Great Article Bashing R.P.I. in the NYTimes

Discussion in 'Basketball' started by hawk2012, Mar 10, 2012.

  1. hawk2012

    hawk2012 Well-Known Member

    This provides some hope for Iowa's NIT chances.

    "When I posed this question to David Worlock, the associate director for the men’s tournament, his answer was unambiguous: we were supposed to be picking the best teams. The committee members spoke frequently of the “shirts and skins testâ€￾: who would beat whom if they actually played a game?

    Under this paradigm, one particular factor tended to dominate in our discussion of the teams: quality wins. Which teams had showed they could win against tough opponents, especially away from home?

    The focus on quality wins, it turns out, contradicts another criterion that the selection committee weighs heavily: the Ratings Percentage Index, or R.P.I. The system, developed in 1981 in the era of the DOS prompt and the Commodore 64, tends to give computer rankings and other objective attempts at analysis a bad name.

    Over the long run, R.P.I. has predicted the outcome of N.C.A.A. games more poorly than almost any other system. And it shows some especially implausible results this season. Southern Mississippi, for instance, was somehow ranked ahead of Missouri, even though it has endured seven losses to Missouri’s four (some of them against middling teams like Houston, Texas-El Paso, Alabama-Birmingham and Denver).


    But to a large extent, the N.C.A.A. process is a case of two wrongs making a right, counterbalancing R.P.I. flaws by making a series of mental adjustments to it. Using a more reliable system as the point of departure would give the committee a better way through the unenviable task of sorting through the bubble."
  2. DwayneTwill

    DwayneTwill Well-Known Member

    Getting beat by Campbell should hurt, too.
  3. olivecourt

    olivecourt Well-Known Member

    That's what's so dumb about the RPI. The RPI doesn't care that we lost to Campbell, it only cares that we played them. Had we beaten Campbell but lost to Wisconsin, our RPI would be exactly the same.
  4. ChosenChildren

    ChosenChildren Well-Known Member

    actually, i think it is the opposite. If we had beaten Campbell and lost once to Wisky, I think our RPI would be much higher......
  5. H8IAST8

    H8IAST8 Well-Known Member

  6. H8IAST8

    H8IAST8 Well-Known Member

    when I said the rpi is a joke 1 month ago a got slammed on here.
  7. herbyhawk

    herbyhawk Banned

    just goes to show how bad the RPI is, NW is 1-10 against teams in the top 50 of the RPI, and still has a high RPI, after time losing has to have a effect on the rankings. playing against top teams has to have a reward for winning and punishment for losing, otherwise teams can just schedule heavies and lose and can get in
  8. bcl20

    bcl20 Well-Known Member

    A simple understanding of statistics tells you it's a joke. I've been saying I hate it for a while too.
  9. vonwilhelm

    vonwilhelm Well-Known Member

    RPI...Rotten Power Indicator.
  10. Cydkar

    Cydkar Well-Known Member

    The media and fans definitely totally overrate RPI. It's just a tool in a bag of tools being used.
  11. WhitUp

    WhitUp Well-Known Member

    Where I see the RPI is flawed is comparing BCS conference vs mid-major and mostly low-major conferences. The schedules are so different I don't know how you can really compare teams who beat nobody and teams who lost to good teams.
  12. big10fan

    big10fan Well-Known Member

    its one of those things that you bring up when it makes you look good and dismiss when you look bad. that said, it is a really weird system, and i think an outdated one. i don't know what you'd replace it with though, its been in use so long and people hate change (even when its for the better).
  13. H8IAST8

    H8IAST8 Well-Known Member

    just go to "computers"rpi,kenpom,sagarin, etc. average the 3 to get computer rankings