Standings as of 2018-04-24

Standings are aimed to be released by the end of every Tuesday. 

The 2017-2018 College Dodgeball Season is complete. For this 2018 Season, we had 70 technical upsets in 296 ranked matches (76.35% success rate) across 39 events, including Nationals 2018. This is the most ranked matches played in a season (2017 was 286), though we played one less event (2017 had 40 events)

The Gonzalez System is a computer ranking model similar to Elo and is a rating exchange system based on research performed by World Rugby. It has been adapted by the NCDA to the demands of College Dodgeball, but can be tuned and customized endlessly to incorporate accurate data. It has been used to help determine seeds for the Nationals bracket since Nationals 2014, and was used exclusively for the Nationals 2017 and Nationals 2018 bracket. 

Technical Upset Spotlight (Nationals 2018 edition)

A technical upset in the Gonzalez System is when a lower rated team defeats a higher rated team. The overall success rate of the system is currently 80.21% based on 306 technical upsets in 1546 ranked matches played since 2010-09-25.

Nationals 2018 had 13 technical upsets over 59 ranked matches, a 74.58% success rate and a tiny dip below the 2018 Season success rate (76.35%). Saturday had 9 technical upsets over 36 matches, about right on par for the 2018 Season’s predictive success rate (~75%) just prior to Nationals.

Additionally, there were eight overtimes at Nationals, and four of these were technical upsets, which is fairly average overall. OT tends to split in terms of whether the result was a technical upset or a predicted exchange. OT matches make up 9% of all matches at Nationals, 32 of 355.  Overtime occurs slightly more readily at Nationals than across the whole of ranked matches, by a percentage point: 125 of 1546 at 8%.

All exchanges for ranked matches played at a Nationals are doubled, so the minimum/maximum range for a rating exchange is 0.020 to 4.000, with a 2.000 exchange being a completely even match. These double strength Nationals matches account for 22.96% of the records, 355 of 1546.

Saturday’s Upsets

UVA def UNG 2-1

37.254 def 42.598, exchanging 3.069

The largest upset of Saturday, and the biggest rating swing of Nationals 2018, exchanging a hefty 3.069 in a double strength Nationals match. In fact, at a rating gap of -5.344 between the two teams, the technical upset ranks 4th in eight Nationals worth of historical records. To prove this was a pretty big deal, I’m going to throw even more numbers at you. This upset ranks #32 of an overall 306 technical upsets throughout the Records, in the 89th percentile. It is quite rare for this kind of match to happen at on the stage that is Nationals.

CSU def GSU 4-1

34.159 def 38.662, exchanging 2.901

3rd of 13 upsets at Nationals 2018, 8th at a Nationals, 61 of 306 overall.

OSU def UWP 2-1

38.433 def 42.195, exchanging 2.752

4th of 13 upsets at Nationals 2018, 12th at a Nationals, 87 of 306 overall.

VCU def SVSU 3-2 OT

44.805 def 46.935, exchanging 1.113

7th of 13 upsets at Nationals 2018, 38th at a Nationals, 213 of 306 overall. 7th of 32 OT upsets at a Nationals, 40 of 51 OT upsets overall.

Akron def UNG 2-1

38.410 def 39.529, exchanging 2.224

8th of 13 upsets at Nationals 2018, 40th at a Nationals, 216 of 306 overall.

VCU def UWP 5-0

42.675 def 44.324, exchanging 2.130

10th of 13 upsets at Nationals 2018, 52nd at a Nationals, 252 of 306 overall.

DePaul def UCF 4-3 OT

37.413 def 37.845, exchanging 1.043

11th of 13 upsets at Nationals 2018, 57th at a Nationals, 266 of 306 overall. 10th of 32 OT upsets at a Nationals, 47 of 51 OT upsets overall.

Akron def UMD 2-1

36.336 def 36.704, exchanging 2.074

12th of 13 upsets at Nationals 2018, 59th at a Nationals, 271 of 306 overall.

Kent def SVSU 2-1

48.641 def 49.008, exchanging 2.074

13th of 13 upsets at Nationals 2018, 60th at a Nationals, 272 of 306 overall.

Sunday Tournament Bracket Upsets

UMD def OSU 3-2 OT (Bracket)

36.015 def 42.175, exchanging 1.616

Occurring in the Sedenary Play-In Round of 24, a 21 def 12 seed upset. Of the eight Nationals on record, this technical upset is the largest rating gap (-6.160) of any technical upset that has ever occurred at a Nationals. It ranks #18 of all time, in the 94th percentile.

This is obviously the largest seed v seed upset that has occurred in Nationals bracket play, however its exchange is still lower than if UMD managed to defeat OSU in regulation time. The match was close, it was UMD 2-0 OSU at half and OSU climbing back to push into overtime.

Had Maryland been able to close out in regulation, they would have toppled the current largest rating exchange at Nationals, Towson def OSU 2-1 in Nationals 2015 bracket play at WKU. That Octonary, round of 16 match was a -5.575 rating gap and largest Upset exchange (3.115) of a Nationals. Being present for both of these matches, the Towson upset was also a doozy to see in person, and OSU was just a few players away from tying it up before time expired. That’s two heartbreaker early exits in a generation for OSU, when they were heavily predicted to win.

SVSU def Kent 3-2 (Bracket)

48.297 def 51.981, exchanging 2.737

Occurring in the Quaternary finals, round of eight, a 6 def 3 seed upset. There have been a lot of quaterfinal matches across Nationals history, so seeing upsets in this round isn’t out of the ordinary. What this match does highlight is the competitive field of the third, forth, fifth, and sixth ratings across the entire 2018 Season. I’ve mentioned this many times over the weeks of this season, but that section has been incredibly competitive with sixth jumping to third one week and the reverse happening the next. Even on Saturday, Kent defeated SVSU in the smallest technical upset of the weekend (13th/59).

