• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Super Rugby : Play-off Discussion

so anyway... the schedule breaks down like this:
on average south africa plays 2.5 new zealand teams, 2.5 australian teams, and 10 "south african teams"
new zealand/australia plays 6 new zealand/australian teams, 5 australia/new zealand teams, and 4

this is all using games from the last two years...
if you take games in terms of aus vs. nz, sa vs. aus, and nz vs. sa...

your average south african team should expect 5 from sa, .43 wins from new zealand, and 1.4 wins from australia for a total around 6.8 with rounding

new zealand should expect 3 from new zealand, 4.6 from australia, and 3.3 from south africa... so playing australia an extra 3.5 times per year is equal to about 3 extra wins

australia gets 3 from aussie teams, 1.8 from south africa, and .3 from new zealand for 5.1 wins... who cares **** them why do they even exist... most their wins against saffa came against garbage teams

if change the win probabilities to reflect countries in all non-conference games not just against certain countries expected wins go up for saffa and aussie teams and slightly down for new zealand... getting to face new australia more often is still worth two extra wins though
 
There is a solution. I have three adult sons who are all IT professionals earning big bucks overseas. . When I put to them the problems I see in the super rugby draw they laughed. To them this is so simplistic it is funny. Even I can accept that. Put into a database each and every meaningful stat about each team. The guys playing in 2017 know they are influencing the draw the following year. Rank all teams, then formulate the draw to make sure each team plays exactly the same accrued value of opponents as every other team. If their conference games are against low rated opponents, they will play high rated opponents in the inter-conference games and vice versa. This is all aimed at giving all teams the chance to make the finals on merit.

I have no idea at all why this has not always been the case - eliminate emotions and parochialism, favour no one. The matter of home ground is simply another good database which comes into action once the draw is known. It will be based on history on a simple "once home, then away" basis.

For the finals nothing needs to change.

Life is simple.
 
themole25 said:
so anyway... the schedule breaks down like this:
on average south africa plays 2.5 new zealand teams, 2.5 australian teams, and 10 "south african teams"
new zealand/australia plays 6 new zealand/australian teams, 5 australia/new zealand teams, and 4

this is all using games from the last two years...
if you take games in terms of aus vs. nz, sa vs. aus, and nz vs. sa...

your average south african team should expect 5 from sa, .43 wins from new zealand, and 1.4 wins from australia for a total around 6.8 with rounding

new zealand should expect 3 from new zealand, 4.6 from australia, and 3.3 from south africa... so playing australia an extra 3.5 times per year is equal to about 3 extra wins

australia gets 3 from aussie teams, 1.8 from south africa, and .3 from new zealand for 5.1 wins... who cares **** them why do they even exist... most their wins against saffa came against garbage teams

if change the win probabilities to reflect countries in all non-conference games not just against certain countries expected wins go up for saffa and aussie teams and slightly down for new zealand... getting to face new australia more often is still worth two extra wins though
Click to expand...

I can't 100% follow what you're saying, but it sounds to me like you're taking into the equation the strength of both teams, team A and team B, when you should only be taking into consideration the strength of team B.

Just because South African teams have (historically) a lower chance of beating South African teams than NZ teams have of beating Australian teams it doesn't necessarily mean that the NZ draw is easier. It could just as likely mean that NZ teams are stronger (which, I'd wager, is true). Difficulty of draw can be easily approximated based on the number of wins your opponents earned throughout the season AGAINST TEAMS FROM OTHER CONFERENCES (to remove intra-conference bias). For example, the Crusaders' strength of draw:

BRU (2/9 = 0.22)
HIG (9/9 = 1.00)
RED (2/9 = 0.22)
BLU (7/9 = 0.78)
FOR (2/9 = 0.22)
WAR (0/9 = 0.00)
SUN (1/5 = 0.20)
STO (2/5 = 0.40)
CHE (0/5 = 0.00)
BUL (0/5 = 0.00)
HUR (9/9 = 1.00)
CHI (8/9 = 0.89)
REB (0/9 = 0.00)
HIG (9/9 = 1.00)
HUR (9/9 = 1.00)
Total (60/115 = 0.52)

Compared with the Lions' strength of draw:

CHE (0/5 = 0.00)
WAR (0/9 = 0.00)
JAG (3/5 = 0.60)
RED (2/9 = 0.22)
KIN (2/5 = 0.40)
SHA (3/5 = 0.60)
STO (2/5 = 0.40)
JAG (3/5 = 0.60)
FOR (2/9 = 0.22)
REB (0/9 = 0.00)
BRU (2/9 = 0.22)
BUL (0/5 = 0.00)
KIN (2/5 = 0.40)
SUN (1/5 = 0.20)
SHA (3/5 = 0.60)
Total (25/95 = 0.26)

Pretty damning, and that's only going down one level (that is to say, we're not looking at strength of draw of strength of draw, so although the Australian teams have lower values they had to play NZ teams whereas half the SA teams didn't have to).

