18+ 4.5M Nationals Predictions
- Thread starter schmke
- Start date
AverageForehand
Rookie
Could you do 40+ 4.5M Nationals ?
schmke
Legend
Yep, next week.
Moon Shooter
Hall of Fame
I wish utr would put up their predictions instead of just claiming their rating system is so much better. Somehow I doubt that will happen for adult rec tennis.
NumbersGuy
Rookie
You could say that about some others as well
NumbersGuy
Rookie
And I'll go with SoCal, Florida, Mid Atlantic, and a PNW/New England virtual dead heat. SoCal looks especially strong.
Moon Shooter
Hall of Fame
Do you run your own ratings calculations or are you using a someone else's calculations - like tennis record - or some mixture of both?
NumbersGuy
Rookie
I hate to do this but let me just keep it proprietary until I've put a bit more proof in the pudding.
jdawgg
Semi-Pro
The problem with these predictions is that it doesn’t factor in players that aren’t playing due to injury.
So for PNW, we lost our best doubles player to a season ending injury before nationals and another critical doubles player 3 weeks before nationals. We tried our best and still have had a lot of 10 pt tie breaks that didn’t swing our way. Just lost 2-3 to NorCal. Out of the game at 1-2.
So for PNW, we lost our best doubles player to a season ending injury before nationals and another critical doubles player 3 weeks before nationals. We tried our best and still have had a lot of 10 pt tie breaks that didn’t swing our way. Just lost 2-3 to NorCal. Out of the game at 1-2.
NumbersGuy
Rookie
You're right, that's why we call them forecasts and not guarantees. Public data are all we use.
schmke
Legend
You are correct. It also doesn't factor in other things that affect who actually plays like if a team is a "play everyone" team or a "play to win" team. We also can't factor in how each team plays their line-ups and if they stack or not.
I also state that what I'm doing is a simulation and my projection uses the most likely record for each team and how often they finish in the top-4. But the simulation also identifies the chances of all possible records for each team and for many teams, the most like record may have a 40% or so chance, but the second most likely record is typically 30+% so by no means is my projection saying what exactly will happen.
Still, I often project 2-3 of the semifinalists, and those that do make the semis are usually in the top 6-7 of my projections, so there is some validity to my ratings and the approach I take. If a team does better than projected, there is a good chance they benefited from an opponent not fielding their best line-up (intentionally or due to missing players) or simply played well on the the given weekend and overachieved.
schmke
Legend
And you are right, you were missing 3 of your top-4 players and still went 2-2. And 14 of your 20 courts went as my ratings predicted, with 3 of the 6 misses matches were the players were within 0.04 so hardly big upsets.
jdawgg
Semi-Pro
Our team lost seven ten point tiebreaks and only won one. That’s a tough hill to climb.
Scary to think how well we would’ve done with our two better doubles players there. Our best doubles player who we lost to injury is the best 4.5 doubles player I’ve ever seen from pnw. And I’ve seen a lot of 4.5 players. Without him we wouldn’t of made nationals.
Vox Rationis
Professional
That’s what it always comes down to. Staying injury free, being able to travel, playing well, putting out the right line ups, etc… all the pieces have to come together.
schmke
Legend
Are you referring to a tie in the standings?
The National regulations document covers it, and I've written about it (and its shortcomings) a bunch on my blog, but in the event of a team win/loss record tie, it is broken with:
- Courts win/loss record
- Head-to-head
- Fewest sets lost
- Fewest games lost
- Game winning percentage
- TBD
thx, I've read your arguments, hard to argue. I'm actually more on the fence about head-to-head _not_ being the first tie breaker. I can see it both ways. If you do make it the first tie-breaker then a given losing team is instantly essentially two points behind, which is a huge hole in a 4 matches format competition.
On the other hand if only two teams are tied, and one beat the other it's difficult to see why the winning team shouldn't be advancing. Plus it seems many times the last match does not matter for one of the teams (since that team may be already eliminated) and they are likely to play weaker players just so they can participate, or just plainly not play with a 'normal' intensity. Which in turn is likely to turn into a blowup for the other team (the one that is still in the running) and they pick up tie-breaking court wins that way.
