In article <[log in to unmask]>,
Steven Czuba <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 
>Since Harvard/Vermont split, you must look at the next tie break - record
>against top four. Well, since they're currently both in the top four,
>effectively the next tiebreak has become a record against only the top 3. The
>question is, is this the valid interpretation of this tie break ?
 
Yes, this interpretation is correct.
 
>This also points out,that if both teams tied are in the top 1,2 or 3 positions
>- the next tie break becomes best record against top 2 (since the records
>against each other are a wash).
>
>Take this a step further and use a 3 team example:
>1. Brown 30
>2. Clark 27
>3. Harvard / Princeton / Colgate with 25 points.
>
>This would mean the record against the top 2 for the Top 4 tiebreak ? Again,
>am I interpretting this tiebreaker properly ?
 
I believe so, but I am not 100% certain.  However, I can see no other
way of interpreting the rule without violating the "Top 4" criteria.
 
There's an easy way to handle all this.  Wait until Friday night, when
all the games are over, and listen to what the radio announcers
tell you will be your team's game next week.  I'll be listening to
the Union game Saturday night to find out how things sort out and
where RPI will be playing, since RPI has an afternoon game at Colgate.
 
Of course, if you're out of the listening area for your team (or any
team), just read hockey-l.
 
That's how I handle these situations.
 
Kurt Stutt
[log in to unmask]