View Full Version : [FRCTop25.com] Week 1 Results Broadcast LIVE tonight!
Justin Montois
07-03-2012, 11:52
First off, a huge thank you to everyone who voted this week. Voter turnout was awesome and we can't stress enough how happy Mike and I are with the amount of submissions we got this week. (Even if it means a heck of a lot more work for us!)
Tonight at 10:30PM EST we will be hosting another LIVE episode of Mike and Justin in the Morning where Mike and I will release the Week 1 Rankings of the Top 25 teams in FRC. Last week we topped out at 122 viewers, can we break that record this week?
As always, if you have anything you would like to discuss, shoot an email to mikeandjustinitm@gmail.com and we'd be happy to bring it up. Also, if you want to give us some insight on something you saw this past weekend that you think is noteworthy please let us know, as much as we would love too, Mike and I can't watch every match or be at every event.
Also, we have two viewer videos to show that are AWESOME! If you would like to create your own segment please email us and we would be happy to talk to you about it. It could be anything from previewing a particular regional or making your own predictions or anything!
We can't for the show tonight and we hope you can join us!
Can't wait to see the show!
tsakshaug
07-03-2012, 16:05
have to see the "tape" still at work at that time, unless it is really slow
Justin Montois
08-03-2012, 00:16
Thanks for everyone that tuned in! We had a great time! We hope you guys did too!
Drivencrazy
08-03-2012, 01:17
It was a good cast. Still surprised to see 341 down in third but oh well. BTW did you get any pizza?
It was a good cast. Still surprised to see 341 down in third but oh well. BTW did you get any pizza?
Clearly people voted without actually watching all the events, because 341 was hands down the best team competing in week 1.
How is 118 and 148 ahead of 1477 who won the event ? What an insult.
ttldomination
08-03-2012, 03:08
How is 118 and 148 ahead of 1477 who won the event ? What an insult.
I don't know all of the stats, but I will say that 118 tops 1477 in my books.
As two machines going head to head, 118 definitely showed to be the more dominant robot, with 1477 playing a close second. 118's alliance was simply eliminated from the event because their elimination alliance failed to balance a bridge in their last match vs. a three robot balance, which is a devastating deficit to overcome with pure hoop offense.
The three robot balance might also be a reason why people prefer 148 over 1477 as well. Not saying that 148 was solely responsible, but their little stinger has received a lot of attention.
Nothing away from 1477, they have an excellent robot and deserved every ounce of the Alamo win, but I think these rankings really depend on what different people saw and what different people value.
- Sunny G.
I don't know all of the stats, but I will say that 118 tops 1477 in my books.
As two machines going head to head, 118 definitely showed to be the more dominant robot, with 1477 playing a close second. 118's alliance was simply eliminated from the event because their elimination alliance failed to balance a bridge in their last match vs. a three robot balance, which is a devastating deficit to overcome with pure hoop offense.
The three robot balance might also be a reason why people prefer 148 over 1477 as well. Not saying that 148 was solely responsible, but their little stinger has received a lot of attention.
Nothing away from 1477, they have an excellent robot and deserved every ounce of the Alamo win, but I think these rankings really depend on what different people saw and what different people value.
- Sunny G.
That's like saying the Green Bay Packers should be rated over the New York Giants who won the Superbowl because the Packers offense is more spectacular.
118 and 148 are more known in the FIRST community (you don't see very many threads even mentioning 1477 while there are threads dedicated solely to 118 and 148's robots. So matter what they did they wouldn't get the respect they deserve).
Results are what count not style points.
That's like saying the Green Bay Packers should be rated over the New York Giants who won the Superbowl because the Packers offense is more spectacular.
Results are what count not style points.
No it isn't.
You are no better than your alliance when it comes to win loss. That doesn't mean that the winner necessarily had the best robot. It means they had the best alliance.
No it isn't.
You are no better than your alliance when it comes to win loss. That doesn't mean that the winner necessarily had the best robot. It means they had the best alliance.
