#40 Colt (10-3)

avg: 1661.83  •  sd: 109.18  •  top 16/20: 0%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
164 Spring Break '93** Win 15-5 990.29 Ignored Jun 28th Antlerlock 2025
101 TBD** Win 15-6 1568.44 Ignored Jun 28th Antlerlock 2025
63 DAPPER Win 13-11 1537.22 Jun 28th Antlerlock 2025
145 Motive** Win 15-1 1182.48 Ignored Jun 28th Antlerlock 2025
78 Odyssey Win 15-4 1734.8 Jun 29th Antlerlock 2025
63 DAPPER Win 15-10 1761.98 Jun 29th Antlerlock 2025
140 Crossfire** Win 13-3 1202.18 Ignored Jul 12th Boston Invite 2025
78 Odyssey Win 13-6 1734.8 Jul 12th Boston Invite 2025
169 BUDA Regional CUT [B]** Win 13-0 881.99 Ignored Jul 12th Boston Invite 2025
26 Red Tide Loss 11-13 1683.84 Jul 12th Boston Invite 2025
59 Big Wrench Win 15-8 1921.27 Jul 13th Boston Invite 2025
42 Houndd Loss 11-15 1267.7 Jul 13th Boston Invite 2025
32 Sprout Loss 12-13 1657.94 Jul 13th Boston Invite 2025
**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)