- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
RPI Rant
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:37 pm
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:37 pm
As many of you know, I am big fan of computer polls in football. They aren't perfect, but they are objective and they average 6 of them together. They are pretty good about treating a #75 team almost equally with a #120 team, which I think is good.I never followed RPI much, but I always thought it gave screwy results. It seems you are waaaaay better off playing really bad teams than really awful teams for your SOS (I contend you ought to beat either one). Moreover, it seems to give too much influence to SOS.
Here's the kicker, and I might be wrong, but I just did some back-of-the-envelope math and I think if you replace LSU's win over Alcorn State for example with a LOSS to Duke, our RPI goes up. So how does LOSING to a really good team make you a better team? Me and 4 of my buddies could lose to Duke.
Now, I know LSU has played an easy schedule and they don't deserve to be put with other 4-loss teams that played tough ones. But I think LSU's RPI is a little deflated due to some oversimplified RPI formulas
Here's the kicker, and I might be wrong, but I just did some back-of-the-envelope math and I think if you replace LSU's win over Alcorn State for example with a LOSS to Duke, our RPI goes up. So how does LOSING to a really good team make you a better team? Me and 4 of my buddies could lose to Duke.
Now, I know LSU has played an easy schedule and they don't deserve to be put with other 4-loss teams that played tough ones. But I think LSU's RPI is a little deflated due to some oversimplified RPI formulas
This post was edited on 2/12/09 at 2:39 pm
6
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:42 pm to lsumatt
It depends on where the teams play wrt your Duke example.
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:44 pm to lsumatt
quote:
but I just did some back-of-the-envelope math and I think if you replace LSU's win over Alcorn State for example with a LOSS to Duke, our RPI goes up.
I remember in 2000 when we were RPI watching, St Johns lost a mid-season game at Duke by 35 and their RPI went up the next week.
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:45 pm to lsumatt
One could make the argument that losing to Duke, rather than beating a cream puff shows some amount of effort and risk-taking (to play a tougher schedule) that should perhaps be rewarded.
By the way, always enjoy your math posts.
By the way, always enjoy your math posts.
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:47 pm to LuckyLee
quote:
It depends on where the teams play wrt your Duke example.
That's not the point. I assumed same place. But we could play them in Coach K's living room, it doesn't make us better by losing to them
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:47 pm to lsumatt
i have zero problem withe formulation. In a tourney that must select from 300+ DI teams this is a necessary evil to ensure that every team with a nice record against shithole competition doesn't make it to the dance. I also like that in theory it should reward fans with interesting OOC matchups.
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:48 pm to TigerNacho
quote:
shows some amount of effort and risk-taking (to play a tougher schedule)
But the RPI isn't a participation trophy you get for trying really hard, its supposed to be a measure of how good you are
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:49 pm to el tigre
quote:
I also like that in theory it should reward fans with interesting OOC matchups.
What about Big East teams that have inflated RPIs from getting to play so many in conference games again high rated teams?
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:50 pm to lsumatt
quote:
Moreover, it seems to give too much influence to SOS.
Definitely. Football doesn't factor it in enough, basketball does too much I think. We should work on making our own computer poll that's an extension of the RPI
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:50 pm to el tigre
quote:
i have zero problem withe formulation.
How can you possibly not have a problem with a formula that says you are a better if you lose?
quote:
ensure that every team with a nice record against shithole competition
I don't have a problem using a computer formula to weight SOS, just make it a better formula that isn't oversimplified. Football does it.
This post was edited on 2/12/09 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:50 pm to TigerNacho
quote:
One could make the argument that losing to Duke, rather than beating a cream puff shows some amount of effort and risk-taking (to play a tougher schedule) that should perhaps be rewarded. By the way, always enjoy your math posts.
The problem is, that is something that should be awarded in qualitative thought processes, not in quantitative.
The players, and often the coaches, don't make the schedules, and you don't know for sure who will pan out in your schedule or not. Add in the fact that teams play close to 30 games in college basketball, and it becomes ridiculous to overcompensate for losses to good teams.
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:52 pm to lsumatt
quote:
That's not the point. I assumed same place. But we could play them in Coach K's living room, it doesn't make us better by losing to them
Losing to Duke at home is worse than on the road. I think the weighting is 1.4 for home loss, 1 for neutral, and .6 for away. It also takes into account the other team's SOS.
I understand what you're implying though that losing should never be better than winning. I'm not sure if I agree though. i guess the problem is that RPI doesn't take MOV into account. I definitely think losing by 5 to the best team is better than beating the worst team by 30.
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:54 pm to The Easter Bunny
quote:
What about Big East teams that have inflated RPIs from getting to play so many in conference games again high rated teams?
they deserve it for stressing basketball more than most other conferences.....like the SEC in football.
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:54 pm to LuckyLee
quote:
I understand what you're implying though that losing should never be better than winning. I'm not sure if I agree though. i guess the problem is that RPI doesn't take MOV into account. I definitely think losing by 5 to the best team is better than beating the worst team by 30.
Yea, only if margin of victory is in the equation does it make any kind of good sense to quantify the value of losses.
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:55 pm to el tigre
quote:
they deserve it for stressing basketball more than most other conferences.....like the SEC in football.
+1.
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:56 pm to LuckyLee
quote:
I'm not sure if I agree though.
How can losing (w/o scoring margin included) EVER be evidence of your team strength.
Again, I could lose to the 1992 Dream Team. Beating Glen Oaks High > losing to Duke anywhere.
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:59 pm to LuckyLee
quote:
they deserve it for stressing basketball more than most other conferences.....like the SEC in football.
Its not about who cares more, its who has done more to earn that ranking. I don't have a problem with Big East teams inflating their ranking by beating eachother (the SEC does it in football) as long as the Big East earns it OOC.
And don't get me wrong Big East >> SEC. But the formula needs some work
Posted on 2/12/09 at 2:59 pm to lsumatt
I agree Matt, but MOV should only be taken into consideration in a loss, not a win
Posted on 2/12/09 at 3:00 pm to lsumatt
quote:
How can losing (w/o scoring margin included) EVER be evidence of your team strength.
It shouldn't be without including MOV. I've never said RPI is perfect, just like sagarin isn't perfect. They're just metrics to use to gain a much clearer picture than looking at a W-L column.
Posted on 2/12/09 at 3:01 pm to josh336
quote:
I agree Matt, but MOV should only be taken into consideration in a loss, not a win
Why? I don't think this makes sense.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News