How do Roger Federer's 2004 through 2007 seasons compare to Novak's 2011 and 2015?

I took a look at what are considered to be Novak Djokovic's two best seasons (2011 and 2015) compare using an Estimated Dynamic NTRP Rating Report chart, so next up is Roger Federer's 2004 through 2007 run.

First, 2004.

He was well over 7.0 early in the year with consistently high results at the Australian Open, then hung around 7.0 much of the rest of the year but dipped with the Cincinnati and Olympics losses, then had some closer than expected wins in Bangkok and the Masters Cup to finish just under 7.0.  The average dynamic rating for the year was 7.00.

Next, 2005.

Arguably his best year record wise, 2015 did have him over 7.0 more consistently with high points around/over 7.1 at the majors and Indian Wells.  He dipped late again though with closer than expected matches in Bangkok and the Masters Cup again.  The average for the year was his high of 7.01.

Next, 2006.

This year looks similar to 2005 with some similar peaks, getting almost 7.2 at Wimbledon, and again finishing just under 7.0.  The average for this year was 6.99.

Last, 2007.

This year does not have the same peaks, but he hung right around 7.0 and managed to finish the year just over at 7.02.  But the average for the year was the low of this four year run at 6.97 as the same peaks weren't there.

Comparing to Novak's 2011 and 2015, they are very similar, perhaps Fed's 2005 having higher peaks, but Novak's 2011 being more consistent.  Those charts here for comparison.

Novak 2011.

His average of 7.04 is his high and a testament to his consistency.

And Novak 2015.

This average was just 6.95, his 2013 and 2014 actually having higher averages at 6.98 and 6.96.

What other seasons do you considered to be some of the best ever?

Past year Estimated Dynamic NTRP now available

I have posted the 2010 and 2011 end of regular season Estimated Dynamic NTRP ratings to the web-site for the Northwest Washington area. See the 2010 men, 2010 women, 2011 men, and 2011 women.

I should note a few things.

First, these ratings generally only include regular season matches.  No local, regional, sectional, or national playoffs are included, except I did include some for the 3.5 mens level for 2011.

Second, the final USTA NTRP ratings do a recalculation based on benchmark players at the end of the year and they do not simply use the current Dynamic NTRP.

Third, the USTA can and has elected to do mass bumps up/down at times to keep the levels balanced.

For these reasons, what you see as the final rating may not match the end of year NTRP from the USTA. But it is still interesting to look at.

2012 NCAA Tournament Observations and Potential Upsets

I posted my computer's full ratings and as well as who my computer says should have made the 68-team field earlier today.  But now it is time to look at who actually made the field and see what observations can be made and what we can learn from them.  The full list of teams with my computer's ratings is below.

First, it is always fun to look at the seeding and see how things panned out.  At the top, my computer agrees with 3 of the #1 seeds and 3 of the #2 seeds.  It says Syracuse should have been a #2 and Ohio State the #1, and then Duke is too high as a #2 and Memphis should have replaced them.  So all in all, not that far off here.

So where was the seeding way off?

Belmont is the most underrated team being a #14 seed, but my computer ranks them #27 which says they should have been around a #7 seed.  They play a #3 seed in Georgetown that is seeded slightly high (ranked #17 should have been a #5 seed) so this game is a potential upset.

Memphis is a #8 seed but being ranked #8 by my computer says they should have been a #2 seed.

St. Louis and Long Beach State are also small conference teams getting no respect as my computer ranks them #19 and #33, worthy of #5 and #9 seeds, but they received #9 and #12 seeds.

On the other side of things, Montana got in with their conferences automatic bid, but ranked #88 should have been around a #15 seed but received a #13 seed ahead of some at-large teams my computer ranks well ahead of them.

Southern Miss, somehow gets a #9 seed but being ranked #67 shouldn't have even been a bubble team let alone make the tournament.  I may eat crow on this, but do not pick them as one of your #9 upsets #8 seed games.

Colorado State also shouldn't have made it as an #11 seed being ranked #71.  Don't look for them to pull the upset of Murray State either.

San Diego State gets a #6 seed but being ranked #44 should have had more like a #12 seed.  The committee set them up to fail having to play #49 NC State, good upset chance here.

Notre Dame and Temple are a bit high at #7 and #5 respectively, as they are ranked #40 and #32 more in line with a #10 and #8 seed.

What do you think?

Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
1	Kentucky	87.688	32-2	73.497	+0, -1.560
2	Michigan St	86.530	27-7	75.276	+2, +0.691
3	Ohio State	86.306	27-7	74.682	+2, +0.614
4	North Carolina	85.856	29-5	73.825	-2, -1.013
5	Kansas	85.262	27-6	75.069	-2, -0.849
6	Missouri	85.045	30-4	72.937	+1, +1.224
7	Syracuse	84.534	31-2	73.480	-1, -0.672
8	Memphis	83.226	26-8	72.864	+3, +0.904
9	Wichita St	82.856	26-5	71.967	-1, -0.208
10	Indiana	82.468	25-8	73.863	-1, -0.476
11	Vanderbilt	82.145	24-10	74.450	+9, +1.286
12	Baylor	82.034	26-7	74.585	+2, +0.206
13	Duke	81.894	27-6	75.163	-3, -0.590
14	Wisconsin	81.863	24-9	74.377	-1, -0.104
15	Louisville	81.710	26-9	74.378	+9, +1.650
16	Marquette	81.507	25-7	74.091	-4, -0.676
17	Georgetown DC	81.154	22-8	74.322	+1, -0.023
18	New Mexico	81.052	26-6	70.889	+3, +0.656
19	St Louis U.	81.045	24-7	71.787	-4, -0.659
20	Florida	80.995	23-10	74.278	-1, +0.095
21	Kansas St	80.694	21-10	74.094	-4, -0.510
22	Michigan	80.591	23-9	75.411	-6, -0.790
23	Florida St	80.452	24-9	74.404	+9, +1.144
24	Gonzaga	79.856	25-6	70.251	-2, -0.473
25	Iowa St	79.674	22-10	73.698	-2, -0.572
26	Creighton	79.586	28-5	71.435	+0, -0.167
27	Belmont	79.528	26-7	69.833	+1, -0.041
28	Murray St	79.477	27-1	68.534	+1, -0.059
29	UNLV	79.171	24-8	71.982	-4, -0.654
30	Texas	79.159	20-13	74.756	+1, -0.324
31	Virginia	79.124	22-9	71.795	-1, -0.371
32	Temple	79.075	24-7	73.768	-5, -0.650
33	Long Beach St	79.049	23-8	70.979	+3, +0.152
34	Cincinnati	79.012	24-10	72.603	+4, +0.461
35	Purdue	78.998	21-12	74.341	-1, -0.265
36	Alabama	78.952	21-11	74.083	-3, -0.322
37	St Mary's CA	78.593	25-5	69.489	+2, +0.106
38	Connecticut	78.463	20-13	74.596	+4, +0.505
39	California	78.369	24-9	71.122	-4, -0.881
40	Notre Dame	78.366	22-11	73.470	-3, -0.482
42	West Virginia	78.091	19-13	74.264	-1, -0.272
43	VA Commonwealth	77.982	28-6	69.791	+0, +0.073
44	San Diego St	77.509	24-7	71.409	+0, -0.208
45	Harvard	77.441	25-4	69.556	+2, -0.028
46	New Mexico St	77.303	24-9	69.409	+13, +0.587
49	North Carolina St	77.225	22-12	72.929	+12, +0.617
51	South Florida	77.171	19-13	74.445	-2, +0.109
53	St Bonaventure	76.847	20-11	71.963	+19, +0.855
54	Brigham Young	76.784	23-8	69.788	-4, -0.242
56	Xavier OH	76.718	21-12	73.939	-1, -0.040
57	Iona	76.660	25-7	69.323	-3, -0.103
59	Ohio U.	76.618	26-7	69.479	-2, -0.101
62	South Dakota St	76.523	25-7	68.956	-4, -0.195
67	Southern Miss	75.968	23-8	72.836	-7, -0.699
70	Davidson	75.798	24-7	68.300	-2, -0.479
71	Colorado St	75.795	20-11	72.550	+2, -0.107
77	Lehigh	75.398	25-7	66.579	+5, +0.352
85	Colorado	74.650	21-11	72.002	+20, +1.047
88	Montana	74.543	23-6	66.465	+2, +0.125
98	Lamar	73.923	21-11	68.848	+16, +0.834
103	Detroit Mercy	73.668	20-13	70.010	+13, +0.635
122	UNC-Asheville	72.509	21-9	67.032	+4, -0.086
125	Loyola-Maryland	72.325	24-8	68.357	+7, +0.096
129	Vermont	72.089	23-11	66.344	+17, +0.635
147	LIU-Brooklyn	71.205	25-8	66.390	+13, +0.591
180	Norfolk St	68.984	24-8	66.027	+1, -0.034
186	Western Kentucky	68.661	15-18	70.000	+19, +0.792
227	Mississippi Valley St	66.609	21-12	66.358	-6, -0.477

Who should have made the 68 team 2012 NCAA Tournament - Miami, Drexel, Tennessee, Seton Hall, and Arizona

We now know the 68 tournament teams, but who should have made it?  Below is the answer according to my computer.

The bold teams are the teams that won their conference tournament or received the automatic bid.  I've then filled in the rest of the 68 team field based on the highest rating by my computer.  I've then highlighted in red those teams that did not make the field.

There are 5 that have an argument for being left out, the highest rated of those being Miami-FL.  Yes, they were just 19-12, but West Virginia was 19-13 and had only a slightly tougher schedule.

Drexel is 27-6 and my computer likes them enough, but the committee must have dinged them for their weak schedule.

My computer also likes Tennessee enough but 17-14 just wasn't good enough despite the strong schedule.

Seton Hall has a decent gripe with 20 wins and a strong enough schedule.

And Arizona would be my computer's last at-large team with 23 wins and a decent schedule.

Who made it in that shouldn't have?

Southern Miss is in as a #9 seed, so no where near the bubble, and they have a nice looking 23-8 record, but my computer ranks them only #67, well back of the #52 that Arizona, my last at-large is at.  A #9 seed is certainly too high.

Xavier made it in as a #10 seed, also not close to the bubble, and is closer to making it on my list at #56, but too should have been left out or certainly not a #10 seed.

Colorado State ranks only #71 on my computer but somehow got a #11 seed.

