Tag: Stanford

Stanford and California Atop ITA 2016 Women’s Rankings

horvath Leave a comment

The May 25th season-ending Intercollegiate Tennis Association (ITA) women’s team rankings (http://www.itatennis.com/) saw Stanford and California at the top of the polls. Both schools are from the PAC-12.

The SEC conference had three top ten teams – Florida, Vanderbilt, and Georgia. The ACC also had two teams in the top 10, North Carolina and Miami.

Six of the top 10 teams moved up in the rankings compared to the January 5th rankings, two remained in the same position, and two teams fell in the rankings but remained in the top 10.

By the end of the season, USC, Virginia, UCLA, and Texas A&M had fallen out of the top 10 rankings (January 5th).

May 25, 2016 Ranking January 5, 2016 ranking School Conference
1 8 Stanford PAC-12
2 6 California PAC-12
3 3 University of Florida SEC
4 tie-4 North Carolina ACC
5 1 Vanderbilt University SEC
6 18 Ohio State University Big 10
7 tie-4 University of Georgia SEC
8 12 Oklahoma State University Big 12
9 19 Pepperdine WCC
10 13 University of Miami (Florida) ACC

As expected there was minimal movement in the singles rankings between January 5th and June 1st, with a couple of exceptions.

June 1, 2016 ranking January 5, 2016 Ranking Player School Conference
1 4 Danielle Collins Virginia ACC
2 6 Hayley Carter North Carolina ACC
3 14 Luisa Stefani Pepperdine WCC
4 2 Francesca Di Lorenzo Ohio State Big 10
5 12 Ellen Perez University of Georgia SEC
6 7 Sinead Lohan University of Miami (Florida) ACC
7 16 Breaunna Addison Texas Big 12
8 11 Brooke Austin Florida ACC
9 5 Maegan Manasse California PAC-12
10 9 Stephanie Wagner University of Miami (Florida) ACC

The following players fell out of the top 10 rankings over the course of the season:
• In the January 5th poll, Joana Eidukonyte, Clemson, was ranked first; she finished the season in the 30th position.
• Belinda Woolcock of Florida was ranked 3rd on January 5th, but fell to 15th by the end of the season.
• Julia Elbaba, Virginia, was ranked 8th at the start of the season and dropped to 13th.
• Finally Klara Fabikova, California, began the season ranked 10th and finished in the 16th position.

The ACC dominated the top 10 singles rankings with 5 players. Miami had two players ranked in the top 10.

The results of this year’s team and individual tournaments were interesting in the sense that the number one team in the country Stanford only had one singles player ranked in the top 25. Carol Zhao was ranked 24th.

Having strong depth is much different than having the top players in the country. Some teams have depth, some have strong players, and a few have both. That is what makes college tennis so exciting.

Two Points a Set – CU’s Long and Winding Road to Improvement

horvath Leave a comment

Since 2007, the University of Colorado Women’s Volleyball program has been challenged to put a team on the court that wins in conference play. This post presents data that documents the improvement made by the Lady Buffs from 2009 to 2014.

Background

In 2006 the Lady Buffs won 49.5% of the points in conference competition, they qualified for the NCAA Championships, and were ousted in the second round. Data for 2006 and 2007 are not included in this discussion because sets were played to 30 points at that time.

In 2007 CU only won a single conference match with virtually the same team that had won the first round in the 2006 NCAA Championships.

In 2008, the rules were changed and sets were played to 25 points. The fortunes of the Lady Buffs improved slightly – they won seven matches.

In 2009 changes were made in the CU program and Liz Kritza took over as coach. Her teams won six out of 62 matches in her first three seasons.

The Buffs switched to the PAC-12 Conference in 2011.

In the inaugural PAC-12 season there were 22 conference matches. For purposes of discussion in this post, the data for 2011 has been adjusted to make it comparable to other years. Twenty matches were played in 2012 and subsequent years.

In 2012 the Lady Buffs won four of twenty matches. They were victors half the time when their 2013 and 2014 totals are combined.

