11/21/24
February 07, 2006
How about a Men's Olympic Hockey pool.: The schedule is set and we know the teams playing. I learned a new system that might work well with this tournament. Details inside.
I'm in: Canada - 12 Finland - 11 Czech Republic - 10 Russia - 9 Sweden - 8 USA - 7 Slovakia - 6 Germany - 5 Switzerland - 4 Kazakhstan - 3 Italy - 2 Latvia - 1
posted by NoMich at 09:55 AM on February 07, 2006
Sounds like fun. Be back this afternoon with my picks.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 09:57 AM on February 07, 2006
Confidence pool. Sweet. Will points remain the same when the quarters, semis, and medal-rounds come about? Or will there be an opportunity to "re-pick" teams?
posted by redsnare at 10:09 AM on February 07, 2006
Points would stay as originally picked, so choose your 10, 11, & 12 wisely.
posted by njsk8r20 at 10:14 AM on February 07, 2006
This all sounds sexist.
posted by yerfatma at 10:25 AM on February 07, 2006
Well, so what? What's wrong with being sexy?
posted by NoMich at 10:34 AM on February 07, 2006
Didn't you see the end of Slapshot?
posted by yerfatma at 11:11 AM on February 07, 2006
Oh! I like this! To make it a bit easier, here are the two divisions: A: Canada Italy Germany Switzerland Finland Czech B: USA Sweden Russia Slovakia Latvia Kazakhstan
posted by grum@work at 11:13 AM on February 07, 2006
Mark Feb 22nd as a must play hokey to watch Olympic Hockey 1/4 finals 8 remaining teams 4 games on NBC. I'm in; 12-Canada 11-Finland 10-Sweden 9-USA 8-Russia 7-Chezk Rep. 6-Germany 5-Switzerland 4-Slovakia 3-Kazahkstan 2-Latvia 1-Italy
posted by skydivedad at 11:19 AM on February 07, 2006
Oh I like grum's 2 divisions. I want to repick!
posted by skydivedad at 11:21 AM on February 07, 2006
12 - Canada 11 - Czech 10 - Finland 9 - Sweden 8 - Russia 7 - USA 6 - SLovakia 5 - Switzerland 4 - Germany 3 - Kazahkstan 2 - Latvia 1 - Italy What about tie breakers?
posted by grum@work at 11:26 AM on February 07, 2006
Is it the afternoon yet? It is! Oh boy! 12. Dominion of Canada 11. Czeching Republic 10. Russian Empire 9. Fjords of Sweden 8. Slovakia Pie 7. Finland, pony trekking or camping 6. USAirhockeyteam 5. Kazakhstanatoo 4. Ger-many men on the ice 3. Latvialong 2. Switzerlandandy 1. Italy and a partridge in a pear tree. Thanks for the division info, grum.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 11:27 AM on February 07, 2006
What about tie breakers? I'm open to suggestions. Am I to assume that I'm going to be held responsible for keep track of the points?
posted by njsk8r20 at 11:28 AM on February 07, 2006
njsk8r20, are you going to keep track of the points as we go? 'Cause I like doing this stuff if you'd prefer not to. Let me know. Actually, I'm going to swap Germany and Latvia in my picks, so: 4. Lativa 3. Germany Everything else stays the same.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 11:32 AM on February 07, 2006
Czech Republic-12 Canada-11 Sweden-10 Russia-9 Finland-8 USA-7 Slovakia-6 Germany-5 Switzerland-4 Latvia-3 Kazakhstan-2 Italy-1
posted by HATER 187 at 11:37 AM on February 07, 2006
How about we pick winners in the 2 divisions 6-1 instead of 12-1.? This is what I thought of when I saw grums post. Makes sense to me. Div A 6-Canada 5-Finland 4-Chezk Rep. 3-Germany 2-Switzerland 1-Italy Div B 6-Sweden 5-USA 4-Russia 3-Slovkia 2-Kazakhstan 1-Latvia What do you guys think? I believe it will make the pool much more competitive. We could then assign pt. values to the Medal winners, etr..
posted by skydivedad at 11:49 AM on February 07, 2006
Oooooooo... Hater backs the dark horse Czechs! Nifty. Canada - 12 Czechs - 11 Sweden - 10 Russia - 9 Finland - 8 (..or just watching TV..) USA - 7 Slovakia - 6 Germany - 5 Latvia - 4 Swiss - 3 Kazakhstan - 2 Italy - 1 With that divisional format - the Canucks and Czechs are going to win more games than the poor suckers in the much deeper pool B.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:54 AM on February 07, 2006
Didn't you see the end of Slapshot? Sorry, I had Spinal Tap on my mind with my comment. How about we pick winners in the 2 divisions 6-1 instead of 12-1.? I like this idea a lot. And you're right, it does make sense.
