists, for each Team Under Consideration, the two selection criteria which are more or less the same in each comparison: RPI and record vs TUCs. Each team's name in the table is a link to a rundown of the games contributing to these two criteria.

Note a team's record in the "vs TUCs" column is that against all TUCs; since head-to-head games are left out of this criterion, the record used in an actual comparison will be different if the two teams have played each other.

Team Comps Won RPI vs TUCs
Rk PWR Rk RPI Rk W-L-T Pct
Yale 1 29 3 .5790 1 13-3 .8125
North Dakota 2 28 1 .5873 2 22-8-3 .7121
Boston Coll 3 27 2 .5821 3 12-5 .7059
Miami 4 26 4 .5620 5 13-6-5 .6458
Merrimack 5 24 8 .5520 4 10-5-2 .6471
Michigan 6 24 5 .5565 6 12-7-3 .6136
Denver U 7 23 6 .5562 7 15-10-2 .5926
Union 8 22 7 .5526 8 10-7-3 .5750
Minn-Duluth 9 21 9 .5481 9 12-9-5 .5577
Western Mich 10 19 13 .5302 15 8-9-4 .4762
Notre Dame 11 18 11 .5429 12 8-8-5 .5000
NE-Omaha 12 17 12 .5330 11 15-14-2 .5161
New Hampshire 13 16 10 .5433 16 8-9-1 .4722
CO College 14 16 16 .5264 13 15-16-3 .4853
RPI 15 16 18 .5237 10 7-6-4 .5294
Dartmouth 16 14 14 .5285 20 6-8-2 .4375
Boston Univ 17 13 15 .5276 19 5-7-5 .4412
Maine 18 12 17 .5247 24T 6-10-2 .3889
Minnesota 19 12 20 .5178 14 10-11-6 .4815
AK-Anchorage 20 10 21 .5138 23 12-17-2 .4194
St Cloud 21 9 23 .5113 17 13-16-4 .4545
AK-Fairbanks 22 7 25 .5089 26 8-13-1 .3864
Air Force 23 7 22 .5120 24T 3-5-1 .3889
Wisconsin 24 6 19 .5205 28 7-16-4 .3333
Ferris State 25 6 26 .5080 22 6-9-4 .4211
Bemidji State 26 5 29 .5060 21 11-15-4 .4333
Cornell 27 4 27 .5078 18 9-11-1 .4524
Princeton 28 2 24 .5106 29 3-9-1 .2692
RIT 29 1 28 .5061 30 2-7-1 .2500
Quinnipiac 30 1 30 .5032 27 5-10-4 .3684

See also


Last Modified: 2020 February 1

Joe Schlobotnik / joe@amurgsval.org

HTML 4.0 compliant CSS2 compliant