BYU eked in as a #14 seed and has to play a first round game and at #54, just two spots behind #52 Arizona, one can make the argument this was ok.

And Iona, BYU's opponent in that first round game also received a #14 seed and at #57 is also close enough to justify it.

Now, just because a team made it my computer said shouldn't doesn't mean they won't win a round or two.  Anything can happen in a given game, and in the case of Southern Miss, Xavier, and Colorado State, they actually get a high enough seed that they don't have to face as strong an opponent.  But it doesn't change the fact that particularly Miami and Drexel should have made it in.


Thoughts on these teams being omitted and eking in?

More to come.

Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
1	Kentucky	87.688	32-2	73.497	+0, -1.560
2	Michigan St	86.530	27-7	75.276	+2, +0.691
3	Ohio State	86.306	27-7	74.682	+2, +0.614
4	North Carolina	85.856	29-5	73.825	-2, -1.013
5	Kansas	85.262	27-6	75.069	-2, -0.849
6	Missouri	85.045	30-4	72.937	+1, +1.224
7	Syracuse	84.534	31-2	73.480	-1, -0.672
8	Memphis	83.226	26-8	72.864	+3, +0.904
9	Wichita St	82.856	26-5	71.967	-1, -0.208
10	Indiana	82.468	25-8	73.863	-1, -0.476
11	Vanderbilt	82.145	24-10	74.450	+9, +1.286
12	Baylor	82.034	26-7	74.585	+2, +0.206
13	Duke	81.894	27-6	75.163	-3, -0.590
14	Wisconsin	81.863	24-9	74.377	-1, -0.104
15	Louisville	81.710	26-9	74.378	+9, +1.650
16	Marquette	81.507	25-7	74.091	-4, -0.676
17	Georgetown DC	81.154	22-8	74.322	+1, -0.023
18	New Mexico	81.052	26-6	70.889	+3, +0.656
19	St Louis U.	81.045	24-7	71.787	-4, -0.659
20	Florida	80.995	23-10	74.278	-1, +0.095
21	Kansas St	80.694	21-10	74.094	-4, -0.510
22	Michigan	80.591	23-9	75.411	-6, -0.790
23	Florida St	80.452	24-9	74.404	+9, +1.144
24	Gonzaga	79.856	25-6	70.251	-2, -0.473
25	Iowa St	79.674	22-10	73.698	-2, -0.572
26	Creighton	79.586	28-5	71.435	+0, -0.167
27	Belmont	79.528	26-7	69.833	+1, -0.041
28	Murray St	79.477	27-1	68.534	+1, -0.059
29	UNLV	79.171	24-8	71.982	-4, -0.654
30	Texas	79.159	20-13	74.756	+1, -0.324
31	Virginia	79.124	22-9	71.795	-1, -0.371
32	Temple	79.075	24-7	73.768	-5, -0.650
33	Long Beach St	79.049	23-8	70.979	+3, +0.152
34	Cincinnati	79.012	24-10	72.603	+4, +0.461
35	Purdue	78.998	21-12	74.341	-1, -0.265
36	Alabama	78.952	21-11	74.083	-3, -0.322
37	St Mary's CA	78.593	25-5	69.489	+2, +0.106
38	Connecticut	78.463	20-13	74.596	+4, +0.505
39	California	78.369	24-9	71.122	-4, -0.881
40	Notre Dame	78.366	22-11	73.470	-3, -0.482
41	Miami FL	78.351	19-12	73.727	-1, -0.061
42	West Virginia	78.091	19-13	74.264	-1, -0.272
43	VA Commonwealth	77.982	28-6	69.791	+0, +0.073
44	San Diego St	77.509	24-7	71.409	+0, -0.208
45	Harvard	77.441	25-4	69.556	+2, -0.028
46	New Mexico St	77.303	24-9	69.409	+13, +0.587
47	Drexel	77.258	27-6	68.492	-1, -0.219
48	Tennessee	77.233	17-14	73.863	-3, -0.348
49	North Carolina St	77.225	22-12	72.929	+12, +0.617
50	Seton Hall	77.192	20-12	73.299	+6, +0.465
51	South Florida	77.171	19-13	74.445	-2, +0.109
52	Arizona	77.147	23-11	71.043	+0, +0.245
53	St Bonaventure	76.847	20-11	71.963	+19, +0.855
59	Ohio U.	76.618	26-7	69.479	-2, -0.101
62	South Dakota St	76.523	25-7	68.956	-4, -0.195
70	Davidson	75.798	24-7	68.300	-2, -0.479
77	Lehigh	75.398	25-7	66.579	+5, +0.352
85	Colorado	74.650	21-11	72.002	+20, +1.047
88	Montana	74.543	23-6	66.465	+2, +0.125
98	Lamar	73.923	21-11	68.848	+16, +0.834
103	Detroit Mercy	73.668	20-13	70.010	+13, +0.635
122	UNC-Asheville	72.509	21-9	67.032	+4, -0.086
125	Loyola-Maryland	72.325	24-8	68.357	+7, +0.096
129	Vermont	72.089	23-11	66.344	+17, +0.635
147	LIU-Brooklyn	71.205	25-8	66.390	+13, +0.591
180	Norfolk St	68.984	24-8	66.027	+1, -0.034
186	Western Kentucky	68.661	15-18	70.000	+19, +0.792
227	Mississippi Valley St	66.609	21-12	66.358	-6, -0.477

College Basketball Week 19 Ratings and Rankings - It is tourney time!