So what's the point of doing this dog and pony show if people are just going to vote for the teams they heard of and blow off teams that don't get as much exposure? Just put the usual suspects up and ignore the rest then.
So what's the point of doing this dog and pony show if people are just going to vote for the teams they heard of and blow off teams that don't get as much exposure? Just put the usual suspects up and ignore the rest then.
I fail to see why it's implausible that people legitimately believe one team is better than another, even if the team they think is better didn't win the regional.
The best robot doesn't always win. Nor does the best golfer/tennis player/swimmer/etc. That doesn't stop someone from being ranked #1 in the world even though they don't always win.
Squeakypig
08-03-2012, 07:43
Despite 2337 winning the Kettering district (which their alliance deserved to win) I feel like team 3322 should have ranked higher than them. Also, I believe 85 B.O.B. had a more impressive competition at Gull Lake than 51 did at Kettering. I think we will see better rankings around week 4. Until then, it really is gonna be about who the top names are, who posts the most videos on chief, etc.
Edit: Just saw 33 at the number 6 spot. For a team that didn't get their shooter working correctly until day 2 of competition...I don't think we saw them compete enough to put them that high...at all...I think they have the potential to do very good, but we haven't seen it in it's effect yet.
PayneTrain
08-03-2012, 07:59
341 gets high score of Week 1;Finishes Third...
Well, now I have motivation to vote. That's just silly.
Looking at the top 10 it seems to be a popularity contest. But I am glad to see a few new teams make the list too.
Chris Hibner
08-03-2012, 08:17
For those that believe in OPR, below is the top-50 OPR from week 1 (thanks bongle). This OPR includes OPR points awarded for the coopertition bridge during quals.
1 OPR 341 35.3801
2 OPR 1986 30.4368
3 OPR 118 27.4233
4 OPR 16 24.7187
5 OPR 3528 23.7081
6 OPR 1218 23.1749
7 OPR 716 23.0361
8 OPR 1477 22.8183
9 OPR 1208 22.0868
10 OPR 148 21.4331
11 OPR 488 21.0588
12 OPR 3322 20.4773
13 OPR 967 19.7735
14 OPR 935 18.6588
15 OPR 58 18.6124
16 OPR 1730 18.5956
17 OPR 486 17.6905
18 OPR 131 17.6758
19 OPR 1918 17.2691
20 OPR 2468 17.2359
21 OPR 1982 16.7821
22 OPR 231 16.4926
23 OPR 51 16.4507
24 OPR 3476 16.1193
25 OPR 885 15.9677
26 OPR 525 15.3935
27 OPR 2496 15.3004
28 OPR 1997 15.2512
29 OPR 319 15.1421
30 OPR 772 15.13
31 OPR 85 15.067
32 OPR 2386 14.9676
33 OPR 1987 14.7172
34 OPR 234 14.6423
35 OPR 3467 14.6028
36 OPR 1538 14.5944
37 OPR 2485 14.4801
38 OPR 2751 14.301
39 OPR 2848 14.1875
40 OPR 126 14.0645
41 OPR 1108 13.8912
42 OPR 2337 13.5748
43 OPR 1985 13.5436
44 OPR 2345 13.3764
45 OPR 33 13.2874
46 OPR 95 13.2699
47 OPR 3597 13.2631
48 OPR 1138 13.1683
49 OPR 3284 12.8843
50 OPR 1726 12.7834
While popularity certainly plays a role in some of the picks, these numbers show that some of the discussed controversial picks may not be so controversial. 118 and 1477 both look like they put up a lot of offense. The numbers show 118 put up a little more. 1477 stepped up their game when the chips were down. Who'll be better come St. Louis? It's too early to tell, but odds are that they'll both be in the hunt.
Despite 2337 winning the Kettering district (which their alliance deserved to win) I feel like team 3322 should have ranked higher than them. Also, I believe 85 B.O.B. had a more impressive competition at Gull Lake than 51 did at Kettering. I think we will see better rankings around week 4. Until then, it really is gonna be about who the top names are, who posts the most videos on chief, etc.
