2008 Lax World MCLA Division 1 Top 25 Poll (4/9/08) is out

[Rob Graff]

Don't wait until the last minute to do a poll. I'm sure that's what most of them do. I think the polls are very accurate this time around. Good job pollsters.

Tom, to the extent that you are suggesting we all wait until the last minute to do the poll, I know that to be incorrect for most pollsters. If I'm misinterpreting your comments, I apologize in advance.

Rob

[Dan Wishengrad]

Don't wait until the last minute to do a poll. I'm sure that's what most of them do. I think the polls are very accurate this time around. Good job pollsters.

Tom, to the extent that you are suggesting we all wait until the last minute to do the poll, I know that to be incorrect for most pollsters. If I'm misinterpreting your comments, I apologize in advance.

Rob

I agree with Rob. Most of us not only DON'T wait until the last minute, we also don't fill out our ballot in a vaccum. There is a private thread on this site where we pollsters share ideas, rankings, etc. etc. and where we debate internally about specific teams. We all read these public threads, also, and the views of many of you are taken into consideration. Just this week I posted my Top 10 and got some p.m.s from fellow pollsters asking me to defend one or two picks with arguments why Team A should be higher than Team B. I then re-evaluated my rankings, looked at all the results again and re-drafted my ballot.

Most of us take this responsibility very seriously. This year there's just so much of "A beat B who beat C who beat A" that ranking 25 teams isn't easy. We reach entirely different conclusions and the final released poll just sorts this out.

[GeorgiaLacrosse]

Neither FSU or FU should be considered top 10. FU lost to BC, LMU and lost by 11 to chapman. FSU has one win in the top 10 and THREE loses to teams in the 12-15 range. Sorry no top 10 for either.

doesn't uscb only have one top 10 win as well? with loses to fsu and uf

if fsu beats uf and ucsb loses to chapman and beats lmu like they are predicted then fsu should jump ucsb for sure

[StrykerFSU]

There is a private thread on this site where we pollsters share ideas, rankings, etc. etc. and where we debate internally about specific teams.

Ahhh, the Shangri'La of forum threads. I thought it only existed in legend...

[GeorgiaLacrosse]

There is a private thread on this site where we pollsters share ideas, rankings, etc. etc. and where we debate internally about specific teams.

Ahhh, the Shangri'La of forum threads. I thought it only existed in legend...

is that a reference to rush hour 3... that movie was painful

[1one]

I never said UCSB should be in the top 10, i did say FSU and FU shouldn't be there. I would put BC over both FSU or FU though...

[Tom]

To respond to Rob Graf.

I was saying that I don't believe any of the pollsters wait until the last minute to figure our where teams should be ranked. Sorry about the mix up.

[Zamboni_Driver]

I think what your are seeing here is a fear that since all pollsters don't see all teams, that if pollsters have to evaluate 3 or 4 teams that have all chipped away at each other, that they might favor the ones they have seen play, which would most likely be in their same conference (a.k.a conference bias) and put those on top. 4 spots can take you from 10th to 14th and get bumped by AQ's so the fear is real whether it is true or not.

1 suggestion I have for any poll based system to help reduce that--

In graph style (bar) show the distribution of ranks voted for a team

There is always a push to release how people voted. I don't think that people really care how 1 particular person voted, but they want to see is there any group that is inflating a teams rank as compared to the rest of the group (i.e. a bimodal distribition) or if it is a bell shape, or if there is 1 or 2 extreme outliers.

If both UCSB had a bell shape distribution around 8 with a few higher and a few lower, and FSU the same thing at 11, no one would be arguing because you would be arguing with the collective thought of 40 people. If UCSB had 5 guys place them at #4 and the rest at 11 or 12 (which could propel them to then there would be an argument for pollster evaluations.

People want to see if there is agreement within the pollsters - averages and standard deviations don't do that.

[FLALAX]

Disclosure for the poll votes would also help to eliminate bias. When an individual votes with the heart and not the head it will be easiy recognized and called out.

[CATLAX MAN]

We have this discussion year in and year out. Here goes again:

Individual poll votes are not going to be disclosed........nor should they be.

A poll, by definition, is a consensus of 40 different voters from different areas of the county averaged out into one result. No one voter can sway a team's place in the poll in a material fashion.

The MCLA has a panel of voters who are the most informed and well cross sectioned group that you can assemble. Have a little trust people.

There has never been a team at the National Tournament that didn't deserve to be there. Therefore, the conclusion one can draw is that this polling system works pretty well.

[WCLLPREZ]

In the WDIA, each poll voter has access to see how the other poll voters voted but this is not released to the public

[CATLAX MAN]

In the WDIA, each poll voter has access to see how the other poll voters voted but this is not released to the public

Actually, I think that is a bad idea.

[Zamboni_Driver]

We have this discussion year in and year out. Here goes again:

That should tell us all something.

There is a potential gap between what the fans, teams, coaches, are desiring and what information the are given in regards to polls. This is not to suggest that the poll organizers and pollsters succumb to all demands, but the MCLA might want to explore options for disseminating information about the poll (i.e. organization, oversight, pollster evaluations), while at the same time increasing demands on the teams to provide interpretable data (i.e. more OOC games, multiple conferences, OOC games after April 1)

[ok...that last part was totally my desire!]

Edit: Just to be clear I do not support releasing any information on individual pollsters - their privacy should always be respected and remain annonymous

[CATLAX MAN]

We have this discussion year in and year out. Here goes again:

That should tell us all something.

Yes, it usually indicates a new group of posters who don't know the history of this league's polling system

AND/OR

it means that there is a number of supporters of teams on the bubble that want to bring light to their team/knock down a team above them.

[Zamboni_Driver]

We have this discussion year in and year out. Here goes again:

That should tell us all something.

Yes, it usually indicates a new group of posters who don't know the history of this league's polling system

AND/OR

it means that there is a number of supporters of teams on the bubble that want to bring light to their team/knock down a team above them.

I definitely agree with the second, because support or critique of a team's rank seems to be location dependent (Cali people liking UCSB's spot and FL people not)

I've got a third too...

Parity creates controversy and teams work too hard to have their season end without knowing why....