Below are listed the YAM2 rankings as of the end of last weekend
(3/13/95).   The explanation of the YAM2 method at the end of the ranking
list has been expanded somewhat for those folks who have had questions
regarding the influence of the ranking factors.
 
 YAM2  RPI                                 Norm.      YAM2
 Rank  Rank                       W-L%    Sched.    Metric
 
  1     2   Michigan              0.814     0.937     0.763
  2T    1   Boston_University     0.786     0.970     0.762
  2T    3   Maine                 0.816     0.933     0.762
  4     6   Colorado_College      0.738     0.922     0.680
  5     4   New_Hampshire         0.686     0.966     0.662
  6     7   Clarkson              0.697     0.919     0.640
  7     9   Michigan_State        0.681     0.924     0.629
  8     5   Minnesota             0.618     1.000     0.618
  9     8   Denver                0.658     0.938     0.617
  10    11  Bowling_Green         0.694     0.885     0.615
  11    10  Wisconsin             0.590     0.960     0.566
  12    13  Lake_Superior         0.611     0.922     0.563
  13    14  Vermont               0.571     0.931     0.532
  14    16  Princeton             0.565     0.926     0.523
 15T    12  Northeastern          0.529     0.978     0.517
 15T    18  Colgate               0.574     0.901     0.517
  17    17  Brown                 0.550     0.928     0.511
  18    19  Miami                 0.553     0.906     0.501
  19    15  North_Dakota          0.513     0.964     0.495
  20    21  RPI                   0.546     0.895     0.488
  21    23  Harvard               0.500     0.917     0.459
  22    25  Mass_Lowell           0.500     0.916     0.458
  23    20  St_Cloud              0.461     0.959     0.441
  24    27  Minnesota-Duluth      0.474     0.922     0.437
  25    24  Western_Michigan      0.461     0.941     0.433
  26    26  Providence            0.457     0.937     0.428
  27    29  Merrimack             0.456     0.924     0.421
  28    22  Michigan_Tech         0.421     0.969     0.408
  29    28  St_Lawrence           0.417     0.956     0.398
  30    30  Cornell               0.429     0.919     0.394
  31    32  Ferris_State          0.389     0.916     0.356
  32    31  Dartmouth             0.370     0.927     0.344
  33    34  Northern_Michigan     0.346     0.938     0.325
  34    33  Boston_College        0.343     0.943     0.323
  35    35  Illinois-Chicago      0.351     0.917     0.322
  36    38  Union                 0.357     0.881     0.315
  37    37  Yale                  0.339     0.908     0.308
  38    36  Alaska-Anchorage      0.306     0.936     0.286
  39    39  Notre_Dame            0.271     0.916     0.249
  40    40  Alaska-Fairbanks      0.259     0.896     0.232
  41    43  Air_Force             0.262     0.806     0.211
  42    41  Ohio_State            0.194     0.927     0.180
  43    42  Mass_Amherst          0.191     0.915     0.175
  44    44  Army                  0.091     0.754     0.069
 
  41    43  Air_Force             0.262     0.801     0.210
  42    41  Ohio_State            0.182     0.913     0.166
  43    42  Mass_Amherst          0.172     0.909     0.156
  44    44  Army                  0.091     0.749     0.068
 
        The YAM2 is an intuitively based simple formula which seeks to
measure accomplishment over the course of the season.   It will not
identify the teams which are currently hot,  but views the season as
a whole.
 
        YAM2 differs from the Rating Percentage Index primarily in its
relationship between Win% and Strength of Schedule.   In YAM2 this is a
multiplicative relationship,  whereas in the RPI it is additive.
 
        YAM2 = (Win%) x (Strength of Sched.)
 
        Strength of schedule is quantified the same way as in RPI:  namely
2 parts Opp% added to 1 part Opp-Opp%.   In this implementation the strength
of schedule is normalized to the value of the stongest schedule (Minnesota
this week).   Also,  as in the RPI,  the head to head games are subtracted
from the records before calculating the Opp% in order to prevent "inverse"
effects on the ranking metric.
 
        YAM2 gives equal *mathematical* weight to Win% and Strength of Schedule.
However,  since Strength of Schedule inherently varies less than Win%,  SOS will
produce less effect than Win% upon the ranking placements (approximately
plus or minus five positions,  maximum,  from experience).
 
        As a property of the multiplicative relationship between Win%
and Strength of Schedule,  YAM2 will not produce "inverse" ranking
effects.   For instance,  it will not raise a ranking if a team goes
to MN and loses two games.    It will also not knock a team out of the
NC$$ tournament if it goes to OSU and *wins* two games (except in *very*
unusual circumstances:-).
 
        -- Dick Tuthill