Re: Winning versus scoring

For someone who complains about personal attacks,
Andy, you sure know how to dish them out. 

On to
more substantive things....

" Andy [Hu], face
facts. Maryland just isn't that good. [flame delated]
Compare these numbers:
 Duke vs. Maryland
 TUPPTH:
Duke, 5.17 to 4.28
 PP20TH: Duke, 278 to 238


We were 7-6, you were 9-4. Either the Southeast was
much stronger than the Mid-Atlantic or breaks bounced
just right. "

 While comparing records among
teams who not only did not face each other, but faced
completely different sets of opponents is fraught with
problems, a rigorous enough look can elucidate a good deal
and provide context for numbers such as those above.


 In both Baltimore and Chattanooga, we had the
same field size, 13, on the same set of Qs. The one
difference besides the teams : the JHU moderation crew got
through more TUs, which is partially a function of team
buzzer speed and partially a function of moderator
speed. 

 Both SCTs had some very good teams at
the top (though no team in SE approached the kind of
numbers Princeton A did at MA), and some not-so-good ones
on the bottom, though there were no total doormats
as no team failed to average at least 90 PPG.


 Looking at the SE field, my guess based on a
cursory examination of team totals is that there were
five games a team roughly at the skill level of a Duke
or Maryland (or GW or Princeton B) would under most
circumstances consider an easy win, i.e. teams that averaged
fewer than 150 points/game on these questions. I count
two such teams in the Mid-Atl region, even allowing
for a reasonable adjustment for Baltimore's faster
pool of moderators. That's _three_ extra games of
score padding for "bubble" teams in the SE, and that
makes a big difference in PPTH, though none at all - at
least in theory - in BConv. (Obviously a bubble team in
the Mideast would have an even greater gripe about
this formula, if such a team existed.) Bonus
conversion stats tell some of this story, but not all of it.


 It is the major reason why Duke and Florida
Atlantic are in line ahead of Maryland, GW, and Princeton
B. 

 So in games among teams that had
something resembling a shot at a qualifying bid, Maryland's
record was 7-4 (6-4 if we give Andy the benefit of the
doubt and remove 2-9 Georgetown despite its scoring
~180 PPG). Unless Duke suffered a highly unusual upset
in Chattanooga, which would hardly holster any claim
to superiority, their record in such games was 2-6.


Yes, Maryland won its share or more of close games.
And Duke may well have lost its share or more. But
isn't that the point of playing these games, on some
level? Especially if you consider how NAQT ICT is run
(roughly the same way everything else is), with points
scored data always being secondary to wins and losses.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:43 AM EST EST