Sure, it's only an approximation of draw difficulty, but it's a much better approximation than what you've suggested.
 
But there isn't really a draw happening at the moment. As is, the Conferences are set, and has been so since we've done the 18 team conference system. The only thing that changes is the one year SA Conference 1 Plays against Australia and SA Conference 2 plays against New Zealand, and the next year they swap. Everything else stays the same.
 
Can someone confirm the QF kick off times? This board indicates two games kicking off Sunday. The super rugby site has 3 QFs kicking off Saturday. Assume the latter is correct.

http://www.sanzarrugby.com/superrugby/fixtures/2017-super-rugby/

The games are literally posted on my providers schedule by means of a web link, about 20 minutes prior to kick off, so want to be sure that 5 AM tomorrow morning, 8 pm NZ time, I will see Cru v Landers......

Also shows canes brumbies kick off in about an hour. Guessing 7.35 Canberra time.
 
Nubiwan said:
Can someone confirm the QF kick off times? This board indicates two games kicking off Sunday. The super rugby site has 3 QFs kicking off Saturday. Assume the latter is correct.

http://www.sanzarrugby.com/superrugby/fixtures/2017-super-rugby/

The games are literally posted on my providers schedule by means of a web link, about 20 minutes prior to kick off, so want to be sure that 5 AM tomorrow morning, 8 pm NZ time, I will see Cru v Landers......

Also shows canes brumbies kick off in about an hour. Guessing 7.35 Canberra time.
Click to expand...

well look at the time zones...
 
Red Enigma said:
There is a solution. I have three adult sons who are all IT professionals earning big bucks overseas. . When I put to them the problems I see in the super rugby draw they laughed. To them this is so simplistic it is funny. Even I can accept that. Put into a database each and every meaningful stat about each team. The guys playing in 2017 know they are influencing the draw the following year. Rank all teams, then formulate the draw to make sure each team plays exactly the same accrued value of opponents as every other team. If their conference games are against low rated opponents, they will play high rated opponents in the inter-conference games and vice versa. This is all aimed at giving all teams the chance to make the finals on merit.
Click to expand...
You might wanna inform your 3 it professional sons that besides making the competition "fair" you need to balance tv rights, ratings, time zones and travel time, among other things (international window, etc).
No matter how you look at it, you have to compromise something somewhere.
 
Nubiwan said:
Can someone confirm the QF kick off times? This board indicates two games kicking off Sunday. The super rugby site has 3 QFs kicking off Saturday. Assume the latter is correct.

http://www.sanzarrugby.com/superrugby/fixtures/2017-super-rugby/

The games are literally posted on my providers schedule by means of a web link, about 20 minutes prior to kick off, so want to be sure that 5 AM tomorrow morning, 8 pm NZ time, I will see Cru v Landers......

Also shows canes brumbies kick off in about an hour. Guessing 7.35 Canberra time.
Click to expand...

Not sure about timezones but the Crusaders Highlanders game starts at 7:30 NZT, so in about 21 and a half hours!
 
TRF Mr Fish said:
I can't 100% follow what you're saying, but it sounds to me like you're taking into the equation the strength of both teams, team A and team B, when you should only be taking into consideration the strength of team B.

Just because South African teams have (historically) a lower chance of beating South African teams than NZ teams have of beating Australian teams it doesn't necessarily mean that the NZ draw is easier. It could just as likely mean that NZ teams are stronger (which, I'd wager, is true). Difficulty of draw can be easily approximated based on the number of wins your opponents earned throughout the season AGAINST TEAMS FROM OTHER CONFERENCES (to remove intra-conference bias). For example, the Crusaders' strength of draw:

BRU (2/9 = 0.22)
HIG (9/9 = 1.00)
RED (2/9 = 0.22)
BLU (7/9 = 0.78)
FOR (2/9 = 0.22)
WAR (0/9 = 0.00)
SUN (1/5 = 0.20)
STO (2/5 = 0.40)
CHE (0/5 = 0.00)
BUL (0/5 = 0.00)
HUR (9/9 = 1.00)
CHI (8/9 = 0.89)
REB (0/9 = 0.00)
HIG (9/9 = 1.00)
HUR (9/9 = 1.00)
Total (60/115 = 0.52)

Compared with the Lions' strength of draw:

CHE (0/5 = 0.00)
WAR (0/9 = 0.00)
JAG (3/5 = 0.60)
RED (2/9 = 0.22)
KIN (2/5 = 0.40)
SHA (3/5 = 0.60)
STO (2/5 = 0.40)
JAG (3/5 = 0.60)
FOR (2/9 = 0.22)
REB (0/9 = 0.00)
BRU (2/9 = 0.22)
BUL (0/5 = 0.00)
KIN (2/5 = 0.40)
SUN (1/5 = 0.20)
SHA (3/5 = 0.60)
Total (25/95 = 0.26)

Pretty damning, and that's only going down one level (that is to say, we're not looking at strength of draw of strength of draw, so although the Australian teams have lower values they had to play NZ teams whereas half the SA teams didn't have to).

Sure, it's only an approximation of draw difficulty, but it's a much better approximation than what you've suggested.
Click to expand...
You're talking about certain teams and not overall conferences, which is not what I'm talking about. Yes, when the lions don't play the New Zealand teams they have an easier schedule, which isn't exactly a revelation.

You provided answers to an entirely different question.
 
TRF Mr Fish said:
I can't 100% follow what you're saying, but it sounds to me like you're taking into the equation the strength of both teams, team A and team B, when you should only be taking into consideration the strength of team B.

Just because South African teams have (historically) a lower chance of beating South African teams than NZ teams have of beating Australian teams it doesn't necessarily mean that the NZ draw is easier. It could just as likely mean that NZ teams are stronger (which, I'd wager, is true). Difficulty of draw can be easily approximated based on the number of wins your opponents earned throughout the season AGAINST TEAMS FROM OTHER CONFERENCES (to remove intra-conference bias). For example, the Crusaders' strength of draw:

BRU (2/9 = 0.22)
HIG (9/9 = 1.00)
RED (2/9 = 0.22)
BLU (7/9 = 0.78)
FOR (2/9 = 0.22)
WAR (0/9 = 0.00)
SUN (1/5 = 0.20)
STO (2/5 = 0.40)
CHE (0/5 = 0.00)
BUL (0/5 = 0.00)
HUR (9/9 = 1.00)
CHI (8/9 = 0.89)
REB (0/9 = 0.00)
HIG (9/9 = 1.00)
HUR (9/9 = 1.00)
Total (60/115 = 0.52)

Compared with the Lions' strength of draw:

CHE (0/5 = 0.00)
WAR (0/9 = 0.00)
JAG (3/5 = 0.60)
RED (2/9 = 0.22)
KIN (2/5 = 0.40)
SHA (3/5 = 0.60)
STO (2/5 = 0.40)
JAG (3/5 = 0.60)
FOR (2/9 = 0.22)
REB (0/9 = 0.00)
BRU (2/9 = 0.22)
BUL (0/5 = 0.00)
KIN (2/5 = 0.40)
SUN (1/5 = 0.20)
SHA (3/5 = 0.60)
Total (25/95 = 0.26)

Pretty damning, and that's only going down one level (that is to say, we're not looking at strength of draw of strength of draw, so although the Australian teams have lower values they had to play NZ teams whereas half the SA teams didn't have to).

Sure, it's only an approximation of draw difficulty, but it's a much better approximation than what you've suggested.
Click to expand...

Also, your model is actually a very poor approximation. A lot of your games would have a total win probability less than .4 when it should be 1 for every single game.
 
Having a regular season average attendance above a certain threshold should be a prerequisite for hosting playoff games.
 
themole25 said:
You're talking about certain teams and not overall conferences, which is not what I'm talking about. Yes, when the lions don't play the New Zealand teams they have an easier schedule, which isn't exactly a revelation.

You provided answers to an entirely different question.
Click to expand...

Well just add up the draw difficulty for each conference then and you'll have your answer.

Your model doesn't make any sense. Of course on average SA teams can only win half their games against other SA teams, that's probability. But given that all teams are not equal your model is pointless.

You need to break it down by individual draws, then you can average it out amongst the teams in each conference.
 
For reference:

Brumbies
CRU (9/9)
SHA (3/5)
FOR (2/9)
WAR (0/9)
HIG (9/9)
RED (2/9)
REB (0/9)
HUR (9/9)
BLU (7/9)
LIO (5/5)
KIN (2/5)
JAG (3/5)
REB (0/9)
RED (2/9)
CHI (8/9)
Total = 0.53 (61/115)

Stormers
BUL (0/5)
JAG (3/5)
KIN (2/5)
SUN (1/5)
CHE (0/5)
CHI (8/9)
LIO (5/5)
CRU (9/9)
HIG (9/9)
HUR (9/9)
BLU (7/9)
SHA (3/5)
CHE (0/5)
SUN (1/5)
BUL (0/5)
Total = 0.60 (57/95)

So basically if you were in South Africa 2 you had a free ride into the finals (and first place).
 