Edit: Just saw 33 at the number 6 spot. For a team that didn't get their shooter working correctly until day 2 of competition...I don't think we saw them compete enough to put them that high...at all...I think they have the potential to do very good, but we haven't seen it in it's effect yet.
I think that it is hard for voters to accurately get a feel for which robots at an event are the best, and how robots from different events compare with each other. If I wasn't from Michigan and I saw that 33 was first pick at Kettering, I might rank them pretty high.
My ballot tended to be a mixture of OPR and robot performance in eliminations, with a skew toward events that I thought were more competitive. Hatboro-Horsham had some amazing scoring machines, but outside 3476 I wasn't very impressed by San Diego. (399 over 3476? They were 6th pick and I trust the scouts of the first 5 teams.)
Despite 2337 winning the Kettering district (which their alliance deserved to win) I feel like team 3322 should have ranked higher than them. Also, I believe 85 B.O.B. had a more impressive competition at Gull Lake than 51 did at Kettering. I think we will see better rankings around week 4. Until then, it really is gonna be about who the top names are, who posts the most videos on chief, etc.
Edit: Just saw 33 at the number 6 spot. For a team that didn't get their shooter working correctly until day 2 of competition...I don't think we saw them compete enough to put them that high...at all...I think they have the potential to do very good, but we haven't seen it in it's effect yet.
I actually thought that 2337 was awesome, they scored A LOT of points in Elims. They deserved their spot. 3322 was also awesome, but are less well known, thus is the nature of the beast.
As to 33(us) popularity certainly had a lot to do with it. We were 49 in OPR using only Quals. However, if you added in Elims (when we actually mostly worked) we came up around 4th in OPR. No matter where we were placed, understand that we while we're glad that people think we are the #6 best team right now, WE don't think we were good enough and rest assured that we will be much much better come Troy in Week 5.
Just remember, it's all in fun. Additionally, the more informed voters their are, the less it is a popularity contest.
Regards, Bryan
Edit: Also, Awesome job on the show guys! Your hard work is really apprechiated!
Looking at the top 10 it seems to be a popularity contest. But I am glad to see a few new teams make the list too.
Yes, it is at least partially a popularity contest, it's a public poll. Not everyone was able to watch every event nor do they study all of the statistics. To expect anything more of this, or to get angry about the results is pointless.
Clinton Bolinger
08-03-2012, 09:28
Despite 2337 winning the Kettering district (which their alliance deserved to win) I feel like team 3322 should have ranked higher than them. Also, I believe 85 B.O.B. had a more impressive competition at Gull Lake than 51 did at Kettering. I think we will see better rankings around week 4. Until then, it really is gonna be about who the top names are, who posts the most videos on chief, etc.
This is going to sound extremely bias but 3322 was missing one important element to the game the Bridges. I truly believe that 3322 could have taking number one seed if they just focused more on the bridges during the qualification matches. Just by looking at the data that is provided by FIRST from Kettering:
Best Hybrid: 3322
Best Teleop: 1504
Best Bridge: 33
Best Coop: 2337
Best All Around: 51
3322 had the best Hybrid mode hands done and their 6 ball auto in the eliminations was definitely a force to be reckoned with.
**Note that the data presented in the chart below is taken directly from Kettering Team Standing Page provided by FIRST (http://www2.usfirst.org/2012comp/Events/gg/rankings.html). With a slight adjustment for the Coop Points scaling by a factor of ten (CP*10=Adj. CP). The reason I used 10 is because a Coop Balance is as good as a 2-Bot balance.
-Clinton-
Squeakypig
08-03-2012, 09:50
This is going to sound extremely bias but 3322 was missing one important element to the game the Bridges. I truly believe that 3322 could have taking number one seed if they just focused more on the bridges during the qualification matches. Just by looking at the data that is provided by FIRST from Kettering:
Best Hybrid: 3322
Best Teleop: 1504
Best Bridge: 33
Best Coop: 2337
Best All Around: 51
3322 had the best Hybrid mode hands done and their 6 ball auto in the eliminations was definitely a force to be reckoned with.
