Pairwise Comparisons and PWR for D1 College Hockey (2011-2012)

© 1999-2011, Joe Schlobotnik (archives)

URL for this frameset: http://elynah.com/tbrw/tbrw.cgi?2012/pwr.shtml

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

Today's Pairwise Comparisons (including games of 2012 April 7)

Pairwise Comparisons
Rk Team PWR RPI Comparisons Won
1 Boston Coll  (he) 30 .5846 Un Mi ND FS Mn MD Mm BU Me ML DU WM Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
2 Union  (ec) 29 .5566 Mi ND FS Mn MD Mm BU Me ML DU WM Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
3 Michigan  (cc) 28 .5548   ND FS Mn MD Mm BU Me ML DU WM Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
4 North Dakota  (wc) 27 .5538     FS Mn MD Mm BU Me ML DU WM Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
5 Ferris State  (cc) 26 .5529       Mn MD Mm BU Me ML DU WM Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
6 Minnesota  (wc) 25 .5518         MD Mm BU Me ML DU WM Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
7 Minn-Duluth  (wc) 24 .5474           Mm BU Me ML DU WM Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
8 Miami  (cc) 22 .5428             BU Me ML DU WM   Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
9 Boston Univ  (he) 21 .5433               Me ML DU   Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
10 Maine  (he) 21 .5424                 ML DU WM Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
11 Mass-Lowell  (he) 20 .5423                   DU WM Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
12 Denver U  (wc) 19 .5412                     WM Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
13 Western Mich  (cc) 19 .5378               BU       Cr Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
14 Cornell  (ec) 18 .5376             Mm           Mr MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
15 Merrimack  (he) 16 .5301                           MS NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
16 Mich State  (cc) 15 .5311                             NM Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
17 Northern Mich (cc) 14 .5285                               Nt OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
18 Notre Dame  (cc) 13 .5232                                 OS CC Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
19 Ohio State  (cc) 11 .5152                                   CC   LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
20 CO College  (wc) 11 .5142                                     Ha LS SC Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
21 Harvard  (ec) 10 .5161                                   OS   LS SC   AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
22 Lake Superior (cc) 8 .5128                                         SC   AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
23 St Cloud  (wc) 8 .5123                                           Wi AF Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
24 Wisconsin  (wc) 8 .5101                                       Ha LS     Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
25 Air Force  (ah) 7 .5103                                             Wi Cg Qn NE BS Ni RT
26 Colgate  (ec) 5 .5052                                                 Qn NE BS Ni RT
27 Quinnipiac  (ec) 3 .5071                                                   NE   Ni RT
28 NorthEastern  (he) 3 .5070                                                     BS Ni RT
29 Bemidji State (wc) 2 .5023                                                   Qn   Ni  
30 Niagara  (ah) 1 .5019                                                         RT
31 RIT  (ah) 1 .5009                                                       BS  

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. As of the 2011-2012 season, this is now resolved using "averaged winning percentage", i.e., take the winning percentage against each opponent and average those numbers.
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
Boston Coll 1 30 1 .5846 1 18-8-1 .6852
Union 2 29 2 .5566 2 11-4-6 .6667
Michigan 3 28 3 .5548 4T 18-11-4 .6061
North Dakota 4 27 4 .5538 4T 19-12-2 .6061
Ferris State 5 26 5 .5529 3 15-8-4 .6296
Minnesota 6 25 6 .5518 8 16-12-1 .5690
Minn-Duluth 7 24 7 .5474 6 11-7-3 .5952
Miami 8 22 9 .5428 13 17-15-1 .5303
Boston Univ 9 21 8 .5433 14 12-11 .5217
Maine 10 21 10 .5424 16 10-11-2 .4783
Mass-Lowell 11 20 11 .5423 9 9-7-1 .5588
Denver U 12 19 12 .5412 10 15-12-2 .5517
Western Mich 13 19 13 .5378 11 15-12-4 .5484
Cornell 14 18 14 .5376 7 8-5-3 .5938
Merrimack 15 16 16 .5301 17 7-8-5 .4750
Mich State 16 15 15 .5311 21 12-16-4 .4375
Northern Mich 17 14 17 .5285 15 11-12-5 .4821
Notre Dame 18 13 18 .5232 22 12-16-3 .4355
Ohio State 19 11 20 .5152 24 11-15-2 .4286
CO College 20 11 21 .5142 19 9-11-2 .4545
Harvard 21 10 19 .5161 23 4-6-5 .4333
Lake Superior 22 8 22 .5128 25 10-15-4 .4138
St Cloud 23 8 23 .5123 18 10-12-3 .4600
Wisconsin 24 8 25 .5101 20 11-14-2 .4444
Air Force 25 7 24 .5103 12 6-5-1 .5417
Colgate 26 5 28 .5052 26 7-11-2 .4000
Quinnipiac 27 3 26 .5071 30T 3-8-2 .3077
Northeastern 28 3 27 .5070 28 7-13-1 .3571
Bemidji State 29 2 29 .5023 29 7-16-1 .3125
Niagara 30 1 30 .5019 30T 2-7-4 .3077
RIT 31 1 31 .5009 27 4-7-2 .3846

See also

Last Modified: 2020 February 1

Joe Schlobotnik / joe@amurgsval.org

HTML 4.0 compliant CSS2 compliant