Results

The 2009 conference season was abysmal. The Lady Buffs were not competitive – they won their fewest number of points (1,205) and lost their least number of points (1,609).

To become a competitive team it was necessary for the Lady Buffs to win more points. At the same time they needed to lose fewer points.

As can be seen by fast forwarding to 2014, the Lady Buffs have made progress. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE HOW SLOW THAT PROGRESS HAS BEEN.

They won half the points played in 2014, were 11-9 in conference play, qualified for the NCAA Championships, and won their first round match. For the sake of comparison, the 2014 points won/lost for CU, Stanford, and Nebraska follow:
• CU 1,651 points won and 1,648 points lost.
• Stanford 1,774 points won and 1,493 points lost. Stanford lost in the NCAA semis to champion Penn State.
• Nebraska 1,633 points won and 1,500 points lost. Nebraska lost in the NCAA quarters to finalist BYU.

As can be seen, the Lady Buffs are half-way to becoming an elite team. They are now winning about 1,600 points per season. Unfortunately, they have consistently lost at least 1,600 points per season since 2008. That total will have to be reduced to about 1,500 for CU to move to the next level.

Year Points Won Points Lost % Points Won Record
2008 1,512 1,707 47.0% 7-13
2009 1,205 1,609 42.8% 2-18
2010 1,302 1,639 44.3% 3-17
2011 adjusted 1,304 1,629 44.5% 1-21
2012 1,354 1,655 45.0% 4-16
2013 1,516 1,635 48.1% 9-11
2014 1,651 1,648 50.0% 11-9

Points Won by Year

In 2008 the Lady Buffs won 1,512 points. Point production dropped to 1,205 when the team cratered in 2009. It didn’t return to the 2008 level until 2013 when the team reached 1,516 points.

Year Points Won Difference Prior Year Avg. Diff. Points/Match Avg. Diff. Points/Set
2008 1,512
2009 1,205 -307 -15.4 -4.7
2010 1,302 97 4.9 1.3
2012 1,354 50 2.5 0.7
2013 1,516 162 8.1 2.2
2014 1,651 135 6.8 1.7

There was little change in the points won between 2010 and 2012. On average the Lady Buffs found a way to win 7-8 additional points each match or about 2 additional points per set throughout both the 2013 and 2014 seasons.

TWO POINTS A SET! That sounds so easy.

The data shows there is a fine line between the number of points won for a 4-16 team, a 9-11 team, and a team with an 11-9 record. For additional information, see the report Team Tendencies and the Importance of Winning a Point.

Two Points a Set

Percentage of Points Won – Stanford, Nebraska, and CU Volleyball

horvath Leave a comment

What is the difference in the percentage of points won for winners and losers?

The top teams in the country win slightly more than half the points they play in conference matches. At the other end of the pecking order the worst teams in the country win 40% to 45% of the points they play.

As expected, teams that win about half the points will win about half the sets and about half their matches.

To illustrate this point, consider the 2006 and 2014 University of Colorado teams.

During the 2006 conference season the Lady Buffs won:
• 49.5% of the points
• 53.1% of the sets
• 60.0% of the matches.
During the 2014 season the Lady Buffs won:
• 50.0% of the points
• 50.0% of the sets
• 55.0% of the matches.
Both seasons the Lady Buffs were invited to the NCAA Championships and won their first round matches before bowing out.

When teams win less than half the points they win a much smaller percentage of the sets and an even smaller percentage of the matches. A prime example was the 2009 CU Lady Buffs.

During the 2009 season the Lady Buffs won:
• 42.8% of the points
• 16.7% of the sets
• 10.0% of the matches.
They had one of the poorest records in the country for Division I teams.

When teams win more than half the points those wins are magnified. A greater percentage of sets are won and an even greater percentage of matches are won.

During the 2014 season the Nebraska Cornhuskers won:
• 52.1% of the points
• 66.2% of the sets
• 70.0% of the matches.
The Cornhuskers lost 3-0 to finalist BYU in the quarterfinals of the NCAA Championships.

The 2014 Stanford Cardinal team won:
• 54.3% of the points
• 78.4% of the sets
• 95.0% of the matches.
The Cardinal lost to champion Penn State in the semifinals.

