#124 Xavier (8-5)

avg: 1134.5  •  sd: 66.64  •  top 16/20: 0%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
164 Indiana Win 9-4 1442.49 Mar 1st Huckleberry Flick 2025
42 Kenyon** Loss 3-9 1237.77 Mar 1st Huckleberry Flick 2025
209 Miami (Ohio)** Win 11-3 1101.43 Ignored Mar 1st Huckleberry Flick 2025
230 Purdue-B** Win 10-1 863.03 Ignored Mar 1st Huckleberry Flick 2025
101 Butler Loss 3-9 712.73 Mar 2nd Huckleberry Flick 2025
116 Cincinnati Loss 9-12 849.87 Mar 2nd Huckleberry Flick 2025
165 Oberlin Win 10-4 1437.33 Mar 2nd Huckleberry Flick 2025
192 Tennessee-Chattanooga Win 11-5 1211.46 Mar 22nd Moxie Madness 2025
73 Union (Tennessee) Loss 4-13 922.08 Mar 22nd Moxie Madness 2025
190 Vanderbilt Win 8-6 955.67 Mar 22nd Moxie Madness 2025
156 Alabama Win 10-8 1201.28 Mar 23rd Moxie Madness 2025
142 Berry Win 9-6 1420.74 Mar 23rd Moxie Madness 2025
34 Ohio** Loss 2-13 1358.56 Ignored Mar 23rd Moxie Madness 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)