#138 Fat Stacks (3-9)

avg: 616.53  •  sd: 78.34  •  top 16/20: 0%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
48 Fungi Loss 7-13 945.03 Jun 28th Colorado Summer Solstice Part 2
94 Colorado Cutthroat U-20 Boys Loss 11-12 902.27 Jun 28th Colorado Summer Solstice Part 2
158 Sonoran Dog Loss 10-13 111.93 Jun 28th Colorado Summer Solstice Part 2
144 Carbon Win 14-12 810.4 Jun 29th Colorado Summer Solstice Part 2
126 Nomads Loss 10-15 300.5 Jun 29th Colorado Summer Solstice Part 2
158 Sonoran Dog Win 11-6 986.76 Jun 29th Colorado Summer Solstice Part 2
53 Cache Valley High Ground Loss 6-13 801.45 Jul 12th Deseret Storm
88 X Wives-A Loss 3-13 493.05 Jul 12th Deseret Storm
149 Reál Hogs FC [B] Win 13-11 764.89 Jul 12th Deseret Storm
110 Lil’ Huckers Loss 9-13 445.7 Jul 13th Deseret Storm
149 Reál Hogs FC [B] Loss 9-10 411.05 Jul 13th Deseret Storm
90 PowderHogs Loss 5-13 481.16 Jul 13th Deseret Storm
**Blowout Eligible

FAQ

What is the uncertainty of the mean?
The uncertainty of the mean is equal to the standard deviation of the set of game ratings, divided by the square root of the number of games. We treated a team’s ranking as a normally distributed random variable, with the USAU ranking as the mean and the uncertainty of the ranking as the standard deviation
What's the algorithm again?
  1. Calculate uncertainy for USAU ranking averge
  2. Model ranking as a normal distribution around USAU averge with standard deviation equal to uncertainty
  3. Simulate seasons by drawing a rank for each team from their distribution. Note the teams in the top 16 (club) or top 20 (college)
  4. Sum the fractions for each region for how often each of it's teams appeared in the top 16 (club) or top 20 (college)
  5. Subtract one from each fraction for "autobids"
  6. Award remainings bids to the regions with the highest remaining fraction, subtracting one from the fraction each time a bid is awarded
Is there a longer explanation of all this?
There is an article on Ulitworld written by Scott Dunham and I that gives a little more context (though it probably was the thing that linked you here)