#285 Villanova (3-8)

avg: 549.69  •  sd: 114.98  •  top 16/20: 0%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
76 Princeton Loss 8-12 1042.11 Feb 18th Blue Hen Open
248 Drexel Win 10-7 1134.21 Feb 18th Blue Hen Open
169 NYU Loss 8-10 821.13 Feb 18th Blue Hen Open
167 Virginia Commonwealth Loss 6-13 490.1 Feb 18th Blue Hen Open
168 Johns Hopkins Loss 6-15 486.58 Feb 19th Blue Hen Open
82 Binghamton** Loss 4-14 861.54 Ignored Feb 19th Blue Hen Open
298 Hofstra Loss 3-11 -127.89 Apr 1st Fuego2
224 Haverford Loss 5-12 213.68 Apr 1st Fuego2
307 West Chester-B Win 8-6 704.78 Apr 1st Fuego2
298 Hofstra Loss 7-9 192.78 Apr 2nd Fuego2
239 Stevens Tech Win 8-7 886.75 Apr 2nd Fuego2
**Blowout Eligible


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)