This week's ratings and rankings are now posted.

Kentucky stays a pretty clear #1 but there are some other moves in the top-5, Michigan State and Ohio State jumping ahead of North Carolina and Kansas.

More to come on the tourney, but it is interesting that the computer agrees that Kentucky, Michigan State, and UNC are worthy #1 seeds, but it has Syracuse down at #7, with Ohio State being more worthy by the numbers.

The top-25 is below, the full rankings on the web-site.

Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
1	Kentucky	87.688	32-2	73.497	+0, -1.560
2	Michigan St	86.530	27-7	75.276	+2, +0.691
3	Ohio State	86.306	27-7	74.682	+2, +0.614
4	North Carolina	85.856	29-5	73.825	-2, -1.013
5	Kansas	85.262	27-6	75.069	-2, -0.849
6	Missouri	85.045	30-4	72.937	+1, +1.224
7	Syracuse	84.534	31-2	73.480	-1, -0.672
8	Memphis	83.226	26-8	72.864	+3, +0.904
9	Wichita St	82.856	26-5	71.967	-1, -0.208
10	Indiana	82.468	25-8	73.863	-1, -0.476
11	Vanderbilt	82.145	24-10	74.450	+9, +1.286
12	Baylor	82.034	26-7	74.585	+2, +0.206
13	Duke	81.894	27-6	75.163	-3, -0.590
14	Wisconsin	81.863	24-9	74.377	-1, -0.104
15	Louisville	81.710	26-9	74.378	+9, +1.650
16	Marquette	81.507	25-7	74.091	-4, -0.676
17	Georgetown DC	81.154	22-8	74.322	+1, -0.023
18	New Mexico	81.052	26-6	70.889	+3, +0.656
19	St Louis U.	81.045	24-7	71.787	-4, -0.659
20	Florida	80.995	23-10	74.278	-1, +0.095
21	Kansas St	80.694	21-10	74.094	-4, -0.510
22	Michigan	80.591	23-9	75.411	-6, -0.790
23	Florida St	80.452	24-9	74.404	+9, +1.144
24	Gonzaga	79.856	25-6	70.251	-2, -0.473
25	Iowa St	79.674	22-10	73.698	-2, -0.572

Giants vs Patriots Superbowl Preview

The Giants play New England on 2/5 in the Superbowl.

New York is ranked #5 by the computer with a 12-7 record and a rating of 85.925 against a schedule strength of 83.375. Their performance chart can be found below and shows they were up and down but finished very strong, their worst game being against Washington and best game being at Green Bay. They are 11-7-1 against the spread this year and the computer is 8-9-1 picking their games against the spread and 7-11 picking winners in their games.



New England is ranked #1 by the computer with a 15-3 record and a rating of 89.244 against a schedule strength of 80.935. Their performance chart can be found below and shows they were pretty consistent, their worst game being at Buffalo and best game being at Philadelphia. They are 10-8 against the spread this year and the computer is 6-11 picking their games against the spread and 13-4 picking winners in their games.



The teams played head to head and are separated by 2 degrees through ? as follows:


2 NY_Giants-->Buffalo-->New_England
2 NY_Giants-->Buffalo-->New_England
2 NY_Giants-->Dallas-->New_England
2 NY_Giants-->Dallas-->New_England
2 NY_Giants-->Miami-->New_England
2 NY_Giants-->Miami-->New_England
2 NY_Giants-->NY_Jets-->New_England
2 NY_Giants-->NY_Jets-->New_England
2 NY_Giants-->Philadelphia-->New_England
2 NY_Giants-->Philadelphia-->New_England
2 NY_Giants-->Washington-->New_England
2 NY_Giants-->Washington-->New_England


The spread was New England by 3.5 and has moved to around 3 and the computer agrees picking them by 3.3. Here is the pick using the format from the newsletter:

.NY Giants +3.5 over *. New England 3.3 0.2 0.603 0.506

Enjoy!


Newsletter pick format:

The x denotes the home team. The * denotes the pick to win the game. The . is just a place holder. The number before "over" is the best line I've found typically from Maddux Sports. The team on the left is the pick against the spread. The first column after the second team is what the computer predicts the winning team will win by. The next column is the difference between the Vegas line and that prediction. The next column is the confidence of my pick to win. The last column is the confidence of the pick against the spread.

Baltimore at New England 2012 Playoff Preview - New England to win, Baltimore to cover but it is close

Baltimore plays at New England on 1/22 in the AFC Championship.

Baltimore is ranked #5 by the computer with a 13-4 record and a rating of 85.745 against a schedule strength of 80.597. Their performance chart can be found below and shows they were pretty consistent except in their losses, their worst game being at San Diego and best game being against Pittsburgh. They are 8-8-1 against the spread this year and the computer is 6-10-1 picking their games against the spread and 11-6 picking winners in their games.



New England is ranked #1 by the computer with a 14-3 record and a rating of 89.360 against a schedule strength of 80.764. Their performance chart can be found below and shows they were up and down but pretty good late, their worst game being against NY Giants and best game being at Philadelphia. They are 10-7 against the spread this year and the computer is 6-11 picking their games against the spread and 13-4 picking winners in their games.