**Note that the data presented in the chart below is taken directly from Kettering Team Standing Page provided by FIRST (http://www2.usfirst.org/2012comp/Events/gg/rankings.html). With a slight adjustment for the Coop Points scaling by a factor of ten (CP*10=Adj. CP). The reason I used 10 is because a Coop Balance is as good as a 2-Bot balance.
-Clinton-
I'm assuming this includes elimination matches as well? Also, if I'm not mistaken, I do not believe that 3322 can balance (or they never tried). That forces them to pick 2 robots that are able to balance, but also let's them focus on scoring throughout the entire match. I don't know, it's just my opinion, I've been wrong many times in the past lol.
Also, if I'm not mistaken, I do not believe that 3322 can balance (or they never tried).
According to our data from this weekend, 3322 attempted a coop balance 4 times and was success once. They also tried a single bot balance 3 times and was successful once. So they can balance.
Greg Leighton
08-03-2012, 09:58
FRC Top 25, I’m gonna let you finish but Daisy had one of the best 1st week performances of all time.:D Only kind of joking, but seriously 341 did an amazing job, surprised they didn’t get #1. When I put my list together I looked hard at who won the competition, then did some ranking based on OPR, and on where teams got knocked out. Qualifications during a week 1 can be rough, so I thought it was fair to prioritize elimination performance in my list. I missed a few robots but other than that my list included 21 of the top 25 (1 of the teams I missed was my own).
My list:
341
1986
1218
16
1477
58
131
3476
234
148
1918
3322
231
772
118
935
33
85
357
4161
1138
862
51
399
2016
I'm assuming this includes elimination matches as well? Also, if I'm not mistaken, I do not believe that 3322 can balance (or they never tried). That forces them to pick 2 robots that are able to balance, but also let's them focus on scoring throughout the entire match. I don't know, it's just my opinion, I've been wrong many times in the past lol.
3322 can balance. In match 9 we scored 40 points by ourselves, including 10 points from balancing alone on the bridge. We tried balancing on the Coopertition bridge on Friday with 33 and failed, but in one of our matches on Saturday we balanced the Coop bridge.
We realized that the Coopertition bridge was a huge aspect of the ranking system, but in our matches we mostly tried to depend on our alliance partners (who couldn't score) to balance the Coopertition bridge. They would fail a lot of the time. We also were experiencing brownouts in our Jaguars that would cause us to fail halfway through our matches. In fact, this happened in every match we lost. Thus, our hybrid score was high but our bridge score was not. It's hard to balance a bridge when your robot cannot move.
Clinton Bolinger
08-03-2012, 09:59
I'm assuming this includes elimination matches as well? Also, if I'm not mistaken, I do not believe that 3322 can balance (or they never tried). That forces them to pick 2 robots that are able to balance, but also let's them focus on scoring throughout the entire match. I don't know, it's just my opinion, I've been wrong many times in the past lol.
The data is only from the Standings of the Qualification Matches.
During the elims both 33 and 2337 changed what they did during the match. 33 was hitting their Hybrid mode, while 2337 started marking shots during Tele.
This game changes a lot from the Qualification round to the Elims.
-Clinton-
The data is only from the Standings of the Qualification Matches.
During the elims both 33 and 2337 changed what they did during the match. 33 was hitting their Hybrid mode, while 2337 started marking shots during Tele.
This game changes a lot from the Qualification round to the Elims.
-Clinton-
It was my understanding that 33 and 2337 changed what they did during the match for eliminations because they got their shooters working better. There is no reason for 33 to not hit their hybrid mode in qualifications if they have it working.
This game shouldn't be extremely different between qualifications and eliminations. If the best teams all focus on balancing the Coopertition bridge in qualifications instead of focusing on scoring, then how are the top 8 going to know who the best scorers are in order to make the best picks?
It was my understanding that 33 and 2337 changed what they did during the match for eliminations because they got their shooters working better. There is no reason for 33 to not hit their hybrid mode in qualifications if they have it working.