posted by NoMich at 11:55 AM on February 07, 2006
Does the bronze medal game count?
posted by 86 at 12:02 PM on February 07, 2006
I would imagine all the games, including the medal games, would count. (A) 6-Canada 5-Czech Republic 4-Finland 3-Germany 2-Italy 1-Switzerland (B) 6-USA 5-Sweden 4-Russia 3-Slovakia 2-Kazakhstan 1-Latvia or, if we're doing twelvesies:
12 - Canada
11 - Czech Republic
10 - USA
9 - Sweden
8 - Russia
7 - Finland
6 - Slovakia
5 - Kazakhstan
4 - Germany
3 - Italy
2 - Latvia
1 - Switzerland
posted by chicobangs at 12:10 PM on February 07, 2006
So what is the call by the commish (njsk8r20)? Two divisions of 6, or one ranking of 12? And how do we handle the playoffs? It would be easier to not repick before the medal round, so something that can be done all at once would be good. Tie breaker suggestions: total goals in the two medal games or total points for highest scoring player in the tournament
posted by grum@work at 12:19 PM on February 07, 2006
12 - Canada (7 wins) 11 - Sweden (6 wins) 10 - USA (6 wins) 9 - Czechs (5 wins) 8 - Finland (4 wins) 7 - Russia (3 wins) 6 - Slovakia (3 wins) 5 - Germany (2 wins) 4 - Kazakhstan (1 win) 3 - Switzerland (1 win) 2 - Italy (0 wins) 1 - Latvia (0 wins) (A) 6-Canada 5-Czech Republic 4-Finland 3-Germany 2-Switzerland 1-Italy (B) 6-Sweden 5-USA 4-Russia 3-Slovakia 2-Kazakhstan 1-Latvia I worked out the entire schedule and picked winners for each game. I think the Slovaks will surprise some people (including Russia on the opening night of games). Still, they end up seeded fourth in Group B and get Canada in the quarters. Also in the quarterfinals, the Czechs beat Russia and the US edges Finland. Sweden gets the easy game and advances against the Germans. Canada rolls the Americans in the semis and Sweden knocks out the Czechs in OT. In the bronze medal game, the USA upsets a disappointed Czech squad. And Canada gets the gold, 4-1 over Sweden.
posted by 86 at 12:20 PM on February 07, 2006
Sorry, I was on lunch break. Dr.John, even though you are a Sens fan I would be glad to give you the honors. (I just moved and don't have net access at home yet) All games count of course and no repicking for medal rounds. Lets keep it 1-12 to lessen the chance of ties. In case of a tie I like the total goals of the medal games.
posted by njsk8r20 at 12:55 PM on February 07, 2006
My divison picks go thusly: (A) Czech Rep Canada Finland Germany Swizz Italy B Sweeden Russia USA Slovakia Latvia Kazakhstan
posted by HATER 187 at 12:55 PM on February 07, 2006
Total goals in medal games = 9
posted by 86 at 01:00 PM on February 07, 2006
njsk8r, I'd be happy to crunch the numbers. I prefer the 1-12 format too. It doesn't let you hedge your bets, and thus makes the play much more wide open if there are upsets. But I'm happy to put it to a vote. Or dictatorial ruling, whatever.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 01:10 PM on February 07, 2006
I renounce my authority and hand it all into the capable hands of the good Dr. I'll post my picks later today.
posted by njsk8r20 at 01:17 PM on February 07, 2006
I vote 2 Div 6-1. For what it's worth.
posted by skydivedad at 01:23 PM on February 07, 2006
NoMich's REPICKS: Canada - 12 Finland - 11 Russia - 10 USA - 9 Czech Republic - 8 Slovakia - 7 Sweden - 6 Switzerland - 5 Kazakhstan - 4 Germany - 3 Latvia - 2 Italy - 1
posted by NoMich at 01:52 PM on February 07, 2006
Okay, maybe it's too late to discuss the format, but I fear that with this system the round-robin matches will weigh too much in the balance. How about this: you get X points each time the team advances one round, X being the number of points (12-1) you assigned to the team. This would reduce the round-robin to what it really is, a first round.
posted by qbert72 at 01:54 PM on February 07, 2006
I just looked at the rosters, and I'd like to get some of what you're drinking, you who put Italy higher than 1.
