#252 Texas-B (5-9)

avg: 730  •  sd: 58.98  •  top 16/20: 0%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
35 Missouri** Loss 5-13 1186.83 Ignored Feb 25th Dust Bowl 2023
161 Rice Loss 5-11 511.8 Feb 25th Dust Bowl 2023
93 Iowa Loss 6-12 846.98 Feb 25th Dust Bowl 2023
264 Oklahoma State Win 10-7 1070.9 Feb 25th Dust Bowl 2023
189 Luther Loss 5-8 541.44 Feb 26th Dust Bowl 2023
326 Kansas State Win 11-4 884.51 Feb 26th Dust Bowl 2023
269 Harding Win 8-6 950.02 Feb 26th Dust Bowl 2023
96 Arkansas** Loss 5-13 821.49 Ignored Mar 11th Centex Tier 2
331 Texas Tech Win 12-8 700.4 Mar 11th Centex Tier 2
217 Texas-Dallas Loss 9-10 747.96 Mar 11th Centex Tier 2
186 Texas State Loss 7-15 397.85 Mar 12th Centex Tier 2
264 Oklahoma State Win 11-10 806.23 Mar 12th Centex Tier 2
193 North Texas Loss 11-12 849.85 Mar 12th Centex Tier 2
161 Rice Loss 6-13 511.8 Mar 12th Centex Tier 2
**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)