We didn't get our shooter working better, just working more. We changed focus from coop bridges in qualifications to the hoops in elims. If anything changed, it was the drivers experience using the shooter. We didn't end up touching the shooter all weekend.
This game shouldn't be extremely different between qualifications and eliminations. If the best teams all focus on balancing the Coopertition bridge in qualifications instead of focusing on scoring, then how are the top 8 going to know who the best scorers are in order to make the best picks?
Scouting? That's how we did it.
Blackphantom91
08-03-2012, 10:14
I feel its kinda arbitrary to discuss how the rankings come out in the end due to the fact that not everyone is a scouting master. We have to understand that the results are subjected to what "hot" regional is being watched for that week. Regional broadcasts although absolutely amazing to have, don't always focus on every single robot in a moment of shine or trouble its up in the air on what voters see unless they are at that regional.
The question of is 1477 better than 118 and 148 and should be higher? Results say yes they are, but in the top 25 they are ranked lower than others and we ask why their performance on the field says so they came out the victor right? There also is an alliance that also helped them #Cutthenet because no one team can make it with out help, so why some of these teams on the list?
Its a lot for one person to consider when voting that I just think most people don't have the time to look at fully so it some what does become a popularity contest. I think its our job as viewers and educated "firsters" whom do pay attention to every detail to make note of these things during chat of the show, but at the end of the day it is a public poll so people will pick their favorite teams that they have seen or know by rep.
Good show this week interested in this weeks play and future play throughout the season good luck all teams competing in weeks out.
Scouting?
My point is that if a team isn't scoring in qualifications, it's hard for scouts to figure out how well they will score in eliminations.
My point is that if a team isn't scoring in qualifications, it's hard for scouts to figure out how well they will score in eliminations.
I would agree with that. We took a chance by going for the coop bridges that teams would see that we were going for ranking score, and not trying to score balls in teleop. In a perfect world, we would have been able to demonstrate our shooter during Friday and Saturday morning, but we weren't going to risk losing the coop bridge to shoot balls.
Scouting wise, we gave teams points for being able to balance the coop bridge with another robot. In our scouting data, it put us at a pretty accurate spot by calculated contribution.
Chris Hibner
08-03-2012, 10:25
My point is that if a team isn't scoring in qualifications, it's hard for scouts to figure out how well they will score in eliminations.
To an extent that is true. However, you have to change your scouting focus from number of baskets made to expected value per shot attempt, then have some metrics for gathering efficiency.
Another scouting method would be to only scout baskets made during the first minute of the match (or some other time during the match at which most robot abandon scoring in favor of balancing.
Greg Leighton
08-03-2012, 10:28
My point is that if a team isn't scoring in qualifications, it's hard for scouts to figure out how well they will score in eliminations.
This one isn't totally related to the thread topic, but its hard to resist responding.
IMO, scouting is not easy and it's certainly not just about tabulating the numbers. Your team should understand this, picking 3601 was a fabulous pick, and they were exactly as you stated "a team that wasn't scoring in qualifications."
Blackphantom91
08-03-2012, 10:30
I would agree with that. We took a chance by going for the coop bridges that teams would see that we were going for ranking score, and not trying to score balls in teleop. In a perfect world, we would have been able to demonstrate our shooter during Friday and Saturday morning, but we weren't going to risk losing the coop bridge to shoot balls.
Scouting wise, we gave teams points for being able to balance the coop bridge with another robot. In our scouting data, it put us at a pretty accurate spot by calculated contribution.
In some cases we took 60 seconds out of our match to do it Its just far to important to not do or even attempt I really hope this catches on and teams understand how it can help both teams as a game within a game.
This one isn't totally related to the thread topic, but its hard to resist responding.
IMO, scouting is not easy and it's certainly not just about tabulating the numbers. Your team should understand this, picking 3601 was a fabulous pick, and they were exactly as you stated "a team that wasn't scoring in qualifications."
