#97 Delaware (5-5)

avg: 1419  •  sd: 67.02  •  top 16/20: 0%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
168 Johns Hopkins Win 14-9 1560.44 Feb 18th Blue Hen Open
70 Lehigh Loss 13-14 1401.73 Feb 18th Blue Hen Open
82 Binghamton Loss 11-12 1336.54 Feb 18th Blue Hen Open
169 NYU Win 11-10 1208.8 Feb 19th Blue Hen Open
82 Binghamton Loss 9-12 1116.17 Feb 19th Blue Hen Open
147 Connecticut Win 10-5 1736.37 Mar 4th Fish Bowl
56 James Madison Loss 9-11 1350.43 Mar 4th Fish Bowl
63 Rutgers Win 11-9 1817.99 Mar 4th Fish Bowl
134 Carnegie Mellon Win 10-9 1361.31 Mar 5th Fish Bowl
25 North Carolina-Wilmington Loss 6-15 1284.26 Mar 5th Fish Bowl
**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)