Ultimate Frisbee or "Ultimate," is a fast growing field sport that is being played competitively at universities across the country. Many mid-tier college teams have the goal of winning as many games as possible, however they also need to grow their program by training and retaining new players. The purpose of this project was to create a prototype statistical tool that maximizes a player line-up's probability of scoring the next point, while having as equal playing time across all experienced and novice players as possible. Game, player, and team data was collected for 25 different games played over the course of 4 tournaments during Fall 2017 and early Spring 2018 using the UltiAnalytics iPad application. "Amount of Top 1/3 Players" was the measure of equal playing time, and "Line Efficiency" and "Line Interaction" represented a line's probability of scoring. After running a logistic regression, Line Efficiency was found to be the more accurate predictor of scoring outcome than Line Interaction. An "Equal PT Measure vs. Line Efficiency" graph was then created and the plot showed what the optimal lines were depending on what the user's preferences were at that point in time. Possible next steps include testing the model and refining it as needed.

Based on findings of previous studies, there was speculation that two well-known experimental design software packages, JMP and Design Expert, produced varying power outputs given the same design and user inputs. For context and scope, another popular experimental design software package, Minitab® Statistical Software version 17, was added to the comparison. The study compared multiple test cases run on the three software packages with a focus on 2k and 3K factorial design and adjusting the standard deviation effect size, number of categorical factors, levels, number of factors, and replicates. All six cases were run on all three programs and were attempted to be run at one, two, and three replicates each. There was an issue at the one replicate stage, however—Minitab does not allow for only one replicate full factorial designs and Design Expert will not provide power outputs for only one replicate unless there are three or more factors. From the analysis of these results, it was concluded that the differences between JMP 13 and Design Expert 10 were well within the margin of error and likely caused by rounding. The differences between JMP 13, Design Expert 10, and Minitab 17 on the other hand indicated a fundamental difference in the way Minitab addressed power calculation compared to the latest versions of JMP and Design Expert. This was found to be likely a cause of Minitab’s dummy variable coding as its default instead of the orthogonal coding default of the other two. Although dummy variable and orthogonal coding for factorial designs do not show a difference in results, the methods affect the overall power calculations. All three programs can be adjusted to use either method of coding, but the exact instructions for how are difficult to find and thus a follow-up guide on changing the coding for factorial variables would improve this issue.