2009 Intercollegiate Championship Tournament
Date: |
Friday, April 3, 2009 – Saturday, April 4, 2009 |
Location: |
Hyatt Regency DFW (Dallas, TX) |
Division I Pool 1
Teams are ordered within each pool based on their performance. The order of finish within each pool may depend on tiebreaker games not shown. Ranks for the tournament as a whole are displayed on the Standings tab.
Team | W–L | % | Points | TUH | P | TU | I | PPB | PP20TUH |
Chicago A | 13–0 | 100.0% | 5325 | 315 | 44 |
145 |
28 | 17.75 | 338.10 |
---|
Illinois A | 11–2 | 84.6% | 4800 | 321 | 37 |
152 |
52 | 15.79 | 299.07 |
---|
Harvard A | 11–2 | 84.6% | 4480 | 319 | 48 |
118 |
38 | 16.69 | 280.88 |
---|
Minnesota A | 10–3 | 76.9% | 4765 | 302 | 51 |
119 |
34 | 17.53 | 315.56 |
---|
Stanford | 8–5 | 61.5% | 3745 | 303 | 19 |
129 |
15 | 15.17 | 247.19 |
---|
UC Irvine | 8–5 | 61.5% | 3245 | 289 | 26 |
108 |
24 | 14.14 | 224.57 |
---|
Dartmouth | 7–6 | 53.8% | 3425 | 322 | 28 |
112 |
29 | 14.50 | 212.73 |
---|
MIT | 7–6 | 53.8% | 3050 | 317 | 36 |
106 |
31 | 11.30 | 192.43 |
---|
Pool 2
Team | W–L | % | Points | TUH | P | TU | I | PPB | PP20TUH |
Maryland | 10–3 | 76.9% | 3490 | 322 | 32 |
114 |
54 | 14.66 | 216.77 |
---|
Chicago B | 10–3 | 76.9% | 3200 | 304 | 25 |
121 |
33 | 12.19 | 210.53 |
---|
Florida | 8–5 | 61.5% | 3595 | 309 | 30 |
121 |
25 | 13.64 | 232.69 |
---|
Harvard B | 8–5 | 61.5% | 2880 | 296 | 26 |
107 |
21 | 11.47 | 194.59 |
---|
Florida State | 8–5 | 61.5% | 2740 | 290 | 20 |
109 |
32 | 11.71 | 188.97 |
---|
Carleton College | 7–6 | 53.8% | 3470 | 309 | 20 |
131 |
19 | 12.95 | 224.60 |
---|
Georgia | 5–8 | 38.5% | 2005 | 309 | 19 |
87 |
27 | 9.29 | 129.77 |
---|
UCLA | 4–9 | 30.8% | 2295 | 295 | 13 |
101 |
34 | 11.05 | 155.59 |
---|
Pool 3
Team | W–L | % | Points | TUH | P | TU | I | PPB | PP20TUH |
Toronto | 9–4 | 69.2% | 3800 | 304 | 25 |
130 |
35 | 14.84 | 250.00 |
---|
Minnesota B | 7–6 | 53.8% | 2350 | 303 | 15 |
102 |
30 | 10.73 | 155.12 |
---|
WUSTL | 6–7 | 46.2% | 2125 | 303 | 14 |
97 |
38 | 10.41 | 140.26 |
---|
Texas | 5–8 | 38.5% | 1720 | 281 | 6 |
92 |
14 | 7.96 | 122.42 |
---|
Yale | 5–8 | 38.5% | 1775 | 301 | 13 |
89 |
39 | 8.68 | 117.94 |
---|
Michigan | 4–9 | 30.8% | 1980 | 305 | 12 |
97 |
28 | 8.90 | 129.84 |
---|
Queen's | 4–9 | 30.8% | 1520 | 311 | 12 |
80 |
38 | 8.02 | 97.75 |
---|
Oklahoma | 2–11 | 15.4% | 1395 | 304 | 4 |
78 |
17 | 7.80 | 91.78 |
---|
Pool 4
Team | W–L | % | Points | TUH | P | TU | I | PPB | PP20TUH |
Penn | 6–7 | 46.2% | 1730 | 207 | 10 |
76 |
36 | 11.63 | 167.15 |
---|
Cornell | 6–7 | 46.2% | 1695 | 297 | 7 |
88 |
16 | 8.32 | 114.14 |
---|
Alabama | 5–8 | 38.5% | 1945 | 309 | 8 |
90 |
13 | 10.10 | 125.89 |
---|
Tulsa | 5–8 | 38.5% | 1820 | 316 | 13 |
91 |
20 | 7.84 | 115.19 |
---|
Illinois B | 3–10 | 23.1% | 1675 | 307 | 13 |
83 |
24 | 8.02 | 109.12 |
---|
Princeton | 3–10 | 23.1% | 1300 | 308 | 8 |
79 |
34 | 6.44 | 84.42 |
---|
Tulane | 3–10 | 23.1% | 1310 | 312 | 6 |
74 |
12 | 6.75 | 83.97 |
---|
Delaware | 0–13 | 0.0% | 940 | 306 | 8 |
50 |
24 | 7.59 | 61.44 |
---|
Division II Pool 1/2
Teams are ordered within each pool based on their performance. The order of finish within each pool may depend on tiebreaker games not shown. Ranks for the tournament as a whole are displayed on the Standings tab.
Team | W–L | % | Points | TUH | P | TU | I | PPB | PP20TUH |
Chicago A | 12–1 | 92.3% | 4300 | 301 | 26 |
137 |
47 | 17.02 | 285.71 |
---|
Michigan | 11–2 | 84.6% | 4355 | 302 | 26 |
141 |
39 | 16.47 | 288.41 |
---|
Yale | 11–2 | 84.6% | 4090 | 298 | 19 |
136 |
49 | 17.35 | 274.50 |
---|
RPI | 11–2 | 84.6% | 3120 | 285 | 13 |
119 |
16 | 13.75 | 218.95 |
---|
Carleton College | 9–4 | 69.2% | 3265 | 304 | 22 |
118 |
32 | 13.98 | 214.80 |
---|
Chicago B | 8–5 | 61.5% | 2530 | 304 | 8 |
108 |
19 | 12.28 | 166.45 |
---|
Princeton | 6–7 | 46.2% | 2490 | 305 | 13 |
104 |
39 | 12.39 | 163.28 |
---|
McMaster | 5–8 | 38.5% | 2475 | 282 | 12 |
104 |
37 | 12.41 | 175.53 |
---|
Explanation of Statistics
Confused about all these statistics? We’ve prepared an overview.
Read