tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5644587556919650515.post1678783870021356455..comments2023-10-11T11:02:06.245-04:00Comments on PROFANE: Completely Irrelevant RPI Data (To the Pollsters) Final 08 EditionProfanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05131628865279071396noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5644587556919650515.post-14254911120590464252008-03-13T13:05:00.000-04:002008-03-13T13:05:00.000-04:00Anonymous,Your argument relies on mis-statement of...Anonymous,<BR/><BR/>Your argument relies on mis-statement of my position. That is a textbook straw man argument.<BR/><BR/>It was inherent in your first post, yet I gave you a pass in the hopes that you might, indeed, be interested in a serious argument. <BR/><BR/>Given that your latest comment merely represents a re-statement of your past posts coupled with yet more incivility, including personal attacks, I am not going to bother with a further response on the merits. Best wishes.Profanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05131628865279071396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5644587556919650515.post-1808795025236151472008-03-13T10:53:00.000-04:002008-03-13T10:53:00.000-04:00Go back and re-learn your logical fallacies. That...Go back and re-learn your logical fallacies. That's not a straw man argument. You'll have more credibility, if you respond to the point made.<BR/><BR/>RPI is a badly flawed measure in general. Its specific application this year with respect to Davidson is exacerbated in its error by adjustments made by the NCAA. <BR/><BR/>Your hall of shame is predicated on the assumption that the RPI is an accurate measure of the quality of the teams. That's a ridiculous assumption, but even within the parameters of your assumption, Davidson's poll rankings don't vary much from its RPI -- unless that RPI is contaminated by adjustments which defy reality.<BR/><BR/>In sum, your analysis rests on a critical assumption. Evidence and argument which assail the credibility of your essential assumption do not constitute a straw man. That's ridiculous for you to assert.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5644587556919650515.post-22633219310003939292008-03-12T13:08:00.000-04:002008-03-12T13:08:00.000-04:00Anonymous,Straw man argument. Try again.Anonymous,<BR/><BR/>Straw man argument. Try again.Profanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05131628865279071396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5644587556919650515.post-24162090016984015432008-03-12T12:44:00.000-04:002008-03-12T12:44:00.000-04:00So you defend the ridiculous fiction? Because wit...So you defend the ridiculous fiction? Because without embracing the fiction of home/neutral used by the NCAA, even the RPI would have Davidson at 31 and your differential with the polls would diminish to irrelevance.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5644587556919650515.post-55454694238806333522008-03-12T12:27:00.000-04:002008-03-12T12:27:00.000-04:00Anonymous,Emotion often leads one to engage in juv...Anonymous,<BR/><BR/>Emotion often leads one to engage in juvenile personal attacks. Leave them at the door if you wish to comment here in the future. Shame on YOU.<BR/><BR/>Emotion is also the enemy of any good argument. In particular, yours fails to take account of the fact that one of the functions of this series is to cast a critical eye on the RPI. Arizona and Dayton, for example, remained in the top 25 of the RPI long after any rational basketball person would have placed them in a top 25 poll. The pollsters were also correct in ranking Notre Dame at a time when they were still in RPI purgatory.<BR/><BR/>As for the Sagarin rankings, their strength, taking into account margin of victory, is also their weakness. A win is a win, whether it be by one point on a buzzer-beating tre or by a thirty-three point blowout. Close counts in horseshoes and hand grenades, but not in basketball. Furthermore, Sagarin, like most computer rankings, rewards teams for running up the score long after a contest is finished. The "strength is weakness" argument works in the opposite direction for the RPI, which takes into account the result, the opponent, and the location (on which their does need to be some fine tuning on so-called neutral sites), but NOT the margin of victory.<BR/><BR/>Sagarin ratings are a predictive measure. The RPI is a rough measure of achievement. It is an apples to orange comparison. Asserting that "The statistical superiority of Sagarin over the RPI is well-established" is meaningless unless the goal of the ratings is addressed.Profanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05131628865279071396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5644587556919650515.post-69081434616083058422008-03-12T10:39:00.000-04:002008-03-12T10:39:00.000-04:00RPI is a ridiculous measure. Sagarin has Davidson...RPI is a ridiculous measure. Sagarin has Davidson ranked 26th and is typical of most computer rankings. The statistical superiority of Sagarin over the RPI is well-established. Your "hall of shame" evaluation is totally a function of using a woefully inadequate metric for comparison with the polls.<BR/><BR/>To demonstrate how silly the RPI is, compare the NCAA's ranking for Davidson (presently 41) with the one at Realtimerpi.com (presently 31). The difference? Davidson's game at UCLA is considered neutral by the NCAA and an away game by realtime. The games with UNC and Duke at Bobcats Arena in Charlotte are considered home games by the NCAA and neutral by realtime. Realtime recognizes reality since Davidson fans were a distinct minority at both games.<BR/><BR/>Any metric which fails to recognize the reality that playing UCLA in LA is an away game for the Wildcats has no place being used by anyone interested in accuracy or fairness.<BR/><BR/>Point your finger of shame in the mirror.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com