devo's volleyball – Australian volleyball: news and views

MAVL round 3 results

Posted by devo on November 16, 2009

  • UTSSU def Volleyball WA 3-0 (26-24, 25-23, 25-17,) more
  • AIS def UTSSU 3-1 (25-23, 20-25, 25-23, 25-20) more
  • QAS Pirates def University Blue 3-1 (20-25, 31-29, 25-19, 25-21) more
  • AIS def Canberra Heat 3-0 (25-20, 25-20, 25-22) more
  • University Blues lost to UTSSU 1-3 (23-25, 23-25, 23-20, 14-25)   more
  • QAS Pirates lost to Volleyball WA 0-3 (25-22, 32-30, 25-23) more

Updated ladder with 4 matches to go:

TEAM P Won Lost – games left
QAS Pirates 9 8 1 – vs Heat
AIS 9 6 3 – vs WA
UTSSU 10 4 6 – complete
University Blues 8 3 5 – vs Heat; vs WA
Volleyball WA 8 3 5 – vs AIS; vs Uni Blues
Canberra Heat 8 2 6 – vs Uni Blues; vs Pirates
  • University Blues def Canberra Heat 3-0 (25-11, 25-21, 25-21)  more
  • AIS def Volleyball WA 3-0 (25-18, 25-21, 25-18) more
  • QAS Pirates lost to  Canberra Heat 2-3 (25-18, 20-25, 25-20, 25-18, 15-11 ) more
  • University Blues lost to Volleyball WA 1-3 (25-14, 21-25, 20-25, 21-25) more

Update 2:

Susan Diver-Tuck has informed me that: We are currently still in Perth and have only been up for a short while, but we are in the process of checking and re-checking this information. We will confirm the final four placings as soon as we have finished this process.

Update 3:

Final positions Pirates, AIS, WA, UTSSU more@VolleyballAustralia

The finalists according to the Volleyball Australia news: 1. QAS Pirates 2. AIS 3. Uni Blues 4. WA Hornets. But you wouldn’t blame UTSSU if they were checking the points again (and some are if you read the comments below) – missing the final by a ratio of .49 to .47results table now changed

Update: The final ladder according to the AVL site: now changed

1 QAS Pirates 10 8 2 26 26 14
2 AIS 10 7 3 24 26 11
3 UTSSU 10 4 6 18 16 20
4 University Blues 10 4 6 18 16 22
5 Volleyball WA 10 4 6 18 16 20
6 Canberra Heat 10 3 7 16 12 25

Last Uploaded : Sun 15-Nov-2009 20:14:46

You can check all the details on the  AVL page. The regulations for tied results follow:

Competition points are allocated as follows:
Match won – 3 points
Match lost – 1 point
Forfeit or disqualification – 0 points
The final placings of all teams at the conclusion of Round 4 will determine the four teams and match schedule for the Finals Series which includes semi-finals and the Bronze and Gold Medal Playoff teams.

In the case of a tie in league points between two or more teams at the completion of round 4, the following processes will be used to break the tie in accordance with the Rules of the Game. These processes are to be applied in the order listed and as soon as the tied teams are separated by one of the processes, no subsequent processes are to be applied.

Points Ratio
The order of ranking will be determined by Points Ratio, with the team with the highest points ratio (to two decimal points) will be awarded the higher placing in the round robin.
Points Ratio = Points Won / Points Won + Points Lost

Example of Points Ratio Process
Team A: won 444 points, lost 356, played 800 Team B: won 421 points, lost 279, played 700
Team A Points Ratio = 444/800 = 0.56 Team B Points Ratio = 421/700 = 0.60
Team B has the highest Points Ratio and is therefore awarded the higher placing in the round robin.

Set Ratio
If the tie still exists after the calculation of the Points Ratio, the order of ranking will be determined by Sets Ratio. The team with the highest sets ratio (to two decimal points) will be awarded the higher placing in the round robin:
Set Ratio = Sets Won / Sets Won + Sets Lost

Example of Set Ratio Process
Team A: won 12 sets, lost 8, played 20 Team B: won 10 sets, lost 9, played 19
Team A Set Ratio = 12/20 = 0.60 Team B Set Ratio = 10/19 = 0.53
Team A has the highest set ratio and is therefore awarded the higher placing in the round robin.