Thanks! 3601 was really high on our list because they could balance very well and could feed us balls in autonomous. They were scoring in qualifications, having way more balance points than all the teams around their rank. We didn't pick them to be a scorer, though.
I'm sorry that this thread has been derailed, but I think some great points were made and I've learned a few things.
Paul Copioli
08-03-2012, 10:51
Note that I have not voted yet as I think I am not informed enough to vote accurately. I was at Kettering on Saturday and watched it on the webcast Friday, so I can tell you this with definite certainty:
3322 is a deadly, deadly shooter in both teleop and hybrid.
33 got way, way better on Saturday and was fantastic in the elimination rounds.
2337 is also a deadly, deadly shooter especially in the last 30 seconds.
3322's alliance had between a 6 and 12 point lead after hybrid in the finals in all three matches. 33 and 2337 worked together to score as many as they could until the 30 second mark. That is when 2337 absolutely took over the match. They scored an insane amount of baskets in the last 30 seconds. In my opinion, 2337 was the best individual robot at Kettering. 3322, 33, and 51 were all second (on Sat) to 2337. In any case, I really like how this game plays in elims and it looks like there are some new faces in the "top robot" race. These are all good things for FRC and for the robotics community in general.
Greg Leighton
08-03-2012, 10:58
Thanks! 3601 was really high on our list because they could balance very well and could feed us balls in autonomous. They were scoring in qualifications, having way more balance points than all the teams around their rank. We didn't pick them to be a scorer, though.
I'm sorry that this thread has been derailed, but I think some great points were made and I've learned a few things.
Ah yes, this is true, they did have bridge points (I was thinking mainly about shooting). They were a good support bot.
Ah yes, this is true, they did have bridge points (I was thinking mainly about shooting). They were a good support bot.
Team 3601 couldn't shoot. I was one of the student who were scouting around the pits for a good second pick. I was particularly attracted to team 3601 because they could balance well and could tip the bridge. However, I noticed that a lot of robots at Kettering were a fender shooter, so I was looking for a robot with 4 CIMs in the drivetrain and a good choice of wheels (no nylon or rubber) to play defense. Team 3601 matched this description and amazingly enough, not too many other teams had 4 CIMs in the drivetrain at Kettering. Sadly, my alliance never took the defensive position during the elims. Beyond this, I also eyed 3601 because I already had the idea of having 3601 spit balls into our robot during Hybrid period to score 24 points. Team 862 was originally going to run into the bridge at an angle to get the balls off the coopertition bridge until some brilliant person decided to have them shoot their balls into 3601's mega-hopper.
Back to topic, I honestly think that team 1477 should have ranked higher than 148 and 118, which were both very impressive robots. Team 2337 should have been on par with team 33, as team 2337 was a highly accurate robot with their shooting. Finally, team 341 should have been ranked #1 due to their exceptionally high level of shooting.
Finally, team 341 should have been ranked #1 due to their exceptionally high level of shooting.
I call hacks! Yeah, 341 should have been top. But Top 25 is just for fun, regardless of where people land. At the end of the day, the best bots will still be the best bots, regardless of where 76 random people on the Internet rank them.
Drivencrazy
08-03-2012, 22:30
regardless of where 76 random people on the Internet rank them.
I take offense to that! ;)
Let's assume he meant "...where 76 people randomly rank them..." instead of "...where 76 random people:mad: rank them..." :yikes:
Did this webcast get recorded and will it end up on the FRC TOP25 website?
Let's assume he meant "...where 76 people randomly rank them..." instead of "...where 76 random people:mad: rank them..." :yikes:
Haha, to me that sounds even worse... We've got 76 non-random people ranking teams, but the order in which they rank them is completely random?
Let's assume he meant "...where 76 people randomly rank them..." instead of "...where 76 random people:mad: rank them..." :yikes:
I hope you don't RANDOMLY rank teams!
Did this webcast get recorded and will it end up on the FRC TOP25 website?
The webcast got recorded, but it didn't get recorded until around ~21 pick. They then went back, reviewed the picks, and continued from 21. It's on their LiveStream account in the recorded section.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.