posted by qbert72 at 02:31 PM on February 07, 2006
I don't see Italy or Latvia winning any games, therefore it doesn't matter who is ranked 1 and who gets the 2. I put Italy higher based on the fact that they'll be playing at home.
posted by 86 at 02:47 PM on February 07, 2006
I try not to put too much thought into it. I had much better luck in the football pools when I had no idea who the better teams were. My picks are: 12-Czech Republic 11-Canada 10-USA 9-Russia 8-Slovakia 7-Finland 6-Sweden 5-Germany 4-Switzerland 3-Latvia 2-Kazahkhstan 1-Italy
posted by njsk8r20 at 03:06 PM on February 07, 2006
Latvia has an outside chance at Kazakhstan. Italy has an outside chance at avoiding the Zamboni. Please, somebody comment about my suggested amendment.
posted by qbert72 at 03:07 PM on February 07, 2006
...and 11 goals for the medal games. qbert, although that would make it easier to count up the points but I think the way it is now gives a better chance of getting some more upsets to tip the points standings.
posted by njsk8r20 at 03:30 PM on February 07, 2006
I'll go with 14 goals for the medal games. And Italy will surprise. Marco my words!
posted by chicobangs at 03:48 PM on February 07, 2006
24 total goals in the medal games.
posted by NoMich at 03:56 PM on February 07, 2006
Alright. It's either time to redeem myself or prove the Costanza was no fluke and I know jack shit about sports. 12 Canada 11 Russia 10 Czech Republic 9 Sweden 8 USA 7 Finland 6 Germany 5 Slovakia 4 Swiss Cheese 3 Latvia Majora 2 Italy 1 Kazakhstan
posted by willthrill72 at 04:32 PM on February 07, 2006
19 goals in the medal games.
posted by HATER 187 at 04:41 PM on February 07, 2006
Careful now, the Costanza plaque I made for hockey is even better than the football one, I think. Maybe just cause I am a big hockey fan. Though if anybody puts Canada, the Czechs of the Russians in their bottom three it would seem like they would be gunning for last place which isn't quite what the Costanza was on about. I like the idea of the pool. I'm a gon' wait to see how the debate on the setup transpires. and qbert, maybe the elimination rounds could be double points or something? not to weigh the preliminary rounds too heavily? dunno.
posted by gspm at 04:43 PM on February 07, 2006
12 - Canada 11 - Czech 10 - Finland 9 - Russia 8 - USA 7 - Sweden 6 - Slovakia 5 - Germany 4 - Switzerland 3 - Kazahkstan 2 - Latvia 1 - Italy 18 goals
posted by emoeby at 05:26 PM on February 07, 2006
What happens if a game is a tie? (As can happen in the prelim rounds.) Also qbert under your idea there's really no point in ranking the last few teams since we know they aren't going to make it out. And that's where most of the fun is going to be IMO.
posted by Amateur at 09:20 PM on February 07, 2006
I'll just save whoever is eventually going to have to record this shit some time and repeat my picks with my total goal prediction: Canada - 12 Czechs - 11 Sweden - 10 Russia - 9 Finland - 8 (..lots of miles from Vietnam) USA - 7 Slovakia - 6 Germany - 5 Latvia - 4 Swiss - 3 Kazakhstan - 2 Italy - 1 16 goals
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:21 PM on February 07, 2006
Finland - 8 (..lots of miles from Vietnam) Is this a Hanoi Rocks reference?
posted by NoMich at 09:32 PM on February 07, 2006
I'm just in this to try and embarass people who supposedly know stuff. Here goes nuthin': 12 - Czech 11 - Canada 10 - Finland 9 - Sweden 8 - USA 7 - Russia 6 - Slovakia 5 - Germany 4 - Switzerland 3 - Kazakhstan 2 - Latvia 1 - Italy
posted by owlhouse at 10:56 PM on February 07, 2006
Aight...here we go: 12 - Finland (aka, the Stars -- Jokinen, Kapanen, Lehtinen, Miettien!)* 11 - Canada 10 - Czechsters 09 - US 08 - Russia 07 - Sweden 06 - Switz 05 - Germany 04 - Slovaks 03 - Italy 02 - Kazakhstan 01 - Latvia Goals in the medals games? Lucky 13. *Even if nobody else has love for the Finns, the best chunk of their team is used to playing together, and I'll be rooting them on best I can.
posted by Ufez Jones at 12:02 AM on February 08, 2006
qbert under your idea there's really no point in ranking the last few teams since we know they aren't going to make it out You think you know. But if the team you gave a 2 (Kazakstan) gets out while the team you gave a 5 (Germany) does not, you're 3 points down. I'm not gonna fight over it though. The original system is fine. My picks are coming tomorrow.