If the tie still exists after the calculation of the Sets Ratio, the order of ranking will be determined on the basis of aspects of matches completed between the tied teams.

38 Responses to “MAVL round 3 results”

  1. louise said

    the one win today already means the Pirates are first going into Melbourne.
    I know a HELL OF A LOT can happen & change there but the QLD young team in Perth are doing a great job, and the whole older/younger combination of the team in the various rounds show a great camaraderie and diverse array of players!!
    Hope to be in Melbourne in person to cheer them on (so sorry Kos will not be there to play – a dedicated player and truly great guy) – and THAT all said from a true blue (Uni Sydney) Sydneysider!!
    The fight for 3rd and 4th is really exciting and that’s great for the AVL and men’s volleyball!
    Keep up the great work everyone … and BRING ON MELBOURNE!!!!
    GO MEN’s AVL!!!

  2. Troy M said

    AIS are guaranteed to finish second… so its just a scramble for the final 2 spots, and QLD losing to WA really mixes things up…

    Anyone know where the points differences for each team can be found? (i’m guessing that could come into play)

  3. Troy M said

    Not sure how they calculate the difference percentage, but I went through all the match results and tallied them (could be errors, so check for yourself :P)

    This is what I had for points [+x = points for, -x = points against, (+/-x) = difference]:

    QLD: +817, -767 (+50)
    AIS: +794, -665 (+129)
    UTSSU: +794, -820 (-26)
    UNI BLUES: +693, -738 (-45)
    WA: +660, -682 (-22)
    CANBERRA: +619, -675 (-56)

  4. Troy M said

    according to my calculations UTSSU are guaranteed a spot now…

    – If Uni Blues win, it will finish:
    1st: QLD, 2nd: AIS, 3rd: Uni Blues, 4th: UTSSU

    – If WA win – and score 13-15 more points than Uni Blues it will finish:
    1st: QLD, 2nd: AIS, 3rd: WA, 4th: UTSSU

    – If WA win – and score 10 more points than Uni Blues it will finish:
    1st: QLD, 2nd: AIS, 3rd: UTSSU, 4th: WA

    – If WA win – and have a points advantage of 9 or less over Uni Blues it will finish:
    1st: QLD, 2nd: AIS, 3rd: UTSSU, 4th: Uni Blues

    Because it is a percentage thing – not absolute difference, it might vary… I hope this is right… if it is, there is one spot up for grabs and the Uni Blues/WA game will decide it – and a win by itself is not enough for the WA team.

  5. Troy M said

    (that is relying on me having entered each individual set score from the 3 rounds correctly – so if i made a mistake there then this is useless :P)

  6. Troy M said

    ummm apparently i calculated things wrong… fml :(

    Its QLD, AIS, Uni Blues, WA

  7. Troy M said

    I just double checked my numbers very thoroughly and found a couple of mistakes, but they did not change the overall trends.

    What I have at the moment appears to be correct unless AVF use a different formula to the one devo posted earlier – or the match results listed on the AVL page are incorrect (which could be the case – eg last game WA vs Uni Blues is listed as 14-25, 25-20, 25-20, 25-21 on the AVL page and listed as 14-25, 25-21, 25-20, 25-21 on the AVF news page)

    I have used the scores listed on the AVL page (not the AVF news reports) and this is what I came up with:

    not sure if forum supports image linking – if not here is where i uploaded a pic of my tables:

    So in the top right I have QLD’s stats. First row under QLD heading is AIS 85 91 101 106. This means QLD scored 85 points in game 1 against AIS, conceded 91 points against AIS in game 1, scored 101 points against AIS in game 2, conceded 106 points agains AIS in game 2.

    On the far right side is the table with percentages. “F” column represents total points scored by the respective team and is a sum of that teams “F1” and “F2” columns. “T” column represents total points played by the respective team and is the sum of the “F1”, “A1”, “F2”, “A2” columns. “%” column is “F” column divided by “T” column.

    Could someone please go over my numbers and double check because I don’t understand how it is so different to what the AVF have listed on

    • The Hoff said

      …whatever you were linking to has been taken down…
      “no news_id given”

      • Troy M said

        i checked this link after i posted it and it was working…

        it was a link to the WA vs Uni Blues page which seems to have been removed from the AVF news feed now…

        • Troy M said

          in my infinite wisdom (cough cough) decided to take a screen capture of the table that was on that page… so here is what i was linking to originally

      • devo said

        @ The Hoff,

        I think that was a wise move by AVF. Better no news rather than (maybe) wrong news.

