[ColoradoTree]

This should not come as a shock to you, because by rule the ITA is obligated to rank the national champion #1, but Stanford is #1 in the final ITA team rankings that came out today.

So, if not for the rule obligating ITA to rank the national champ #1, would Stanford still be #1 by their points system?

If we were just counting the top 10 wins and dividing by losses? I'm not sure. But in addition to automatically ranking the champion #1, the ITA puts extra weight on NCAA team matches to basically ensure that the teams who advanced the furthest end up ranked the highest: you get 1 bonus point for reaching the second round, 2 for reaching the Round of 16, 3 for reaching the quarterfinals, 4 for reaching the semis, and 6 for reaching the finals. Adding in those bonus points gave Stanford a 90.97 ranking average, Georgia a 90.08, and UNC a 86.78. 

I'm not sure whether the bonus points are added to your total before you divide by matches and losses, or if they're just added to your score at the end of it all, but we can do the exercise to answer your question (just using the pre-NCAA calculation without bonus points) between those three teams, based on the pre-NCAA team rankings:

Georgia: #1 UNC, #3 Stanford, #4 South Carolina (away), #5 Duke, #8 Vanderbilt (Indoor Nationals), #8 Vanderbilt (reg season), #8 Vanderbilt (NCAAs), #12 N.C. State, #16 Michigan, and #20 Tennessee (away) against two losses, to #3 Stanford and #4 South Carolina, for a total of 83.49

North Carolina: #5 Duke (Indoor Nationals), #5 Duke (reg season), #5 Duke (ACC tournament), #7 UCLA (Indoor Nationals), #7 UCLA (NCAAs), #8 Vanderbilt (away), #11 Florida State, #12 N.C. State (away), #16 Michigan (away), and #21 Virginia (away), against two losses, to #2 Georgia and #3 Stanford, for a total of 81.2

Stanford: #1 UNC, #2 Georgia, #6 Pepperdine, #7 UCLA (away), #7 UCLA (P12), #8 Vanderbilt, #9 Texas, #13 USC (away), #13 USC, and #14 Kansas, against one loss, to #2 Georgia, for a total of 84.51

If you do the calculations first and then add the bonus points, that's about right, because Stanford would be 90.51, Georgia would be 89.49, and UNC would be 85.2. (These don't line up with the exact pre-NCAA numbers because those are double-run, so they would have done what I just did and then run it again based on what that spit out in terms of a new ordering of teams, with only the second run being published.)

So, yes, even without taking the bonus points into account, if they just did the rankings now the same way they did before NCAAs, we'd still be #1.

---

FYI, the next tennis news we're likely to get is the ITA Kickoff Weekend draft, which should be in a couple of weeks. (Last year, it was the first week of June.) I assume we'll play it again next year, given the importance of being in the top 8. If not, then Lele better have a doozy of a non-conference schedule on tap.

[ColoradoTree]

This should not come as a shock to you, because by rule the ITA is obligated to rank the national champion #1, but Stanford is #1 in the final ITA team rankings that came out today.

So, if not for the rule obligating ITA to rank the national champ #1, would Stanford still be #1 by their points system?

If we were just counting the top 10 wins and dividing by losses? I'm not sure. But in addition to automatically ranking the champion #1, the ITA puts extra weight on NCAA team matches to basically ensure that the teams who advanced the furthest end up ranked the highest: you get 1 bonus point for reaching the second round, 2 for reaching the Round of 16, 3 for reaching the quarterfinals, 4 for reaching the semis, and 6 for reaching the finals. Adding in those bonus points gave Stanford a 90.97 ranking average, Georgia a 90.08, and UNC a 86.78. 

I'm not sure whether the bonus points are added to your total before you divide by matches and losses, or if they're just added to your score at the end of it all, but we can do the exercise to answer your question (just using the pre-NCAA calculation without bonus points) between those three teams, based on the pre-NCAA team rankings:

Georgia: #1 UNC, #3 Stanford, #4 South Carolina (away), #5 Duke, #8 Vanderbilt (Indoor Nationals), #8 Vanderbilt (reg season), #8 Vanderbilt (NCAAs), #12 N.C. State, #16 Michigan, and #20 Tennessee (away) against two losses, to #3 Stanford and #4 South Carolina, for a total of 83.49

North Carolina: #5 Duke (Indoor Nationals), #5 Duke (reg season), #5 Duke (ACC tournament), #7 UCLA (Indoor Nationals), #7 UCLA (NCAAs), #8 Vanderbilt (away), #11 Florida State, #12 N.C. State (away), #16 Michigan (away), and #21 Virginia (away), against two losses, to #2 Georgia and #3 Stanford, for a total of 81.2

Stanford: #1 UNC, #2 Georgia, #6 Pepperdine, #7 UCLA (away), #7 UCLA (P12), #8 Vanderbilt, #9 Texas, #13 USC (away), #13 USC, and #14 Kansas, against one loss, to #2 Georgia, for a total of 84.51

If you do the calculations first and then add the bonus points, that's about right, because Stanford would be 90.51, Georgia would be 89.49, and UNC would be 85.2. (These don't line up with the exact pre-NCAA numbers because those are double-run, so they would have done what I just did and then run it again based on what that spit out in terms of a new ordering of teams, with only the second run being published.)

So, yes, even without taking the bonus points into account, if they just did the rankings now the same way they did before NCAAs, we'd still be #1.

---

FYI, the next tennis news we're likely to get is the ITA Kickoff Weekend draft, which should be in a couple of weeks. (Last year, it was the first week of June.) I assume we'll play it again next year, given the importance of being in the top 8. If not, then Lele better have a doozy of a non-conference schedule on tap.