posted by qbert72 at 01:11 AM on February 08, 2006
What happens if a game is a tie? (As can happen in the prelim rounds.) I would say since there was not a winner then no points shall be awarded for that game. Does that sound fair?
posted by njsk8r20 at 07:24 AM on February 08, 2006
whoever is eventually going to have to record this shit Come on weedy, why are you calling my brainchild shit? Well, OK, it's not mine but I stole it from the eskimos fair and square.
posted by njsk8r20 at 07:48 AM on February 08, 2006
I would say since there was not a winner then no points shall be awarded for that game. Does that sound fair? That adds quite a bit of randomness to the game. I am not saying I don't like it, but a couple of ties could put somebody way behind. An alternative would be to split the points, e.g. if I have Canada 12 and Sweden 10, they tie I get (12+10)/2 = 11. Another alternative would be to get the lesser, i.e. tie goes to the 'underdog.' That makes scorekeeping more complicated because the winner will depend on each player's picks.
posted by Amateur at 07:55 AM on February 08, 2006
I like amateur's idea of splitting the score in case of a tie. It makes half points possible and could make things interesting.
posted by willthrill72 at 08:28 AM on February 08, 2006
OK straight up it is then. Here's my repicks. 12-Canada 11-Sweden 10-USA 9-Russia 8-Chezh Rep. 7-Slovakia 6-Finland 5-Germany 4-Switzerland 3-Kazakhstan 2-Latvia 1-Italy Tourney-MVP Dany Heatley Most Goals in the Tourney- Ovechkin Total Goals Medal Rounds-17 Games decided by shoot-outs-3 Lowest GAA-Evgeni Nabokov Highest scoring Defender-Kimmo Timonen Ugliest Uniforms-USA I'm sure I've forgotten something...
posted by skydivedad at 08:30 AM on February 08, 2006
I like both of Amateur's alternatives. Either one is OK with me. That way every game is worth something. I'll leave that up to DrJohn or the masses.
posted by njsk8r20 at 08:33 AM on February 08, 2006
Here goes.... 12-Canada 11-Czech Rep. 10-Finland 9-Russia 8-Sweden 7-USA 6-Germany 5-Slovakia 4-Switzerland 3-Italy 2-Latvia 1-Kazakhstan Total goals for medal round: 18
posted by elovrich at 09:13 AM on February 08, 2006
Okay... judging from what's been posted, here's what I see developing here. This is not a dictatorial pronouncement, but rather an attempt to draft some sort of cohesive rules that we can all agree to. Please reply with critiques and suggested refinements. If nobody has too strong an issue with these suggestions, then we can use them as the official rules.
The picks
Rank all the teams from 12 to 1, independent of division. I don't think there would be too much difference between this system and the divisional one, and the majority of people have been posting with this system.The points
You will be awarded points equal to a team's rank for each win by that team. I've thought long and hard about weighting the medal round, and I think I'd prefer not to: I feel that pool-play upsets should be rewarded, even if they are ultimately insignificant. Let's say Latvia beats a heavyweight to advance to the quarters, but then loses. Anybody who ranked Latvia highly would see all their points from the pool-play upset overwhelmed by the influx of points from the weighted medal round.The tiebreaker
My only concern with the medal-round-goals tiebreaker suggestion is the risk of a second tie. Everyone seems to agree that the medal round will have between 12 and 20 goals, and we have more than eight players in this pick 'em. What about a system in which we compare the tied players' picks to the final standings? Whoever had the more accurate final standings, weighted towards the top, would win the tiebreaker:- Begin with the gold-medal-winning team. Whichever player has that team ranked higher wins.
- If still tied, proceed to the silver-medal-winning team. Whichever player has that team ranked higher wins.
- If still tied, proceed to the bronze-medal winning team...
- If still tied, proceed to the fourth-place team...
posted by DrJohnEvans at 10:35 AM on February 08, 2006
Oh yeah, the individual game tie situation.
