#67 Mount Holyoke (10-4)

avg: 1267.65  •  sd: 63.15  •  top 16/20: 0%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
194 Boston University-B** Win 9-2 767.89 Ignored Mar 25th New England Open1
96 Harvard Win 8-7 1146.25 Mar 25th New England Open1
22 Wellesley Loss 3-10 1147.61 Mar 25th New England Open1
118 Rhode Island Win 10-3 1459.74 Mar 25th New England Open1
32 SUNY-Binghamton Loss 3-7 1051.63 Mar 26th New England Open1
75 Boston University Loss 6-7 1096.28 Mar 26th New England Open1
120 Brandeis Win 8-6 1140.78 Mar 26th New England Open1
185 Messiah** Win 8-3 862.64 Ignored Apr 1st Shady Encounters
97 NYU Win 8-5 1464.05 Apr 1st Shady Encounters
139 Wesleyan Win 8-5 1153.84 Apr 1st Shady Encounters
95 Temple Win 7-5 1357.4 Apr 1st Shady Encounters
111 Lehigh Win 8-5 1372.68 Apr 2nd Shady Encounters
59 Penn State Loss 7-8 1176.54 Apr 2nd Shady Encounters
95 Temple Win 8-3 1629.26 Apr 2nd Shady Encounters
**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)