Discussion in 'College Tennis Talk' started by Clemson_tennis, Mar 13, 2012.
any surprises? I'm not sure why Virginia dropped to 5.
Fresno St dropping 5 spots is about right. What do you expect when you're playing Tahiti Tech and Potato U.
I dont know how Miami actually moved up a spot.
glad to see Yannick maden rise from 88-49.
also a big jump for Nik Sckoltz.
Two Gamecocks crack the rankings. Machado at 104 and Pinheiro at 117
Kind of odd seeing Alex Domijan at 94
love the new rankings:
duke still holding strong in the top 6 - the avg for teams 3-6 is pretty tight - big dropoff to 7
pretty wild that pepperdine is ahead of stanford now seeing as they had six straight losses at one point this season - but not unexpected or undeserved - that's what happens when you put it on the line against great teams every time you step on the court instead of fooling around with yale and fun doubles exhibitions
db was right, pepperdine and duke do have fairly similar rankings this week...somehow though i think he expected them both to be behind stanford
also i love that fresno is dropping even without losing any more matches yet
a look ahead to what the computer will be working with next week:
duke - top 15 wins (#4, #10, #12, #14) - worst loss (#8 )
stanford - top 15 wins (#7, #12) - worst loss (#19)
i think that's a sufficient amount of crow i've made db eat for commenting on duke's "lucky" ranking that was sure to start falling after a loss to a pepperdine team that he somehow thinks is supposed to be an easy win for top teams
we'll find out next time stanford takes the court - at pepperdine!
UF defeats Duke 5-0... Rain shortened play between #1 Allie Will and #2 Beatrice Capra with Capra up 6-4, 5-4 and serving at her ad for match point...she has to be p.o'd.
Gators were clearly better top to bottom and a couple matches were routes.
Yeah you don't see too many matches between the top two singles players in the country abandoned at match point, but oh well, tough break with the weather
UF definitely the better team but looked like a likely 5-2 with the Capra match point and a 4-2 lead in the third
Can't really comment much, since I've only seen Will play one time, but she seems like an overrated #1. Again could be wrong, but she got absolutely crushed by Chelsea Gullickson in Athens a couple weeks ago, and looks like she was on her way to another loss today...
I watch her a lot and I agree with you. She is a solid top-10 player, but the computer ratings have her on top right now. I'd be shocked if she ends up year end #1. It's even week to week on whether she is #1 on her own team. When she is on, she is. When she is off, Embree is. When they are both on, I like Will.
That being said, Frank is #1 on the men's side? Really?
juricova has my vote as the best woman out there
beat gullickson 2,1 in indoors and was up 6-4, 5-1 on capra when that match got called due to the duke victory
she hasn't been up to her standard in the two big individual tournies so far so she's not ranked #1, but she has the best individual resume in women's college tennis by a longshot
08-09: #8 final ranking
09-10: #2 final ranking, indoors champ, ncaa finalist
10-11: #1 final ranking, ITA A-A finalist, indoors finalist, ncaa champ
11-12: lost in quarters of ITA A-A and indoors, currently #6
Why is this surprising? Do you follow college tennis?
I do...and I would have thought playing and losing at line 3 against OSU's (then unranked) Kobelt would have cost him more than it did. I get that he had a good fall, but he hasn't even played #1 for UVA this spring.
I don't get how the computers work (admittedly), but the eye test says that if you play 2 & 3 on your own team, you're probably not #1 in the country.
"I get that he had a good fall" is a bit of an understatement, don't you think?
In what way should the computer rankings take into account what position you play on your team?
It can't. At least not accurately or fairly. The only way to really do it would be to have a separate ranking list for each position. But that wouldn't always work because positions aren't static. It would though control for strength of opponent a bit better. Actually, I like the idea of different rankings for each position, but it would get awfully convoluted.
You do have to admit, it's hard for most people to accept that someone could be #1 in the country without being #1 on their own team, though...
Top of my head? Strength of Opponents. Quality of Wins. Quality of Losses. If you use a computer, isn't there a weighting system? Can you theoretically go all spring playing other school's 2's and 3's and be ranked #1? Would that make rational sense? Doesn't to me.
Frankly, Steve Johnson is on a 48-match winning streak in the college game (including '11 team & individual champ) & plays every school's #1 player. That puts him at #1 in my eyeball test. I'd put Frank around 5-7 after the OSU loss. It's my opinion, not a UVA fans, not the ITA's system. Just me.
it's very surprising, considering a) he doesn't play 1, b) he lost to unranked OSU player, and c) the fall shouldn't amount for too much, considering you don't necessarily play players at your position in the lineup. I call BS as well.
Those factors are all taken into account. Your best N wins, where N increases gradually as the season progresses, are the primary positive component of your ranking. Your losses are the negative component. Frank has a lot of good wins from the fall, but as the spring progresses, he will not pick up any more good wins because of playing #3. That will erode his ranking over time. Until his competition has as many good wins as he has, they will not overtake him for #1.
I am sure that you can understand why last spring's results do not affect Steve Johnson's ranking right now. He has played very few teams' #1 player, because last spring does not count, he did not play in the fall, and he has not played that many matches in the spring. As the spring season goes on, all of his wins will be higher quality than the wins that Frank will get at #3, until he passes Frank up. And some other #1's will also pass Frank up at the same time. Jarmere Jenkins of UVa will likely be one of them; he is 7-0 in the spring against tougher opponents than Frank has faced. But Frank outperformed Jenkins at the big fall tournaments, at which both players competed, and that should count for something.
I like computer rankings because it takes the opinions out of it, and makes players actually earn their rankings. UVa fans "know" that Jarmere Jenkins is our best player this season, which is why he is playing #1. But rankings based on who we all "know" is better, regardless of results, would not be fair to the players who achieve the results.
well said, thanks. i guess we technically agree, i just have less patience than the computer
I think that Frank's rankings decline will be pretty significant this spring as he plays #3, which does not really bother me, because I am more concerned about the team, anyway. We will see how long he lasts at #1. I am thinking it won't be too much longer. Then again, he only has one loss, so only Steve Johnson really has any big advantage over him.
What's with the 125-175 singles rankings that are appearing now? Not in the actual rankings when you click on them but they appear on the team results.
Separate names with a comma.