#243 NYWT (1-11)

avg: 103.75  •  sd: 114.66  •  top 16/20: 0%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
22 Storm** Loss 1-13 1089.35 Ignored Aug 5th Philly Open 2023
91 Brackish** Loss 3-13 486.1 Ignored Aug 5th Philly Open 2023
149 ColorBomb Loss 5-10 231.41 Aug 5th Philly Open 2023
234 Voltage Loss 7-13 -315.63 Aug 5th Philly Open 2023
201 Spice Loss 9-10 398.93 Aug 6th Philly Open 2023
207 Buffalo Brain Freeze Loss 8-11 114.01 Aug 6th Philly Open 2023
155 NY Swipes Loss 6-13 190.42 Aug 26th The Incident 2023
227 The Incidentals Loss 5-13 -286.02 Aug 26th The Incident 2023
183 Starfire Loss 4-13 2.97 Aug 27th The Incident 2023
216 Brooklyn Hive Loss 9-12 59.71 Aug 27th The Incident 2023
97 Farm Show** Loss 4-13 455.09 Ignored Aug 27th The Incident 2023
227 The Incidentals Win 12-10 552.1 Aug 27th The Incident 2023
**Blowout Eligible

FAQ

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
  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
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)