MSU def VCU 4-3 OT (Bracket)

44.319 def 46.226, exchanging 1.291

Occurring in the Octonary round, round of sixteen, a 10 def 7 seed upset. This high scoring Overtime match rocked the crowd. It was very, very loud on the court. It fell sixth of the 13 upsets across Nationals 2018. Over all Nationals, it was the 5th technical upset in OT.

GVSU def CMU 6-1 (2018 Championship)

56.816 def 57.893, exchanging 2.215

In eight recorded National Championships across the Gonzalez system, this is the first technical upset at that level. Going into that Championship, CMU had a slight advantage with just 1.007 points between ratings. Further, this is the shallowest Rating Gaps across the eight National Championships. Ranking 221 of 306 technical upsets, falling in the 27th percentile, it placed 9th of the 13 technical upsets across Nationals 2018.

Candidly, in one way, this is an example of a failing within the system. The Gonzalez system failed to predict the winner at the highest level. However, the rating gap was very shallow, indicating if an upset were to happen it would be more likely to occur in this circumstance. A deeper potential for an upset to happen, a knock to the usual 80.21% success rate across the whole of the system. The system did deliver the top two ratings to the National Championship in the fairest manner we’ve seen across the NCDA’s 14 year history.

It is important to remember that actual results and hard data contribute to the system. GVSU won the match by playing dodgeball better than their competitor. This action can occur at any time.

Post Nationals 2018 Ratings, sorted.

Mov.	Rank	Rating	Team
↑ from 2	1	59.031	GVSU
↓ from 1	2	55.677	CMU
↑ from 7	3	50.447	BGSU
↓ from 3	4	49.979	SVSU
—	5	49.245	Kent
↓ from 4	6	48.121	Towson
↓ from 6	7	47.976	JMU
↑ from 10	8	45.590	MSU
↑ from 11	9	44.935	VCU
↓ from 8	10	43.771	UK
↑ from 13	11	42.369	Miami
↑ from 14	12	41.747	Ohio
↑ from 26	13	41.620	UVA
↑ from 31	14	41.500	Akron
↓ from 9	15	40.972	UWP
↓ from 15	16	40.584	PSU
↑ from 24	17	40.559	OSU
↓ from 16	18	40.502†	UNT
↓ from 17	19	40.324*	SIUE
↓ from 18	20	40.020*†	ZAG
↓ from 19	21	39.980*†	OS
↓ from 20	22	39.362	WKU
↓ from 22	23	38.586*†	UWW
↓ from 23	24	38.557*†	NIU
↑ from 28	25	37.611	UMD
↑ from 29	26	36.636*	Midland
↓ from 25	27	36.263	DePaul
↑ from 36	28	36.009	CSU
↑ from 32	29	35.805	BSU
↓ from 12	30	35.682	UNG
↓ from 30	31	35.564	UCF
↑ from 33	32	35.556	SU
↑ from 34	33	35.044*	WVU
↑ from 35	34	34.996	MC
↓ from 27	35	34.619	UNL
↓ from 21	36	34.570	GSU
↑ from 38	37	32.595	BW
↓ from 37	38	29.586	NSU

Movement as of 2018-04-10
* denotes a provisional rating (< 6 matches)
† denotes a team that has not played three games this season, the required minimum games needed to qualify for Nationals.

This is where our Member Teams ended their 2018 Season. Double strength matches at Nationals have the potential to touch every section of the Standings, and they did so with great enthusiasm. Only Kent kept their #5 ranking.

Inactive and defunct teams (as determined by the Exec Board, from not playing in the 2018 Season, among other criteria) have been removed from this table.

Congratulations to everyone on their seasons. It was a big year.

2019 Pre-Season Ratings

Rank	Rating	Team
1	54.519	GVSU
2	52.003	CMU
3	48.081	BGSU
4	47.730	SVSU
5	47.179	Kent
6	46.336	Towson
7	46.227	JMU
8	44.438	MSU
9	43.946	VCU
10	43.073	UK
11	42.022	Miami
12	41.555	Ohio
13	41.460	UVA
14	41.370	Akron
15	40.975	UWP
16	40.684	PSU
17	40.664	OSU
18	40.622	UNT
19	40.489	SIUE
20	40.260	ZAG
21	40.230	OS
22	39.767	WKU
23	39.185	UWW
24	39.163	NIU
25	38.453	UMD
26	37.722	Midland
27	37.442	DePaul
28	37.252	CSU
29	37.099	BSU
30	37.007	UNG
31	36.918	UCF
32	36.912	SU
33	36.528	WVU
34	36.492	MC
35	36.210	UNL
36	36.173	GSU
37	34.691	BW
38	32.435	NSU

This is where teams will start their 2019 Season. Season to Season Carry Over functions as a way of collapsing the rating gap from top to bottom ratings, and to account for real world losses to a team’s roster. Teams keep 75% of their rating once they enter the off season, and for the remaining portion, it is reverted to the League Mean. We add 25% of the League Mean Rating. More information can be found in the Gonzalez System Spec Doc.

Policy [Section 4.2.2.2.1] denotes that any team that did not play a ranked match in the previous season (this case meaning the 2018 season) does not contribute to the League Mean Rating. For various reasons, some teams might be listed in the rating tables (active, paying dues, etc) but do not contribute to the League Mean Rating when Season to Season Carry Over occurs and every team rating is reverted to the League Mean.

See the Resource Center for more documentation.
Records, Master Spreadsheet: 2005-Present
Records, Individual Docs: 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018
Systems: Gonzalez Current, Gonzalez Old, Perrone, Champ, Lieblich
Spec Document: Gonzalez System Spec Doc