#4 Tufts (10-3)

avg: 2426.44  •  sd: 126.82  •  top 16/20: 100%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
40 Georgia** Win 15-5 2130.7 Ignored Feb 11th Queen City Tune Up1
202 North Carolina-Wilmington** Win 15-2 645.79 Ignored Feb 11th Queen City Tune Up1
35 Michigan Win 15-8 2184.38 Feb 11th Queen City Tune Up1
45 Washington University** Win 15-4 2079.26 Ignored Feb 11th Queen City Tune Up1
7 Carleton College Win 10-8 2541.01 Feb 12th Queen City Tune Up1
1 North Carolina Loss 5-12 2337.91 Feb 12th Queen City Tune Up1
2 British Columbia Loss 8-11 2182.69 Mar 11th Stanford Invite Womens
25 California-Davis Win 10-5 2293.84 Mar 11th Stanford Invite Womens
17 California-San Diego Win 10-5 2398.47 Mar 11th Stanford Invite Womens
29 UCLA** Win 11-3 2264.62 Ignored Mar 11th Stanford Invite Womens
8 Stanford Win 13-7 2790.86 Mar 12th Stanford Invite Womens
1 North Carolina Loss 8-12 2496.76 Mar 12th Stanford Invite Womens
9 Washington Win 11-8 2549.13 Mar 12th Stanford Invite Womens
**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)