The Individual Game Tie Situation
I like Amateur's idea of awarding the average of the player's rankings of the two teams. posted by DrJohnEvans at 10:41 AM on February 08, 2006
Looks good to me. Should we all re-post our picks (maybe in a new thread) once everything is settled? Or do you think you can wade through this mess? And of course, many thanks for being the leader on this, DrJohn.
posted by 86 at 11:02 AM on February 08, 2006
re-post away. I hung back and waited for the dust to settle. bwa ha ha. (not that it will necessarily help me).
posted by gspm at 11:08 AM on February 08, 2006
12 - Czech 11 - Sweden 10 - Canada 9 - Finland 8 - USA 7 - Russia 6 - Slovakia 5 - Germany 4 - Switzerland 3 - Latvia 2 - Kazakhstan 1 - Italy 13 goals in medal round.
posted by holden at 11:09 AM on February 08, 2006
Nah, keep posting the picks here—I've already got everything in a monster spreadsheet. The only way I could make it more efficient would be to find an RSS feed of the results and have the spreadsheet update automatically... ! But thank you for the offer.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 11:09 AM on February 08, 2006
Updated picks: 12 - Canada 11 - Czech 10 - Finland 9 - Sweden 8 - Russia 7 - USA 6 - Slovakia 5 - Switzerland 4 - Kazahkstan 3 - Germany 2 - Latvia 1 - Italy 17 goals in the medal round.
posted by grum@work at 11:49 AM on February 08, 2006
Well, this should at least get me in front of the TV for some hockey games, although, my lack of hockey-knowledge may net me the Costanza award. 12 - Russia 11 - Finland 10 - Canada 9 - Sweden 8 - Czech Republic 7 - USA 6 - Germany 5 - Slovakia 4 - Switzerland 3 - Kazakhstan 2 - Latvia 1 - Italy 15 goals in medal round
posted by redsnare at 11:56 AM on February 08, 2006
Repeat of my picks along with my total goals in medal games Czech Republic-12 Canada-11 Sweden-10 Russia-9 Finland-8 USA-7 Slovakia-6 Germany-5 Switzerland-4 Latvia-3 Kazakhstan-2 Italy-1 19 goals in medal games. njsk8r20 thanks for starting this up. DJE thanks for agreeing to run this bitch.
posted by HATER 187 at 12:49 PM on February 08, 2006
Thanks, HATER, but there's no need to repeat picks (unless you're changing them, of course). Everyone who has posted so far has been recorded. To confirm, I'll post a table closer to puck drop, maybe Monday or Tuesday.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 01:03 PM on February 08, 2006
You are welcome HATER. Thanks to everyone for playing and offering suggestions. Special thanks to DrJohnEvans for coming to my rescue. I like the rules just the way they are. Mad props to justgary for posting this on the sidelines. BTW, DrJohn, what is the pick deadline?
posted by njsk8r20 at 01:13 PM on February 08, 2006
I imagine the deadline should be the puck drop of the first game, which occurs next Wednesday, at 11:30am Torino time. So, 5:30am EST Wednesday morning.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 01:21 PM on February 08, 2006
I'm in -- OH CANADA - 12 CZECH - 11 FINLAND - 10 SWEDEN - 9 RUSSIA - 8 USA - 7 SLOVAKIA - 6 GERMANY - 5 SWITZERLAND - 4 KAZAHKHSTAN - 3 LATVIA - 2 ITALY - 1 18 Goals in medal games
posted by wingnut4life at 06:43 PM on February 08, 2006
(12) Sweden: Lundqvist and Axelsson kick some ass defensively, and Alfredsson provides the goals. (11) Upper Mexico: I would have picked them for first place, but betting on the favorites is for pussies. Yeah, you heard me. Pussies. (10) Czech Republic: The Dominator stands on his head. Then he freaks the fuck out and assaults a player from the other team. He gets back in net and juggles three hockey pucks and an apple. He eats the apple while juggling. Afterwards, he stands on his head again. Repeat ad nauseum. Hasek’s multitasking gets this team a medal. (9) USA: I’d have ranked the U.S. higher, but I’m hoping for an upset. What? What’s that? Chris Chelios? Okay, forget the upset. (8) Russia: They won’t medal. If Russia does somehow sneak into the finals, it will be more about fear than skill. If they lose, look for an article on annanova about a curious streak of headless horses found in Siberia, followed shortly by a spate of “lower body injuries” to the least successful Russian players. (7) Finland: Remember this name: Hannu Toivonen. If Hannu is hurt, forget that name. You know what, forget that name anyway. Forget I said anything. (6) Slovakia: Being the seventh-best hockey country on the planet is nothing to scoff at. Go look at a map. Slovakia is tiny. So is the Czech Republic, for that matter. Both countries are surrounded by other countries that suck at hockey. Why is this weird little pocket in Europe so good at hockey? I don’t get it. When the Czechs and the Slovaks parted ways, they disbanded what was probably the most talented hockey hotspot (per capita) on the planet. (5) Germany: I don’t think Marco Sturm will be able to play. Marcel Goc will probably be the only forward whose name you recognize on this team. After the first few games, Kolzig is gonna get F-ed in the B by the big boys. Incidentally, “F-ed in the B by the Big Boys” is not a movie I’d recommend you watch. The cinematography was okay, but the plot was terrible. (4) Switzerland: Aebischer will play well enough to get Martina Hingis’s phone number, but she won’t return his calls. He thought he had a chance. Tough break, dude. At least you’re not from Kazahkhstan. (3) Latvia: Same deal with the Czechs and the Slovaks. I’m sure they have some good players, but just Latvia is just Latvia. (2) Kazahkhstan: An H followed by a K, followed by another H. Confusing spelling nets this team an early exit. (1) Gondoliers: These guys got in on an Olympic technicality. I played pro hockey in Italy for two years. Wait, maybe I didn’t. Does it matter if I did or not? No. No it doesn’t. Hockey is not important in Italy.
