And with the new format for Nationals, we get to see how the ties play out, how large the group tied is and what tie-breakers are ultimately used, and how equitable they are.
Here are the standings for the top-4 and ties teams listed in the order TennisLink shows. You'll note I'm including schedule strength (using my top-10 average ratings for opponents through all matches played), sets won, and games won, all not included on TennisLink.
| Section | Record | Schedule | Courts | Sets | Games |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Florida | 4-0 | 3.97 | 14-6 | 29-14 | 201-149 |
| Southern | 4-0 | 3.97 | 13-7 | 28-18 | 215-178 |
| Caribbean | 3-1 | 3.93 | 12-8 | 28-18 | 219-155 |
| Texas | 3-1 | 3.92 | 12-8 | 28-20 | 205-171 |
| New England | 3-1 | 3.95 | 12-8 | 24-22 | 183-187 |
| Pacific NW | 3-1 | 3.96 | 11-9 | 27-22 | 200-169 |
| MoValley | 3-1 | 4.00 | 10-10 | 25-26 | 181-195 |
We see there was a 2-way tie for first at 4-0 and it was pretty easily broken by the individual courts won/lost tie-breaker.
But then there were 5 teams for 2 spots, with three of the teams being tied on courts at 12-8. It is interesting that the two with the easier schedules came out on top of the tie-breaker as they lost fewer sets than New England, but New England's tougher schedule is very well why they were a bit back on those stats.
It is interesting that there were two 2-2 teams that were 12-8 on courts, one SoCal had the toughest schedule of all teams at 4.01 so that was likely a factor keeping them from being 3-1 and taking a semi spot.
Unlike the 5.0+ men, there does not appear to be an issue due to the flawed tie-breaker the USTA uses, but schedule strengths not being balanced could very well have been a factor.
Note that there easily could have been more teams at 3-1, so a 5-way tie could have been larger.
No comments:
Post a Comment