#152 UCLA-B (3-7)

avg: 401.62  •  sd: 116.58  •  top 16/20: 0%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
183 Cal Poly-SLO-C Win 13-7 432.27 Feb 1st Pres Day Quals men
176 California-San Diego-B Win 13-8 565.82 Feb 1st Pres Day Quals men
55 Grand Canyon Loss 7-13 659.4 Feb 1st Pres Day Quals men
84 Cal Poly-SLO-B Loss 8-12 583.49 Feb 2nd Pres Day Quals men
121 California-Davis Win 9-5 1212.99 Feb 2nd Pres Day Quals men
99 Santa Clara Loss 7-11 412.97 Feb 2nd Pres Day Quals men
116 California-Santa Cruz-B Loss 4-12 145.44 Feb 8th Stanford Open Mens
157 Loyola Marymount Loss 9-11 107.16 Feb 8th Stanford Open Mens
167 Cal State-Long Beach Loss 6-9 -224.32 Feb 9th Stanford Open Mens
157 Loyola Marymount Loss 10-11 231.37 Feb 9th Stanford Open Mens
**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)