posted by Samsonov14 at 08:41 PM on February 08, 2006
Samsonov14... you crack me up... Thanks for the commentary.. Vi ponymyity po russki?
posted by skydivedad at 09:19 PM on February 08, 2006
Funny, funny stuff. You need a tiebreaker Sammy.
posted by 86 at 07:21 AM on February 09, 2006
I thought that with the Dr's new system we didn't need a tiebreaker any longer. There was one built right into our picks, which I found nice.
posted by qbert72 at 08:34 AM on February 09, 2006
You need a tiebreaker Sammy. 86, I think the Q is right. Just in case, though, I will say that in the medal rounds there will be four hundred and eighty-seven (487) goals. I think this Olympics is going to be the most exciting Olympics ever.
posted by Samsonov14 at 12:43 PM on February 09, 2006
Is that a prime number? Guess not. BTW, grum, can you figure out how many possible combinations of these team rankings there are?
posted by njsk8r20 at 01:33 PM on February 09, 2006
Should just be number of teams raised to the number of teams, shouldn't it? I can never remeber probability theory. n Choose p or something. There's a button on your calculator.
posted by yerfatma at 01:39 PM on February 09, 2006
The only problem with my tiebreaker suggestion is that there are no consolation games. Now, this is good for the pool, because we wouldn't want to award points for consolation wins, but it's bad for the tiebreaker because it makes it a little more difficult to establish the final standings. So to keep things fair we should establish how we'll rank the teams at the end of the tournament. How about this: 1. Gold medal winner 2. Silver medal winner 3. Bronze medal winner 4. Bronze medal loser 5–8. Quarterfinal losers. 9–12. Didn't make it out of pool play. Here's how we can rank the teams within the 5–8 and 9–12 brackets: 1. Most wins. 2. If tied, fewest losses. 3. If still tied, head-to-head results. 4. If still tied, best goal differential. 5. If still tied, most goals scored. 6. If still tied, sum up the ranks of the semifinalist teams that beat each team. The team which lost to the higher-ranking teams wins. 7. If still tied, I will run a simulated NHL 2004 game between the two teams to determine the winner. The stats from the quarterfinal game would be included when dealing with the 5–8 teams. How does that sound? And yes, I realize that I've just defined a tiebreaker for the tiebreaker. I'm looking forward to using it.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 01:47 PM on February 09, 2006
Sounds great. May it not go too far down that tiebreaker list, and may you play NHL 2004 only because you want to.
posted by chicobangs at 02:02 PM on February 09, 2006
yerfatma, [12] [x^y] [12] = 8.9161E+12 I don't think it will have to come down to all that DJE, but I'm glad to see you are prepared.
posted by njsk8r20 at 02:37 PM on February 09, 2006
What a great idea! Here are my picks: Canada 12 Sweden 11 Czech 10 USA 9 Finland 8 Russia 7 Slovakia 6 Germany 5 Switzerland 4 Latvia 3 Kazakhstan 2 Italy 1 Can't wait to see how this turns out ...
posted by jane at 02:38 PM on February 09, 2006
8.9161E+12 Maybe it's 12 Pick 2, which might be 144. Let's just say you won't be getting your degree in statistics from the University of SpofiOnline today. Not until we hire a new professor.
posted by yerfatma at 02:46 PM on February 09, 2006
With a little help, I think I got it. 39,916,800 possibilities, I don't know, that still sounds high.
posted by njsk8r20 at 03:29 PM on February 09, 2006
BTW, grum, can you figure out how many possible combinations of these team rankings there are? Well, there are 12 teams for 12 positions. 12 different teams can finish in first place. After that, only 11 different teams can finish 2nd. After that, only 10 different teams can finish in 3rd. Etc...etc. 12*11*10*9*8*7*6*5*4*3*2*1=12! (factorial) 12! = 479,001,600 If you think that seems high, here is an example. Imagine we are only using 4 teams A, B, C, D. Here are the combinations for the 4 teams (order: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th): ABCD ABDC ACBD ACDB ADBC ADCB BACD BADC BCAD BCDA BDAC BDCA CABD CADB CBAD CBDA CDAB CDBA DABC DACB DBAC DBCA DCAB DCBA That's 24 different orders for 4 teams. That's 4*3*2*1 = 4!
posted by grum@work at 03:41 PM on February 09, 2006
Of course, if we are being realistic, there are some teams that just won't finish first (or last). If we were to group them (teams that finish no lower than 6th, teams that finish no higher than 7th), we could come up with a better representation of the possible finishes. 6! * 6! = 518400
posted by grum@work at 03:43 PM on February 09, 2006
BDCA is totally the winner.
posted by Samsonov14 at 03:50 PM on February 09, 2006
I feel like that scene in scanners!
posted by willthrill72 at 03:54 PM on February 09, 2006
fyi, the Excel command for 12! is =FACT(12) I learned something today. I'm going home now.
posted by njsk8r20 at 04:03 PM on February 09, 2006
fyi, the Excel command for 12! is =FACT(12) Thanks for that bit of personal info. I am now haXxor ur puterz. |33+
posted by NoMich at 04:33 PM on February 09, 2006
re: the tiebreaker. if there's a shoot-out in a medal round game do the goals scored in said shoot-out count towards the total?
posted by goddam at 08:45 PM on February 09, 2006
Ok here are my picks. 12-Canada 11-Czech Republic 10-Russia 9-USA 8-Sweden 7-Slovakia 6-Germany 5-Finland 4-Switzerland 3-Italy 2-Latvia 1-Kazakhstan Total goals - 12
posted by skydivemom at 10:08 PM on February 09, 2006
re: the tiebreaker. if there's a shoot-out in a medal round game do the goals scored in said shoot-out count towards the total? I believe it is handled the same way as regular international shootouts. The winning team in a shootout is only awarded one goal (to break the tie), regardless of the number of shootout goals it takes.
posted by grum@work at 11:40 PM on February 09, 2006
What grum said. The NHL does it this way as well, so it should work fine for us.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 12:30 AM on February 10, 2006
Rangers Czech Republic - 12 Russia - 11 Canada - 10 Red Wings Sweden - 9 Finland - 8 USA - 7 Slovakia - 6 Switzerland - 5 Latvia - 4 Germany - 3 Kazakhstan - 2 Italy - 1 Total goals in the two medal games (right?) = 14 PLEASE DON'T BEAT ME UP FELLOW CANADIANS.
posted by mkn at 12:45 AM on February 10, 2006
i have no idea what I'm doing, as you can see from my list earlier, but you'd better add in my goals for the tie breaker, just in case. Goals = 16
posted by owlhouse at 05:30 AM on February 10, 2006
i have no idea what I'm doing My money is on owlhouse.
posted by 86 at 08:32 AM on February 10, 2006
PLEASE DON'T BEAT ME UP FELLOW CANADIANS. posted by mkn at 12:45 AM CST on February 10 We won't beat you up. We'll just ban you from Tim Horton's.
posted by grum@work at 09:54 AM on February 10, 2006
Finland - 12 Canada - 11 Czeck Mix - 10 USA - 9 Sweden - 8 Russia - 7 Latvia - 6 Germany - 5 Slovakia - 4 Switzerland - 3 Italy - 2 Kazahkstan - 1 16 goals I hope spelling doesn't count
posted by rainbaby at 01:22 PM on February 10, 2006
Is this a Hanoi Rocks reference? Close. Monty Python.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 03:18 PM on February 10, 2006
Sweden-12 Canada- 11 Czhech - 10 Russia- 9 USA- 8 Slovakia- 7 Finland - 6 Switzerland-5 Germany - 4 Latvia - 3 Kazakhastan -2 Italy- 1 Goals 14
posted by tselson at 04:04 PM on February 10, 2006
Canada-12 Sweden-11 Czech Republic-10 USA-9 Russia-8 Slovakia-7 Finland-6 Latvia-5 Switzerland-4 Germany-3 Italy-2 Kazakhstan-1 21 goals in the medal round.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 04:20 PM on February 10, 2006
7. If still tied, I will run a simulated NHL 2004 game between the two teams to determine the winner. What happens when that game ties?