The teams are separated by 2 degrees as follows:


2 Baltimore-->Indianapolis-->New_England
2 Baltimore-->NY_Jets-->New_England
2 Baltimore-->NY_Jets-->New_England
2 Baltimore-->Pittsburgh-->New_England
2 Baltimore-->Pittsburgh-->New_England
2 Baltimore-->San_Diego-->New_England


The spread is New England by 7.5 and the computer agrees but by less picking them by 6.6. Here is the pick using the format from the newsletter:

.Baltimore +7.5 over *x New England 6.6 0.9 0.707 0.529

But digging deeper, looking at their last 4 games, even with the down game against Miami, New England averages 92.3 ratings points, higher than their 89.4 rating for the year.  With that rating, we'd expect New England to cover as well as win.

Even if we look at Baltimore's last 3, they are a tick up from their season rating at 86.9, but with having to go to New England it is hard to see how one would pick the upset and even taking the 7.5 may be iffy.

Enjoy!


Newsletter pick format:

The x denotes the home team. The * denotes the pick to win the game. The . is just a place holder. The number before "over" is the best line I've found typically from Maddux Sports. The team on the left is the pick against the spread. The first column after the second team is what the computer predicts the winning team will win by. The next column is the difference between the Vegas line and that prediction. The next column is the confidence of my pick to win. The last column is the confidence of the pick against the spread.

Giants at San Francisco 2012 Playoff Preview - San Francisco to win and cover, except ...

The Giants plays at San Francisco on 1/22 in the NFC championship.

New York is ranked #6 by the computer with a 11-7 record and a rating of 85.342 against a schedule strength of 83.010. Their performance chart can be found below and shows they were up and down but are up now, their worst game being against Washington and best game being last week at Green Bay. They are 10-7-1 against the spread this year and the computer is 8-9-1 picking their games against the spread and 7-11 picking winners in their games.



San Francisco is ranked #4 by the computer with a 14-3 record and a rating of 87.689 against a schedule strength of 80.824. Their performance chart can be found below and shows they were pretty consistent, their worst game being against Dallas and best game being against Pittsburgh. They are 13-3-1 against the spread this year and the computer is 10-6-1 picking their games against the spread and 13-4 picking winners in their games.



The teams played earlier in the year the 49ers winning 27-20 at home and are separated by 2 degrees as follows:


2 NY_Giants-->Arizona-->San_Francisco
2 NY_Giants-->Arizona-->San_Francisco
2 NY_Giants-->Dallas-->San_Francisco
2 NY_Giants-->Dallas-->San_Francisco
2 NY_Giants-->Philadelphia-->San_Francisco
2 NY_Giants-->Philadelphia-->San_Francisco
2 NY_Giants-->Seattle-->San_Francisco
2 NY_Giants-->Seattle-->San_Francisco
2 NY_Giants-->St_Louis-->San_Francisco
2 NY_Giants-->St_Louis-->San_Francisco
2 NY_Giants-->Washington-->San_Francisco
2 NY_Giants-->Washington-->San_Francisco


The spread is San Francisco by 2 and the computer agrees picking them by over 5.  Here is the pick using the format from the newsletter:

*xSan Francisco -2.0 over . NY Giants 5.3 3.3 0.677 0.613

But, let's dig deeper.

While San Francisco has been pretty consistent, the Giants have been all over the place, but very good lately.  In their last 4, the Giants average rating is a whopping 97.9 which is better than the 49ers best game hosting Pittsburgh (97.6) and well ahead of the 49ers 87.7 rating and even the average of their best 4 games (94.1).

So if the Giants play at that level, the game would actually be a Giants pick against anything other than the 49ers single best game.

Enjoy!


Newsletter pick format:

The x denotes the home team. The * denotes the pick to win the game. The . is just a place holder. The number before "over" is the best line I've found typically from Maddux Sports. The team on the left is the pick against the spread. The first column after the second team is what the computer predicts the winning team will win by. The next column is the difference between the Vegas line and that prediction. The next column is the confidence of my pick to win. The last column is the confidence of the pick against the spread.

College Basketball Week 11 Ratings and Rankings - Syracuse back to #1

This week's ratings and rankings are now posted.

Syracuse narrowly moves back to #1 this week, but the big moves is at #3 and #4 with two Big-12 teams jumping up.  Florida also makes a big move to #10.

The top-25 is below, the full rankings on the web-site.

Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
1	Syracuse	87.758	19-0	70.994	+1, +0.620
2	Ohio State	87.573	16-3	71.260	-1, -0.864
3	Baylor	86.516	16-0	70.914	+5, +1.537
4	Missouri	85.618	16-1	68.921	+3, +0.269
5	Kansas	85.347	14-3	72.967	-1, -0.599
6	Michigan St	84.849	15-3	72.436	+0, -0.598
7	Kentucky	84.839	17-1	69.234	-4, -1.645
8	Duke	83.822	15-2	74.771	+2, -0.511
9	North Carolina	83.016	15-3	70.543	-4, -2.626
10	Florida	82.992	14-4	70.749	+9, +1.186
11	St Mary's CA	82.928	15-2	69.369	+3, +0.486
12	UNLV	82.776	14-3	71.908	+0, -0.510
13	Kansas St	82.553	12-4	72.842	-4, -1.966
14	Alabama	81.968	13-4	72.674	+1, -0.169
15	Seton Hall	81.935	15-3	72.016	+5, +0.277
16	Creighton	81.906	16-2	70.969	+7, +0.564
17	Indiana	81.561	15-3	71.643	-6, -2.713
18	Virginia	81.512	14-2	68.068	+9, +0.523
19	West Virginia	81.281	13-5	73.308	+6, +0.256
20	Wichita St	81.221	14-3	71.383	+6, +0.220
21	New Mexico	81.201	14-2	68.828	+9, +0.927
22	Wisconsin	81.188	14-5	71.551	+2, -0.084
23	Brigham Young	81.171	13-4	69.973	+5, +0.517
24	California	81.118	15-4	69.773	-2, -0.385
25	Murray St	81.080	15-0	68.723	-12, -1.760

Week 19 NFL Ratings and Rankings - New #1 New England

The NFL ratings after week 19 are now posted here and below.

And there are some changes.  With Green Bay's loss and New England's win, New England is the new #1.  Despite their loss, New Orleans remains #2.  San Francisco is a close #4 and the other teams in the conference championship games are #5 and #6.

Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
1	New England	89.360	14-3	80.764	+2, +0.616
2	New Orleans	88.567	14-4	80.583	+0, -0.386
3	Green Bay	88.547	15-2	80.768	-2, -1.868
4	San Francisco	87.689	14-3	80.824	+0, +0.496
5	Baltimore	85.745	13-4	80.597	+0, +0.260
6	NY Giants	85.342	11-7	83.010	+3, +1.533
7	Pittsburgh	85.219	12-5	80.983	-1, +0.081
8	Philadelphia	84.607	8-8	81.996	-1, +0.412
9	Detroit	83.728	10-7	82.465	-1, -0.405
10	Houston	83.519	11-7	80.294	+0, -0.244
11	Atlanta	82.974	10-7	81.528	+0, -0.124
12	San Diego	82.597	8-8	81.426	+0, -0.206
13	NY Jets	82.259	8-8	82.131	+1, +0.241
14	Seattle	82.108	7-9	81.682	+2, +0.278
15	Miami	82.034	6-10	81.991	+0, +0.191
16	Chicago	81.947	8-8	81.767	-3, -0.387
17	Dallas	81.649	8-8	81.909	+0, +0.437
18	Cincinnati	81.068	9-8	81.152	+0, +0.047
19	Tennessee	80.873	9-7	80.080	+0, -0.103
20	Arizona	80.167	8-8	81.423	+2, +0.268
21	Denver	79.771	9-9	82.348	-1, -0.468
22	Carolina	79.711	6-10	80.983	-1, -0.231
23	Oakland	79.405	8-8	81.656	+0, -0.235
24	Buffalo	79.170	6-10	82.468	+1, +0.179
25	Kansas City	78.756	7-9	81.676	-1, -0.240
26	Washington	78.118	5-11	82.305	+0, +0.394
27	Minnesota	77.178	3-13	82.024	+0, -0.345
28	Jacksonville	76.984	5-11	80.936	+0, -0.089
29	Cleveland	76.508	4-12	81.543	+0, +0.072
30	St Louis	74.013	2-14	83.456	+2, +0.197
31	Tampa Bay	73.877	4-12	82.591	-1, -0.175
32	Indianapolis	73.831	2-14	81.534	-1, -0.100

Houston at Baltimore 2012 Playoff Preview - Baltimore to win, Houston to cover

Houston plays at Baltimore on 1/15 in a divisional playoff game.

Houston is ranked #10 by the computer with a 11-6 record and a rating of 83.763 against a schedule strength of 79.858. Their performance chart can be found below and shows they were very consistent mid-year but had some down times, their worst game being against Carolina and best game being at Tennessee. They are 11-6 against the spread this year and the computer is 10-7 picking their games against the spread and 11-6 picking winners in their games.



Baltimore is ranked #5 by the computer with a 12-4 record and a rating of 85.485 against a schedule strength of 80.531. Their performance chart can be found below and shows they were up and down, their worst game being at San Diego and best game being against Pittsburgh. They are 8-7-1 against the spread this year and the computer is 5-10-1 picking their games against the spread and 10-6 picking winners in their games.



The teams played head to head week 6 Baltimore winning 29-14 and are separated by 2 degrees as follows:


2 Houston-->Cincinnati-->Baltimore
2 Houston-->Cincinnati-->Baltimore
2 Houston-->Cleveland-->Baltimore
2 Houston-->Cleveland-->Baltimore
2 Houston-->Indianapolis-->Baltimore
2 Houston-->Indianapolis-->Baltimore
2 Houston-->Jacksonville-->Baltimore
2 Houston-->Jacksonville-->Baltimore
2 Houston-->Pittsburgh-->Baltimore
2 Houston-->Pittsburgh-->Baltimore
2 Houston-->Tennessee-->Baltimore
2 Houston-->Tennessee-->Baltimore


The spread is Baltimore by 8 and the computer agrees but by less picking them by 4.7. Here is the pick using the format from the newsletter:

.Houston +8.0 over *x Baltimore 4.7 3.3 0.639 0.598

But let's dig deeper.