        The AVF guys in Perth have gone back to the score sheets to double check every figure. The process will take 1 to 2 hours. We just need to be patient.

  8. Yaegan said


    So I just went through it… and keep in mind that my results could be wrong, and that as I used the website for the results, they could be wrong also… But here is how I worked it out to be.

    For the points ratio, using the formula set out in the tournament regulations – which states that points will only be counted to the second decimal place:

    WA – 0.4888 – rounded to 0.49
    Uni Blues – 0.4925 – rounded to 0.49
    UTSSU – 0.4919 – rounded to 0.49

    three way tie by points. That means it goes to a set count back (to two decimal points).

    WA – 0.4444 – rounded to 0.44
    Uni Blues – 0.421053 – rounded to – 0.42
    UTSSU – 0.444444 – rounded to 0.44

    So, by my calculations, WA and UTSSU get through on set count back, and Uni Blues miss out.

    However we now have three different results from three different people. Can someone do this that doesn’t have any affiliation to any club…? Please, and soon, please.

    If people, didn’t know already, Troy and I are from UTSSU

    I would like to get this sorted out as soon as possible.



  9. Yaegan said

    Sorry, just a clarification.

    Troy and My points ratios are exactly the same – and they were done completely independently. He just didn’t realise that the points are only counted to the second decimal. So, that would suggest that if the website is correct, our results are correct. If we are wrong, it is because the website has got the wrong scores.

  10. Pierre Montgomery said

    Reading the choice words of Yaegan (which I must confess resonate in my head with all the splendour of the finest European orchestra) I sit; and I ponder; will the AVF have the courage to uninvite Uni Blues from playing in the finals series in Melbourne after already telling them they are playing.

    I should admit that I would be disappointed, but not shocked if the AVF were to ‘overlook’ their tournament regulations and modify the finals format to allow for 5 teams.

  11. fan of yaegan said

    Perhaps a 6 team finals format??

    I was very pleased to see AVL’s most attractive player take the court against Uni Blues. Sitting quietly in the crowd, I could not take my eyes off him (I’m sure I wasn’t the only one!)
    Not quite sure of the result – beauty was the winner!

  12. Dad said

    Actually, this does point out yet another ‘difference’ between FIVB regs and AVF regs.

    FIVB regs
    8.3.1 Points quotient = In the case of equality in the number of match points
    gained by two or several teams, they will be classified in descending
    order by the quotient resulting from the division of all points scored by
    the total of points lost during all sets.
    8.3.2 Set quotient = If the tie persists as per the points quotient (8.3.1) the
    teams will be classified in descending order by the quotient resulting
    from the division of the number of all sets won by the number of all sets
    8.3.3 If the tie continues as per the set quotient (8.3.2) between two teams,
    the priority will be given to the team which won the last match between
    8.3.4 When the tie in set quotient is between three or more teams, a new
    classification of these teams in the terms of 8.2 and 8.3 will be made
    taking into consideration only the matches in which they were opposed
    to each other.

    Thus rounding. and ‘to two decimal places’ are NOT used by the FIVB.

    And the formula is different for point and set ratio.

    FIVB then go to the result of the last match between two tied teams.

    WE however do this

    If the tie still exists after the calculation of the Sets Ratio, the order of ranking will be determined on the
    basis of aspects of matches completed between the tied teams.

    Coin Toss

    If the tie still exists after the calculation of Sets Ratio, a coin toss will be used to separate the tied teams.
    The team that wins the Coin Toss will be awarded the higher placing in the round robin.

    Which is as clear as mud. What would happen ‘if the tie still exists after the calculation of the Sets Ratio’?

    Do we look at ‘aspects of matches completed between the tied teams’ (and just what and how do we look at?), or do we go straight to the coin toss? And were we playing a round robin?

    2009AJVC regs seem not to mention the two decimal places, (but does use it in the examples) and is a different order (sets then points then coin toss).

    And I am not going to look at the AVSC regs.

