Great Lakes Region

[sac]

OWP: .608, OOWP: .500, SOS: .572

I have .521 for OOWP

My sheet has this, the (HAM) weighted column averages to .500:

OOWP    wOOWP   Game
0.587   0.734   at UW-Whitewater •
0.614   0.768   at UW-Stevens Point •
0.625   0.625   at Wheaton (Ill.) •
0.605   0.605   at Carthage •
0.518   0.388   vs. Lake Forest •
0.541   0.406   vs. Illinois Wesleyan •
0.523   0.523   vs. Centre •
0.542   0.677   at Thomas More •
0.549   0.411   vs. Edgewood •
0.382   0.286   vs. Trine * •
0.444   0.555   at Calvin * •
0.423   0.529   at Albion * •
0.478   0.359   vs. Olivet * •
0.546   0.682   at Alma * •
0.436   0.327   vs. Adrian * •
0.382   0.477   at Trine * •
0.422   0.316   vs. Kalamazoo * •
0.444   0.333   vs. Calvin * •


What isn't clear to me is if the OOWP is calculated using each opponent's weighted OWP, or raw OWP.

Welp, we pretty much don't match on any.  I used the home away multipliers, and removed the result for that team.

For Whitewater, Carroll is 12-7 in-region, adjusted for result and used the away muliplier.
Carroll   W   12   6   0.667   1.25   0.833   


   final total.               12.619   0.601

[Flying Dutch Fan]

Now my head hurts....

[KnightSlappy]

I'm still can't get the exact numbers you have (do you have UW-Whitewater vs. Augsburg as an away game instead of neutral?), but it looks like you're using home/away weighted OWP as your components for OOWP. I'm not doing it that way, but it's not clear from the handbook which way it is to be done.

It appears as though the multiplier comes after the OWPs and OOWPs have been calculated, but I'm sure the manual isn't that detailed.

[sac]

Allegheny 69  DePauw 66

Tigers pick up loss number 6

[smedindy]

That's going to leave a mark...

[KnightSlappy]

Here's what I have through Saturday. Results versus regionally ranked are an estimate based on who's in ranked position by RPI.

RG   ##   WP      wSOS    wRPI    NAT   D3      RRO   CONFER   TEAM
GL   01   0.895   0.546   0.633   008   17-2    3-1   NCAC     Wooster
GL   02   0.810   0.550   0.615   020   17-4    2-1   NCAC     Ohio Wesleyan
GL   03   0.737   0.564   0.607   022   14-5    2-4   MIAA     Hope
GL   04   0.800   0.525   0.594   034   16-4    0-3   OAC      Marietta
GL   05   0.850   0.506   0.592   038   17-3    1-1   OAC      Mount Union
GL   06   0.810   0.500   0.578   052   17-4    1-1   PrAC     Bethany
GL   07   0.882   0.473   0.575   056   15-2    1-0   PrAC     St. Vincent
gl   08   0.810   0.497   0.575   058   17-4    2-2   NCAC     Wittenberg
gl   09   0.700   0.523   0.567   065   14-6    1-4   NCAC     DePauw
gl   10   0.632   0.531   0.556   084   12-7    0-4   OAC      Wilmington
gl   11   0.524   0.564   0.554   089   11-10   0-5   OAC      Baldwin Wallace
gl   12   0.810   0.465   0.551   094   17-4    1-0   AMCC     Penn State-Behrend
gl   13   0.571   0.542   0.550   100   12-9    1-3   OAC      Ohio Northern
gl   14   0.667   0.503   0.544   111   14-7    0-4   OAC      John Carroll
gl   15   0.765   0.463   0.538   119   13-4    1-4   MIAA     Calvin
gl   16   0.476   0.556   0.536   122   10-11   0-5   NCAC     Denison
gl   17   0.429   0.568   0.534   127   9-12    1-3   OAC      Capital
gl   18   0.632   0.496   0.530   135   12-7    3-2   UAA      Case Western Reserve
gl   19   0.500   0.534   0.525   144   9-9     1-4   UAA      Carnegie Mellon
gl   20   0.438   0.541   0.515   174   7-9     0-4   PrAC     Grove City


Calvin could be a wild card by the end of the month, there's a chance they could be the only team in the region who hasn't lost to a non-regionally ranked team. They'll need to get their WP up to have a shot at the rankings, however.

I think Wittenberg should be ranked, but it's hard to see exactly where they fit in. St. Vincent beat Bethany who beat Mount Union who beat Marietta.

[wooscotsfan]

KnightSlappy:  Excellent work as usual.   I find your rankings very informative and helpful!  Thanks and k+

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Maybe it is just me... but doesn't this pretty well describe the math (granted, we won't know until we see SOS numbers on Wednesday)?

Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP). Take each opponent's regular won-lost percentage a Division III teams (excluding the results against the team in question) and average the percentages.

To calculate: Team A Schedule is as follows:

opponent               Record            vs. team A            Revised Record               Revised w-l Percentage
Team B                    21-7                  0-1                          21-6                                   .7778
Team C                    11-15                0-1                          11-14                                 .4400
Team D                    7-20                  0-1                          7-19                                   .2692
Team E                    13-13                0-1                          13-12                                 .5200
Team F                    23-6                  1-0                          22-6                                   .7858
TOTAL                                                                              74-56 (.5692)                     .5585 (OWP)


Opponents' Opponents' Average winning  Percentage (oowP).  The strength of each opponent's schedule is measured by computing the opponent's winning percentage for each opponent, and then averaging the percentages. This recognizes the fact that two opponents with similar won-lost records may have played far different schedules (in terms of strength of opponents).

To calculate, take Teams B, C, D, E and F schedules and perform the same calculation as above (OWP).  It is important to note that the OOWP will support the OWP (i.e., if Teams A and B have the
same OWP of .5692; Team A has an OOWP of .6125 and Team B has an OOWP of .4567; it would indicate team A has the stronger strength of schedule).

Weighted Scale. Once the Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP) and Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP) are calculated, they are to be combined on a weighted scale (e.g., 2/3 weight for OWP and 1/3 weight for OOWP) and this combined number becomes the strength of schedule.

Home/Away Multiplier. A multiplier of 1.25 shall be added to the OWP and OOWP for those games played away from home. A multiplier of 1.0 (no positive or negative effect) will be included in the
OWP and OOWP for all neutral games. A multiplier of 0.75 shall be included in the OWP and OOWP for all home games.

[KnightSlappy]

Maybe it is just me... but doesn't this pretty well describe the math (granted, we won't know until we see SOS numbers on Wednesday)?

Home/Away Multiplier. A multiplier of 1.25 shall be added to the OWP and OOWP for those games played away from home. A multiplier of 1.0 (no positive or negative effect) will be included in the
OWP and OOWP for all neutral games. A multiplier of 0.75 shall be included in the OWP and OOWP for all home games.

The question, at least for me, is when does the HAM get applied to the component OWPs? Is it before the OOWPs are calculated (i.e. do HAM-adjusted OWPs go into the OOWP calculation?) or is the adjusting done after the fact (i.e. are OOWPs calculated using raw OWP numbers?)?

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Yeah... I see your point... thought it was in there. I will see if I can find an answer before Wednesday.

[sac]

Wooster              17-2
St. Vincent           15-2
Hilbert                 18-3
Mt. Union            17-3
Wittenberg         17-4
Ohio Wesleyan   17-4
Marietta              16-4
--------------------------------.800
Bethany              17-4
PSU-Behrend       17-4
Calvin                  13-4
Hope                   14-5
-------------------------------- .700
DePauw              13-6

Drop John Carroll, Wilmington, LaRoche who have too many losses to be viable Pool C candidates


Head-to-head match-ups this week of interest:

Wednesday
DePauw at Wittenberg

Saturday
Wittenberg at Wooster
Bethany at St. Vincent


A very big week for Wittenberg who can solidify their Pool C credentials.

[KnightSlappy]

too many losses to be viable Pool C candidates.

I'm not sure this is a thing. We've seen teams with eight losses get Pool C bids, and that was even before all games counted. It's all about percentages, not counting totals.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Well... some of those eight-loss teams didn't have all eight losses count in their in-region record, so that isn't exactly a fair comparison. That being said, teams have made it with worse win/loss records than others because their SOS was far superior than the other team's (along with other criteria)... so losses can be a tough gauge to lean on. I have usually said 20-wins is a good barameter if you have a decent SOS... but teams with 18 or 19 wins have also gotten at large bids - and done well in the tournament.

[sac]

The only one I've dropped that might have the criteria to get in is Wilmington.  Unless they beat Mt. Union  in two weeks I think they'll have a goose egg for RRO's, but I have to imagine their SOS will be pretty good.

With so many good teams in this region its hard to envision an 8 loss team being in a position for Pool C.    There are at least 3 teams that will have really good records but lousy SOS that could potentially block an 8 loss GL team from ever getting discussed.

[KnightSlappy]

Well... some of those eight-loss teams didn't have all eight losses count in their in-region record

But some of them did.

I also think it's silly that there's a winning percentage (above zero) below which teams "can't" be considered for the rankings / Pool C.