Houston had 5 clear bad games, if we remove those their ratings average is 89.6.  Their problem is that we'd be removing 3 of their last 4 games.  The good news is their last game was their second best of the year.  Houston actually rates better on the road, an 85.7 average.

If we similarly drop Baltimore's 4 losses, their average rating is 90.1, a bit better than Houston's.  At home their rating average is 89.7, better than their road average.

So, it is probably hard to see how Houston has a great shot at the win, but it could be close.  Taking the points certainly looks promising.

Enjoy!


Newsletter pick format:

The x denotes the home team. The * denotes the pick to win the game. The . is just a place holder. The number before "over" is the best line I've found typically from Maddux Sports. The team on the left is the pick against the spread. The first column after the second team is what the computer predicts the winning team will win by. The next column is the difference between the Vegas line and that prediction. The next column is the confidence of my pick to win. The last column is the confidence of the pick against the spread.

New York Giants at Green Bay 2012 Playoff Preview - Green Bay to win and cover

New York plays at Green Bay on 1/15 in a divisional playoff game.

New York is ranked #9 by the computer with a 10-7 record and a rating of 83.809 against a schedule strength of 82.357. Their performance chart can be found below and shows they were very up and down, their worst game being against Washington and best game being against Atlanta. They are 9-7-1 against the spread this year and the computer is 8-8-1 picking their games against the spread and 7-10 picking winners in their games.



Green Bay is ranked #1 by the computer with a 15-1 record and a rating of 90.415 against a schedule strength of 80.833. Their performance chart can be found below and shows they were far more consistent save a couple down games late in the season, their worst game being at Kansas City and best game being at Detroit. They are 11-5 against the spread this year and the computer is 9-7 picking their games against the spread and 15-1 picking winners in their games.



The teams played head to head and are separated by 2 degrees through as follows:


1 NY_Giants-->Green_Bay
2 NY_Giants-->New_Orleans-->Green_Bay
2 NY_Giants-->St_Louis-->Green_Bay


The spread is Green Bay by 7.5 and the computer says it should be more, picking them by 9.6. Here is the pick using the format from the newsletter:


*xGreen_Bay             -7.5 over  .            NY_Giants  9.6  2.1 0.803 0.574


But let's dig deeper.

The Giants are clearly not a consistent team.  If they play like their last 3, they are playing quite well.  Their average rating over that span is an impressive 95.8.  And their average in their best 5 games is an even more impressive 96.3.  However, at their worst, they are pretty bad, their worst 5 averaging 69.7.

New Orleans cannot boast such highs or lows.  Their worst 5 average 83.5 and their best 5 average 95.8.  Their last 3 average just 85.0.

So should the average of both teams show up, the computer's pick looks solid.  But based on the best of both teams, the game should be very close, and if the season ending trends hold up, you have to like the Giants.

Enjoy!


Newsletter pick format:

The x denotes the home team. The * denotes the pick to win the game. The . is just a place holder. The number before "over" is the best line I've found typically from Maddux Sports. The team on the left is the pick against the spread. The first column after the second team is what the computer predicts the winning team will win by. The next column is the difference between the Vegas line and that prediction. The next column is the confidence of my pick to win. The last column is the confidence of the pick against the spread.

2011/2012 College Bowl Games: A final look at how the conferences performed

Here is the final look at how the conferences performed in the 2011/2012 bowl games.  This analysis isn't just looking at win/loss record, but looks at how the conferences should have done based on each game.

The rationale for this is that the actual record alone doesn't tell the whole story.  If a conference is having a down year and/or gets some matchups that aren't favorable, you'd expect a poor record so even a 0.500 record may be an indication the conference did well or at least better than expected.  Thus comparing the actual with expected record is useful, as is looking at how a conference does against the spread, as that tells you if the teams did better/worse than Vegas and the public bettors expected.

The table below has the totals for 34 bowls (BCS Championship game not included since it was SEC vs SEC) and lists the expected record based on Vegas' individual game picks, the record based on my computer's individual game picks, the record my computer said was most likely for the conference taking into account the chance of winning each game and the possible permutations, and then the actual record and record against the spread.  The list is ordered by Vegas expected record.

Conference	Vegas	Computer	Most Likely	Actual	ATS
SEC	7-0	7-0	5-2	5-2	4-3
Big-12	6-2	7-1	6-2	6-2	6-2
Sun Belt	2-1	1-2	1-2	1-2	1-2
Mtn West	3-2	3-2	3-2	2-3	2-3
ACC	4-4	2-6	3-5	2-6	3-5
Independents	1-1	1-1	1-1	1-1	0-1-1
MAC	2-3	4-1	3-2	4-1	3-2
C-USA	2-3	3-2	3-2	4-1	4-0-1
Big-East	2-3	1-4	2-3	3-2	3-2
WAC	1-2	1-2	1-2	0-3	1-2
B1G	3-7	1-9	4-6	4-6	4-6
Pac-12	1-6	3-4	3-4	2-5	2-5

The SEC was supposed to go undefeated but didn't, going 5-2.  That wasn't really unexpected, my computer said that 5-2 was the most likely record.  And the SEC did go 4-3 against the spread so all in all the SEC did about what was expected.

