The Big 12 has confirmed that round robin record is not used when breaking a multi team tie if not all the teams played each other, even if one team swept all the others. This is how the tiebreaker was written, and it's what my tiebreaker site has been assuming.
Yesterday, had around 35k pageviews, which is what I'd expect around 10 days from the end of the basketball regular season. That's crazy considering there's only one football conference on the site. I hope to add more football conferences next season.
Here's a short thread on two remaining ambiguities in the tiebreaker. In each case, I'm pretty sure I'm interrupting things the way the B12 would, bit it's not literally exactly how it's written.
Per the Austin newspaper, Texas has not clicked the CCG according to a Big 12 source. That means the Big 12 interpretation of the tiebreak procedure does not match mine. I really hope they get more specific about their interpretation, then.
@TedFlintKansas
WBB edition
Get a bucket: Angie Welle
Get a defensive stop: Lexi Donarski
Make a three: Stacy Frese
Get a rebound: Chelsea Poppens
Make 2 free throws: Bridget Carleton
Go for 30 points in a game: Ashley Joens
@botnikstudios
@pitchfork
This airport has hired mindless animals who dream of retaliating against masters. I can't believe they would simply continue to do that. Unfortunately that is exactly what happens. I think anyone who travels regularly through this airport is so incompetent.
Here's a brief thread on why I think the conference interpretation of their own tiebreaker appears to be wrong. I say "appears" because they haven't really told us anything yet other than they believe UT hasn't clinched the CCG.
Monday had around 89k pageviews, the third-busiest day since I started keeping track in 2017 (and I doubt any day was anywhere near that busy prior to that).
#1
was March 5, 2023 (the last day of bball regular season) and
#2
was three days prior to that.
@botnikstudios
@Babycastles
This place is very strong at comedy, but overall there's really no reason to go here. It's very basic. Drinks are very basic. You are guaranteed a bad night.
I am ready to change my tiebreaker logic as soon as it is officially announced that a sweep wins a round-robin tiebreaker even if not all teams have played. Here's a link to a preview of the updated logic:
If they would just explain those four scenarios, everything would be cleared up. But I think they won't because a lot of people would be poking holes in their logic. So they cross their fingers and hope Texas wins, and they can fix it in the off-season.
@Hassel_Chris
@mattvanwinkle
@BigJ52
@ChrisMWilliams
To make it clear, ISU needs to win out and have either OU or OSU lose a game. There might be some weird situation where ISU can lose a game and still make it in, but this is by far the easiest route in.
Trivia: asks question. answer is the Lego typewriter set.
Me: shows the team my Lego typewriter set
Trivia: asks question. answer is Olivetti Lettera 35 typewriter
Me: shows the team my Olivetti Lettera 35 typewriter
I swear I'm not a weird typewriter guy...
#triviaweekend
Since it seems the new round-robin sweep logic has basically been released to the media, I've gone ahead and updated the main tiebreaker page to use the new logic. As always, please let me know if you notice any issues.
I have added an alternate model that uses what might be the conference interpretation of their rules. This is only a guess since they haven't clarified that interpretation, but this is the only way UT hasn't clinched that I can come up with.
"Win percentage against the next highest placed common opponent in the standings." Clearly UT is not next-highest because they are above them. You can say KSU should be in over OU due to record v OSU. I think there's no way the B12 does this bc skipping UT record makes no sense.
is up and running for the 2022-23 season. Some conferences have not released brackets yet, but I've updated the brackets that are available, including date/time/tv info where available. As always, let me know if you see any issues.
All the conference MBB and WBB tiebreakers should be up and running now. It looks like Sagarin ratings are no longer being done for MBB this season, so I'm using RealTimeRPI to autofill future game results for both MBB and WBB. As usual, everything is at
Thanks to
@Fergensteiin
for pointing it out to me.
(I deleted an earlier version of this because I forgot the "if not all the teams played each other" part, which was very important.)
@WideRtNattyLt
If ISU beats Texas and loses to WVU, the scenario that keeps us out is Texas losing to both KSU and Kansas (or losing to one and having the other cancelled), Baylor over KSU, and OU/OSU both winning out. I don't see another one (outside of other cancellations, maybe).
From Jan 1 through yesterday, over 42k brackets had been generated at . Based on historical data, I'm expecting 400k-500k over the next 18 days.
Of those 42k+, here's the breakdown by conference:
I've already received two emails today with two different scenarios on one of these issues. Here's one of those scenarios: UT and KSU lose, while OU and ISU win. OU is
#1
based on record vs ISU and then head to head vs UT. Why is OSU not
#2
based on record vs OU?