TRF Mr Fish said:
Well just add up the draw difficulty for each conference then and you'll have your answer.

Your model doesn't make any sense. Of course on average SA teams can only win half their games against other SA teams, that's probability. But given that all teams are not equal your model is pointless.

You need to break it down by individual draws, then you can average it out amongst the teams in each conference.
Click to expand...
1. my model is for the average team... think about it like a regression model y is number of wins, x1 is how good a team is, x2 is how many games they have against their own country, x3 against other country 1, x4 against other country 2

how good a team is will move them higher or lower than the expected wins but my model gives you the average team with value 0

2. actually you can't... since individual teams events are not independent from other teams events, meaning something that simple belongs in the garbage

when two new zealand teams play each other, it's not like those points can escape and get allocated somewhere else or only two points are only awarded

new zealand playing new zealand teams 6 times results in the same amount of points being awarded as does australia playing australian teams 6 times
 
themole25 said:
1. my model is for the average team... think about it like a regression model y is number of wins, x1 is how good a team is, x2 is how many games they have against their own country, x3 against other country 1, x4 against other country 2

how good a team is will move them higher or lower than the expected wins but my model gives you the average team with value 0

2. actually you can't... since individual teams events are not independent from other teams events, meaning something that simple belongs in the garbage

when two new zealand teams play each other, it's not like those points can escape and get allocated somewhere else or only two points are only awarded

new zealand playing new zealand teams 6 times results in the same amount of points being awarded as does australia playing australian teams 6 times
Click to expand...

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the matter! I'm sure we're arguing different things, I think we can at least both agree that it's harder to make the playoffs from the Oz conference than from the SA2 conference if you're a moderate team.
 
Red Enigma said:
There is a solution. I have three adult sons who are all IT professionals earning big bucks overseas. . When I put to them the problems I see in the super rugby draw they laughed. To them this is so simplistic it is funny. Even I can accept that. Put into a database each and every meaningful stat about each team. The guys playing in 2017 know they are influencing the draw the following year. Rank all teams, then formulate the draw to make sure each team plays exactly the same accrued value of opponents as every other team. If their conference games are against low rated opponents, they will play high rated opponents in the inter-conference games and vice versa. This is all aimed at giving all teams the chance to make the finals on merit.

I have no idea at all why this has not always been the case - eliminate emotions and parochialism, favour no one. The matter of home ground is simply another good database which comes into action once the draw is known. It will be based on history on a simple "once home, then away" basis.

For the finals nothing needs to change.

Life is simple.
Click to expand...

Part of the problem with that is it would likely increase travel if based solely on strength of schedule parity. But with the new format next year (where you play teams from each of the three main countries) the above would be a good way to select which teams from each country you play.

There are rumours that the Pro12 will change the composition of their conferences each year to ensure they are based on both nationality and strength / parity. They are obviously looking at ways to try and avoid the Super Rugby issue where a reasonable format is destroyed by a completely unreasonable disparity in strength of teams from each country. The downside is it will be more difficult to foster rivalries.

I have sympathy for Super Rugby. There are no simple answers in my opinion when it comes to format. And they must expand to new markets as even All Blacks are now routinely leaving for other leagues due to pay disparities caused by TV money (e.g. Fekitoa to Toulon announced yesterday).
 
So Quarters done and dusted with everything going to plan, though the Lions can thank their lucky stars!
Based on those performances I'd say a Saders Canes final is the likely bet. I'll be putting all my support behind the Chiefs, but I can't see them pipping the Saders tbh.
Lions Canes should be very entertaining and very competitive, both teams are more than capable of running over the other. All depends on who shows up on the day.
 
I was underwhelmed by the QFs. Perhaps it was nerves?

The results went broadly as expected and I think we'll see a Crusaders/Hurricanes final.
 

Similar threads

E
Super Rugby Atlantic
Replies
11
Views
3K
GalBrEusCat
GalBrEusCat
TRF_Ezequiel
Carstens to play Super Rugby for Stormers
Replies
1
Views
1K
Seaton
Seaton
TRF_Ezequiel
Super 15 Play Off QF: Blues - Waratahs @ Eden Park (24-06-2011)
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
Larksea
L
FlankerLady7
Super Rugby Trial Games
Replies
0
Views
1K
FlankerLady7
FlankerLady7
TRF_Ezequiel
TRF's Super 15 prediction: THE PLAY OFFS
2 3
Replies
55
Views
8K
TNT88
TNT88

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Top