In Ryan's posting about an underdog's statistical chance of winning a 2
of 3 series, he also mentions how physcological effects can change the
outcome.  How each game becomes an independent trial.  A good example
of this was Clarkson's two wins over Lake Superior last year.  I think
that that was even more of an upset than MSU beating UMO.  Lake Superior
had some 28-32 game winning streak and hadn't lost to any inferior teams.
(UMO did lose to Northeastern this year.)  Back on the subject, Clarkson
went into Sault Ste. Marie and won the first game by a good margin
(including 2 empty net goals).  Now Clarkson only has to win one of the
next two games.  All of the pressure is on LSSU to win the next two.
Clarkson knows that they are capable of winning and can afford a loss.
When one looks at the winning percentages of the teams in the NC$$
tourney, they're pretty high, mostly above 80%, so there is a better
chance of having the lower seed win two games than a true underdog.
But it can happen: Ryan's own RPI is a good example of a team with a
low winning percentage going out and beating two (almost three) better
teams.
 
As was proposed before, I would support the NC$$ going to an 8 team
tournament with the first round being best of 3 at campus sites.  16
teams would be too many, more than a third.
 
I hold myself personally responsible for all of the western teams being
in the semis.  I picked everything wrong, except Northern Michigan over
Clarkson (I was really pulling for us though), Lake Superior over Alaska
and Michigan to beat NMU, but I jinxed Maine, St. Lawrence (that one on
purpose :-) ) and Minnesota.  Sorry folks.
 
Mike Zak
Clarkson '87, '90