Similarly, the Big-12 was supposed to go 6-2 and did, although they did go 6-2 against the spread so beating expectations there.  My computer had the SEC and Big-12 in a virtual tie for the best conference and the bowl games did nothing to contradict that.

Behind them, the only other conferences expected to do better than 0.500 by Vegas were the Sun Belt and Mountain West, but neither did.  The Sun Belt did what my computer said they would, 1-2, and the Mountain West was a game worse than expected.  These are weaker conferences and did nothing to show that perception wasn't true.

The other major conferences also did about what was expected.  The ACC probably underachieved a bit, Vegas expecting 4-4, but my computer said 2-6/3-5 and they finished 2-6.  They went 3-5 against the spread though so probably a slight underachievement.

The BigTen was expected to be 3-7 by Vegas, the most likely record according to my computer though was 4-6 and they did that.

And the Pac-12 went 2-5, better than Vegas' 1-6, but worse than my computer's 3-4.

So there you have it.  A look at how the conferences really did in the bowl games.

College Basketball Week 10 Ratings and Rankings

This week's ratings and rankings are now posted.

Due to the closeness at the top and a few big wins, there is a swap at the top.  Ohio State thrashed their two opponents and while Syracuse also won two games, they were closer and Ohio State moves to #1. The big mover in the top-10 is Kansas moving to #4 after beating two top-50 teams.

The top-25 is below, the full rankings on the web-site.

Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
1	Ohio State	88.437	15-2	70.572	+1, +0.844
2	Syracuse	87.138	17-0	70.351	-1, -0.918
3	Kentucky	86.484	15-1	69.286	+0, -0.372
4	Kansas	85.946	12-3	73.562	+9, +2.330
5	North Carolina	85.642	14-2	69.699	+1, -0.552
6	Michigan St	85.447	14-2	71.777	+1, +0.107
7	Missouri	85.349	14-1	67.605	-3, -1.009
8	Baylor	84.979	14-0	69.745	-3, -1.338
9	Kansas St	84.519	12-2	71.956	+3, +0.850
10	Duke	84.333	13-2	74.441	-1, -0.409
11	Indiana	84.274	15-1	70.890	-3, -0.508
12	UNLV	83.286	14-2	71.621	+4, -0.036
13	Murray St	82.840	13-0	69.995	+2, -0.728
14	St Mary's CA	82.442	12-2	69.837	-3, -1.308
15	Alabama	82.137	12-3	72.252	+12, +1.552
16	Georgetown DC	82.095	12-2	71.516	-2, -1.495
17	Gonzaga	82.089	13-2	70.526	+5, +0.487
18	Michigan	82.061	12-3	70.740	+20, +2.711
19	Florida	81.806	12-4	70.609	-9, -2.130
20	Seton Hall	81.658	14-2	71.459	+6, +0.930
21	St Louis U.	81.587	12-3	68.998	-3, -0.938
22	California	81.503	13-4	70.855	-1, -0.101
23	Creighton	81.342	13-2	70.257	-4, -0.758
24	Wisconsin	81.272	12-5	71.074	-7, -1.868
25	West Virginia	81.025	12-4	72.959	+15, +1.855

College Football Week 20 and Final 2011/2012 Ratings and Rankings

Here are the week 20 and final college football ratings and rankings.

Alabama moves to #1 swapping places with LSU and Oklahoma State remains #3 but over 6 points back.  According to the computer, the 2 best teams played in the BCS title game and based on the thumping they gave LSU, Alabama is the clear #1.

No real changes elsewhere with just 2 games played since the week 19 ratings.  The full list is on the web-site.

Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
Rank	Team	Rating	Record	Schedule	Change
1	Alabama	96.146	12-1	73.309	+1, +3.498
2	LSU	93.996	13-1	74.849	-1, -2.550
3	Oklahoma St	87.469	12-1	73.527	+0, +0.020
4	Oregon	85.555	12-2	70.315	+0, -0.245
5	Arkansas	85.440	11-2	72.006	+0, +0.191
6	Boise St	84.083	12-1	65.853	+0, +0.012
7	Oklahoma	83.400	10-3	73.509	+0, +0.043
8	Stanford	82.547	11-2	69.881	+0, -0.069
9	Wisconsin	82.006	11-3	67.684	+0, +0.104
10	South Carolina	80.691	11-2	70.865	+0, +0.078
11	Southern Cal	79.610	10-2	70.165	+0, -0.064
12	Georgia	79.461	10-4	71.800	+0, -0.095
13	Texas A&M	79.137	7-6	73.163	+0, +0.054
14	Baylor	79.007	10-3	71.933	+0, +0.033
15	Michigan	78.792	11-2	68.508	+0, +0.034
16	Houston	78.521	13-1	62.654	+0, -0.042
17	Missouri	78.000	8-5	71.628	+0, +0.042
18	TCU	77.951	11-2	64.542	+0, -0.005
19	Michigan St	77.821	11-3	68.478	+0, +0.044
20	Kansas St	76.913	10-3	72.751	+0, +0.071
21	Texas	76.341	8-5	73.226	+0, +0.031
22	Florida St	76.103	9-4	65.445	+0, -0.003
23	Notre Dame	75.588	8-5	70.629	+0, -0.000
24	Southern Miss	75.425	12-2	63.247	+0, -0.060
25	Nebraska	74.880	9-4	70.325	+0, +0.051