The 2006 Nebraska Cornhuskers won:
• 56.4% of the points
• 89.4% of the sets
• 95.0% of the matches.
The Cornhuskers were National Champions in 2006. Their only loss was to the Lady Buffs, a team that won less than half its points in conference play. Despite their one loss, this Husker team was incredibly dominant.

The data shows there is a fine line between the percentage of points won for the best and the worst teams in the country. For additional information, see the report Team Tendencies and the Importance of Winning a Point.

Percentage of Points Won - Stanford, Nebraska, CU

Women’s Volleyball Team Tendencies

horvath Leave a comment

The women’s volleyball scores for the University of Colorado were evaluated for the nine-year period 2006 to 2014. In addition, scores were included for select Nebraska and Stanford seasons. From this analysis points won, sets won, and matches won, the following team tendencies were developed.

The following definitions are used in the description of the different levels.
Blowouts – decided by 10 points or more.
Solid – decided by 5 to 9 points.
Competitive – decided by 3 or 4 points.
Close – decided by 2 points.

Tier I Teams
• Win more than 53% of the points.
• Don’t lose blowout sets and less than 10% of sets are solid losses. They don’t give opponents a chance to get into the match.
• Win a majority of the close and competitive sets.
• At least 35% of the sets are solid wins
• At least 10% of the sets are blowout wins.
• Win at least 80% of their matches and most wins are 3-0.

Tier II Teams
• Win between 50.1% and 53.0% of the points.
• May lose a few blowout and solid loss sets.
• Win a majority of close and competitive matches.
• About 30% of their sets are solid wins and 5% are blowouts.
• Win at least 66% of their matches and most wins are 3-0 or 3-1.

Tier III Teams
• Win 48.1% to 50% of the points.
• Less than 10% of sets lost are blowouts and 20% solid losses.
• Sometimes win a majority of the close and competitive matches.
• Win about 20% of the sets are solid wins
• May win a few blowout sets.
• Win about half their matches.

Tier IV Teams
• Win between 45.1% and 48% of the points.
• About 20% of their sets are blowouts and 25% are solid loses.
• Most losses are 3-0 or 3-1.
• Win about 35% of their sets and matches.

Tier V Teams
• Win less than 45.1% of their points.
• More than half their sets are solid losses or blowouts.
• A majority of their matches are lost 3-0.
• Win less than 30% of their matches.

The above hierarchy will allow coaches to identify where their team falls in the peaking order and provide them with coaching that will help them move up the pecking order.

For additional information, click here and go to the report Team Tendencies and the Importance of Winning a Point.

NCAA Volleyball – 33 Years in a Row for Stanford and Penn State

horvath Leave a comment

There was a time when baseball fans hollered, “Break up the Yankees.” At the time, it was an understatement to say that the Bronx Bombers were dominant.

If these anti-Yankee folks were women’s volleyball fans today they would say, “Break up the Penn State and Stanford programs.”

The first NCAA championships were held in 1981. In the 33 championships, including this season, Penn State and Stanford are the only two teams to appear in every NCAA tournament. That type of dominance makes the New York Yankees look as inept as the Chicago Cubs.

Over the past 33 seasons, Stanford has won 6 NCAA national championships and was runner-up on 8 occasions. As well, they had three undefeated conference seasons.

Since 1981, the overall winning percentage for the Cardinal fell below 65% twice. Their conference winning percentage dropped below that mark only once.

Penn State has been equally as impressive. They won 5 national championships and were runner-up on 3 occasions. They won the national championship four consecutive years (2007 – 2010) and were undefeated in two of those seasons.

As well, they were undefeated in conference play 14 times. Only once did the Penn State overall season winning percentage drop below 65%.

33 years in a row
Sunday evening Texas was announced as the number one seed for the 2013 NCAA tournament. They are the outright favorite to defend their title.

Penn State was seeded second and Stanford was seeded seventh. If they both win their first three matches they will face off in the quarterfinals.

Here’s to an exciting NCAA tournament!