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 04:23 PM on February 10, 2006
Der shootout, YYM. Der shootout.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 04:34 PM on February 10, 2006
7. If still tied, I will run a simulated NHL 2004 game between the two teams to determine the winner. Who is going to be the other person to run the simulation? Are you getting players from the local population, or from a different country? Is this other person (as well as yourself) going to be tested? If we find Popecia or elevated red blood cell counts, are you disqualified? What if you decide to run a betting ring with the local mafia, is Wayne Gretzky going to lie about knowing? This is all way too confusing for me...
posted by wingnut4life at 09:47 PM on February 10, 2006
I think he means he'll set it to run AI vs AI. No person's needed (except for the one to start it).
posted by mkn at 09:57 PM on February 10, 2006
I think he means he'll set it to run AI vs AI. No person's needed (except for the one to start it). What if there is a glitch in the matrix? Do we need to supply to 10.2 jigawatts to activate the flux capacitor?
posted by wingnut4life at 10:12 PM on February 10, 2006
Czech Republic-12 Sweden-11 USA-10 Canada-9 Russia-8 Slovakia-7 Finland-6 Germany-5 Switzerland-4 Kazakhstan-3 Latvia-2 Italy-1 total medal round goals: 21
posted by goddam at 11:13 PM on February 10, 2006
Anyone care to venture an over/under for goals scored by the Canadian Women? 16 against the Italians and 2 already in the first 7 minutes against the Russians.... I see 40 in pool play alone.... Or which will be greater, the number of goals scored by the Italians or goals allowed by Canadian goaltending in pool play.....
posted by elovrich at 09:50 AM on February 12, 2006
Admittedly I know nothing about hockey (looks kinda like soccer on ice to me). So I decided to call the psychic friends network to get the results ahead of time. Czech Republic-12 Russia-11 Canada-10 Sweden-9 USA-8 Finland-7 Slovakia-6 Germany-5 Switzerland-4 Kazakhstan-3 Latvia-2 Italy-1 total goals = 17
posted by Folkways at 11:11 AM on February 12, 2006
Anyone care to venture an over/under for goals scored by the Canadian Women? 16 against the Italians and 2 already in the first 7 minutes against the Russians.... I see 40 in pool play alone.... I have to admit, this is the first time I actually sat down and watched a women's hockey game, and wow am I impressed! Not only are they cute (if you can get a glimpse through their mask) but they can play some hockey! Did anyone see the scrum in the corner when the Russian boarded that Canadian girl? Boy have I missed out -- I've just gained a lot of respect for these fine women...
posted by wingnut4life at 12:47 PM on February 12, 2006
Did anyone see the scrum in the corner when the Russian boarded that Canadian girl? Boy have I missed out -- I've just gained a lot of respect for these fine women... I thought that Piper was going to throw a punch, but Wickenheiser held her back. The game is a little slower pace and a little sloppier than a Junior B game, but it's definitely entertaining if the teams are competitive. BTW, I'm curious to see if Wickenheiser will be inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame when she becomes eligible.
posted by grum@work at 06:19 PM on February 12, 2006
Ok, Canadian women have 28 thru 2 games with the Swedes up on Tuesday....can they get 12 again to cover my proposed over/under??
posted by elovrich at 03:53 AM on February 13, 2006
Canada - 12 Sweden - 11 Czech Republic - 10 Russia - 9 Finland - 8 USA - 7 Slovakia - 6 Germany - 5 Switzerland - 4 Latvia - 3 Kazakhstan - 2 Italy - 1 goals in two medal games 12
posted by gspm at 06:58 AM on February 13, 2006
but it's definitely entertaining if the teams are competitive. Which is why I did not suggest a women's pool. It only took at least 8 yrs for USA to catch up to Canada. It will probably take another 8 yrs for the rest of the world's women to catch up. I can't wait for the time when Canada vs USA for gold is no longer a given.
posted by njsk8r20 at 08:01 AM on February 13, 2006
Czech - 12 Canada - 11 Sweden - 10 Russia - 9 Slovakia - 8 USA - 7 Finland - 6 Germany - 5 Kazakhstan - 4 Switzerland - 3 Italy - 2 Latvia - 1 Goals - 13
posted by garfield at 08:58 AM on February 13, 2006
Okay, I'll put up a confirmation thread tonight.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 04:38 PM on February 13, 2006
I was in a NFL pool that worked like this and thought it was interesting. There are 12 teams so you asign points 1-12 to the teams. Everytime that team wins you get the points you allotted them. Ex. Canada-12 Czech Republic-11 Finland-10 Germany-9 Switzerland-8 Italy-7 Sweden-6 Slovakia-5 USA-4 Russia-3 Latvia-2 Kazakhstan-1 So every time Canada wins you get 12pts, everytime USA wins you get 4 pts