Here's the other issue which is more problematic and likely: If UT, OU, KSU win and OSU loses, UT is
#1
at 8-1 overall. I have OU
#2
over KSU based on record vs UT. Simple enough. But the tiebreaker says:
Even though it says "another group", I'm assuming it applies to the tied group as well, so because you look at record prior to the tiebreak, record vs OU is skipped.
... a team that has been placed out of the currently-tied teams is not included in future tiebreak logic among the remaining tied teams. (issue
#1
). The problem is they forgot about the scenario where a team is alone in first and there a tie for 2nd, which looks very likely.
The B12 tiebreaker says "When arriving at another group of tied teams while comparing records, use each team’s win % against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to that group’s own tie-breaking procedure) rather than the performance against individual tied teams."
A similar situation happens if OU, UT, and KSU are tied. The conference could clear this up now, but they are hoping Texas beats Tech and all remaining scenarios are relatively simple.
But that's literally how it's written. I'm going with how I'm sure it will be interpreted, but KSU fans could have a case they should be in based on the literal wording of the tiebreaker.
My 2022 Big 12 Football Standings Generator is up and running. I'm not sure at this point if I'll add any additional football conferences. As always, I'll be doing all Div I conferences for MBB and WBB in a couple months.
@scottreister
@cfchangs9
I'm pretty sure this is purely an academic decision. She already spent 5 years at ISU (she was a redshirt her first year) so she's probably moving on to grad school elsewhere.
Four of those five could be simple to explain and could clear up a lot (UT loses, two or three of the other three teams win). The fifth scenario is if all four teams lose -- Texas is alone in first, but there's a huge tie for second that could involve games other than those 4.
This past Thursday, Saturday, and Sunday were the 24th, 15th and 7th busiest days for in the past 6 years. That's especially unusual this early -- the rest of the top 25 are all within the final 6 days of their respective regular seasons (Tues-Sun).
As we enter the last 10 days of peak traffic (~70% of my annual traffic), here are the conferences that have generated at least 1% of the brackets created since Jan 1 on :
35.5% Big 10 MBB
14.9% Big East MBB
13.2% ACC MBB
12.2% Big 12 MBB
6.9% Big 10 WBB
I've enabled the ability to simulate canceled future games on . We're close enough to the end of the season that I figure it's pretty necessary at this point.
There are 16 possible scenarios involving the top four teams (2^4). In the conference release yesterday evening, they explain 11 of those (8 where Texas wins, 3 where Texas and exactly two other teams lose). That means there are only five others to explain.
One new feature at : if the schedule is updated since opening the page, it will tell you to refresh when you try to submit a scenario. This will fix issues of past games having incorrect results due to leaving the tab open for an extended period of time.
If KSU wins today, their only two losses would be UT and OSU. OU's losses are OSU and KU. If record v UT were ignored, KSU would hold tiebreaker over OU due to record vs KU. I assumed record v UT would not be ignored, and the release confirms that. But the wording was ambiguous.
The tiebreaker says a couple key things:
"Record against the next highest placed common opponent in the standings"
"When arriving at another group of tied teams while comparing records, use each team’s win percentage against the collective tied teams as a group...
...(prior to that group’s own tie-breaking procedure) rather than the performance against individual tied teams."
I admittedly ignore the word "next" in the first quote if UT is alone in first. It makes no sense to skip record vs UT in the 2nd place tiebreaker in that scenario.
I just realized the two issues in my previous thread might be related. The reason it says "next highest" in "Win percentage against the next highest placed common opponent in the standings" (issue
#2
) is likely to make it clear that...
So if UT, OU, OSU are tied and OU gets the
#1
seed based on the initial tiebreakers, record vs OU should not be used to determine the 2 seed. They are not "next". And that would be looking at record AFTER the group tiebreaker, not before.
@Brettmorey1
@JordanEMAW
FYI, the AAC basketball tiebreaker is an example of where it specifically looks at whether one team could match another team's record within a tiebreaker if they played the same number of games in that tiebreaker.
With traffic at ramping up, it's clear which conference is getting the most attention (rightfully so, given the huge logjam).
Out of around 46,000 brackets generated in the past week or so:
55.2% Big 10 MBB
8.9% ACC MBB
6.3% Big 12 MBB
6.0% Big East MBB
I checked all the tournament brackets vs my calculations and found three issues: the aforementioned SEC mbb and AAC wbb issues and the MWC mbb 8/9 seeds, which appears to be the same issue as the other two. I'll change the logic for those three conferences slightly next year.
That's over 45k brackets in that time period. I'm projecting somewhere around 125k more in the next 10 days. As usual, I apologize in advance for any server issues that may arise.
What I think the tiebreaker is saying by "next" is "outside the group of tied teams". And I think the second quote supports this interpretation -- when comparing against a group of tied teams, you look at the record of a group of teams only before the tie is broken, not after.