|
Post by cbrown1709 on Nov 27, 2004 1:40:56 GMT -5
Washington had a chance to win it at 16-15, but a cross-court hit went wide. Just wondering how they could have won it on that?
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Nov 27, 2004 1:41:22 GMT -5
And how are the tie breakers determined?
|
|
|
Post by dogfan on Nov 27, 2004 1:43:52 GMT -5
yes they could have won on the cross court that went wide by an inch
|
|
|
Post by dogfan on Nov 27, 2004 1:52:53 GMT -5
the formula evaluates, in order, head-to-head competition, number of games won in head-to-head matches and the point differential between the teams.
|
|
|
Post by dogfan on Nov 27, 2004 1:55:59 GMT -5
so for stanford it would be UW five game to Stanfords 3 in head to head competiton
It would be point differencial i think for USC
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Nov 27, 2004 1:58:55 GMT -5
yes they could have won on the cross court that went wide by an inch so did the shot that went wide put USC up 16- 15?
|
|
|
Post by dogfan on Nov 27, 2004 2:00:29 GMT -5
a bit confused on that one because it looks like USC would win the tie breaker
i get usc 204 and uw 191
|
|
|
Post by Huskyfan on Nov 27, 2004 2:02:36 GMT -5
so did the shot that went wide put USC up 16- 15? My mistake, Washington was up 15-14 and the hit went wide, so USC tied it 15-15.
|
|
|
Post by dogfan on Nov 27, 2004 2:03:15 GMT -5
no it was uw 16 usc 15
if the shot would have been in it would have been
uw 17 usc 15
but it was wide and it tied the score again and two uw errors finished the game i think
|
|
|
Post by dogfan on Nov 27, 2004 2:44:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Nov 27, 2004 2:48:10 GMT -5
no it was uw 16 usc 15 if the shot would have been in it would have been uw 17 usc 15 but it was wide and it tied the score again and two uw errors finished the game i think dog you numbers are wrong, if uw had 16 how did they end up loosing 17-15?
|
|
|
Post by dogfan on Nov 27, 2004 2:57:22 GMT -5
typical of me lol
so it must have been 15-14 us up then missed cross court 15-15 then two errors 17-15
|
|
|
Post by dogfan on Nov 27, 2004 3:00:07 GMT -5
more acurately
15-17 USC
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Nov 27, 2004 3:11:34 GMT -5
Sorry i got confused as hell
|
|
|
Post by dogfan on Nov 27, 2004 3:19:44 GMT -5
no problem, im often statistically challenged
im trying to figure out the tie breaker the paper and the write up on the athletic site both say that we won the tie breaker
however it seems, somehow that usc would
if we dont beat ucla.
after all, the papers have been known to not be true in the past *S*
|
|