#223 Colorado College-B (1-9)

avg: 226.21  •  sd: 139.62  •  top 16/20: 0%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
76 Arizona** Loss 0-13 769.93 Ignored Mar 2nd Snow Melt 2024
115 Denver** Loss 2-11 519.61 Ignored Mar 2nd Snow Melt 2024
187 Colorado Mines Loss 2-6 -21.35 Mar 2nd Snow Melt 2024
210 Air Force Win 7-5 660.57 Mar 3rd Snow Melt 2024
187 Colorado Mines Loss 2-7 -21.35 Mar 3rd Snow Melt 2024
48 Colorado College** Loss 0-11 1013.36 Ignored Apr 13th South Central D III Womens Conferences 2024
133 Truman State** Loss 5-13 381.98 Ignored Apr 13th South Central D III Womens Conferences 2024
143 John Brown** Loss 3-9 319.46 Ignored Apr 13th South Central D III Womens Conferences 2024
66 Trinity** Loss 3-12 856.11 Ignored Apr 13th South Central D III Womens Conferences 2024
93 Rice** Loss 2-9 681.27 Ignored Apr 14th South Central D III Womens Conferences 2024
**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)