    • Dad said

      Well, using the FIVB method,

      3rd Uni Blues 0.97159091
      4th UTSSU 0.96829268
      5th WA 0.9549763

      But AVF Rules rule!…………………..

  13. Morky said

    I was up late last night doing the calculations and came up witht the following:

    Team Played Won Lost Pts Pt Won Pt Played Ratio
    QAS Pirates 10 8 2 18 918 1786 0.514
    AIS 10 7 3 17 869 1621 0.5360888
    Uni Blues 10 4 6 14 854 1734 0.4925
    UTSSU 10 4 6 14 794 1614 0.4919
    WA 10 4 6 14 806 1649 0.4888
    Heat 10 3 7 13 773 1624 0.4759852

    There seems to have been a munumental F***-UP. Compared to what the AVF have calculated, there are some HUGE differences. I am now the 4th person from UTSSU who has gone back through ALL the AVL results to do the calculations. All 4 of us have the same answers independently.

    In the case of UTSSU, there are 30 too few point in the “won” column and 10 too many in the “points played” column. Uni Blues miss out on almost 60 point in the “won” column by the AVF and have about 150 points too few in the “points played” column by the AVF. Similarly WA miss out on almost 40 point in the “won” column by the AVF and have almost 100 point to few in the “points played” column.

    What the hell is going on???? Can no-one at the AVF add up??????

    Even if some of the results on the AVF website are wrong, the number of points we are talking about equated to whole games or more. Missing 150 points in the “points played” column of a team, equates to 6 lost sets of volleyball.

    I for one have lost all faith in the AVF, and the future of our club in this competition is extremely doubtful. If we want a competition run by amateurs, then we might as well do it ourselves and save the excessive costs!

  14. Paul Prindiville said

    I too have run my eye over the figures for my own sanity to double check from our point of view. I get the same results as the gents above. Ie all three teams a tie on a point ratio of .49 (to 2 decimal points as per the tournament regulations) and then us and UTSSU with .44 as a set ratio and Uni Blues .42.

  15. The Hoff said

    Hopefully the avf have informed all teams to hold off booking flights…
    …that could make this even more messy than it already is…

  16. The Hoff said

    …oh WOW… only just noticed…

    QAS Pirates lost to Canberra Heat 2-3 (25-18, 20-25, 25-20, 25-18, 15-11 )

    Good job Heat!

  17. Robbo said

    Yeah i got some different results with my own calculations. disclaimer: This was just some quick work so there ‘could’ be a mistake….

    Either way, this is a very tough situation

    Team Games Playes Games Won Games Lost Points Sets Fro Sets Ag Set Ratio Points For Points Ag Point Ratio
    QAS 10 8 2 26 26 14 0.65 918 868 0.51
    AIS 10 7 3 24 26 11 0.70 869 752 0.54
    WA 10 4 6 18 16 20 0.44 781 823 0.49
    UTS 10 4 6 18 16 20 0.44 769 806 0.49
    Uni Blues 10 4 6 18 16 22 0.42 834 855 0.49
    Heat 10 3 7 16 12 25 0.32 740 815 0.48
  18. Anon said

    Official results are up on the AVL page! UTSSU are in, uni blues are out! i must say, WA are extremely lucky that the points ratio is rounded to the 2nd decimal. Its disappointing to see uni blues not in the finals, on their day i think they are a better team than UTSSU.

    • Troy M said

      UTSSU beat Uni Blues twice.
      UTSSU had a better set difference than Uni Blues.
      UTSSU had a better points difference than WA.

      On their day, just about anyone can beat anyone who is not on their day (ie QLD losing to last placed Canberra Heat – not rubishing Canberra Heat because on their day they were good enough to beat anyone).

      I really don’t think there is anything in the objective facts that indicates UTSSU should have missed for the sake of Uni Blues or WA

      • Joe said

        It is simply pathetic that in this day and age they round off at two decimal places. The data is available to have a more accurate assessment done and while the blundering avf may have though it unlikely that two teams would end up equal in this way we actually have three! If they went to four decimal places WA misses out. Incompetency = AVF.

  19. The Hoff said

    It is quite disappointing that this error needed to be pointed out by the players, and does not help avf’s otherwise sparkling reputation.

    If we think back to the days of no internet etc, i’m sure this bad error would have slipped through unnoticed.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: