View Full Version : 2015 Waterloo Regional
microbuns
17-03-2015, 09:00
Waterloo is going to start in a few days - here is the list of teams:
216 More RoboDawgs Grandville, MI, USA
244 RoboDawgs 3D Grandville, MI, USA
288 The RoboDawgs Grandville, MI, USA
329 Raiders Medford, NY, USA
865 Warp7 Toronto, ON, Canada
1114 Simbotics St. Catharines, ON, Canada
1241 THEORY6 Mississauga, ON, Canada
1285 The Big Bang Mississauga, ON, Canada
1305 Ice Cubed North Bay, ON, Canada
1334 Red Devils Oakville, ON, Canada
1676 The Pascack PI-oneers Montvale, NJ, USA
2056 OP Robotics Stoney Creek, ON, Canada
2702 REBotics Kitchener, ON, Canada
2935 NACI Robotics Toronto, ON, Canada
3161 Tronic Titans Oakville, ON, Canada
3683 Team Dave Waterloo, ON, Canada
4039 MakeShift Robotics Hamilton, ON, Canada
4083 The Iron Wolverines Dorchester, SC, USA
4308 ABSOLUTE Mississauga, ON, Canada
4617 DAUN ( Dumbledore's Army of United Nerds) London, ON, Canada
4618 CN Robotics Stoney Creek, ON, Canada
4678 CyberCavs Breslau, ON, Canada
4807 JV Jags Richmond Hill, ON, Canada
4907 Thunderstamps St. Thomas, ON, Canada
4917 Sir Lancer Bots Elmira, ON, Canada
4939 Allspark9 Brampton, ON, Canada
4943 Royals Redneck Robots Shelburne, ON, Canada
5158 Richmond Hill Richmond Hill, ON, Canada
5406 Celt-X Hamilton, ON, Canada
5719 Titans Toronto, ON, Canada
I know 4917 is very excited about the competition - we're looking forward to being a part of such a strong competition again. Can't wait to see how it goes!
April_robo
17-03-2015, 20:02
I am very excited to be making the trip from Detroit, MI on Saturday to come see the competition.
216Robochick288
18-03-2015, 01:02
I hope for a good competition for my teams and the other teams there, and a special hope that my dads truck doesn't get stolen again! Hahaha. Good luck to all! Cant wait to watch.
Did anyone notice the match schedule? 2056 and 1114 are together twice. Match 14 and match 20. Its looking good for a new record breaking high score.
Be sure to watch the webcast! We're broadcasting both full field and a mixed video stream. http://www.watchfirstnow.com/live (http://www.watchfirstnow.com/live)
The_ShamWOW88
20-03-2015, 09:18
Watching the first match, 1114 going to be hard to beat at Worlds....
Aidan H.
20-03-2015, 09:48
Did anyone see the co-op stack that wasn't counted in match #3? It is at about 2:07:30 in the Waterloo normal field stream (here (http://new.livestream.com/accounts/12312913/events/3856128)). I know of the "3-second of free-standing", but do those 3 seconds have to occur DURING the match and can't be after the ending of the match? The stack was clearly finished before the end of the match, and didn't seem to have anything wrong with it, but wasn't counted on the final score.
It did look like there was a possibility of the stack being supported by one of the grey totes next to it, but wouldn't there still be a co-op SET counted?
Does anyone have an idea of why this might have happened?
Did anyone see the co-op stack that wasn't counted in match #3? It is at about 2:07:30 in the Waterloo normal field stream (here (http://new.livestream.com/accounts/12312913/events/3856128)). I know of the "3-second of free-standing", but do those 3 seconds have to occur DURING the match and can't be after the ending of the match? The stack was clearly finished before the end of the match, and didn't seem to have anything wrong with it, but wasn't counted on the final score.
It did look like there was a possibility of the stack being supported by one of the grey totes next to it, but wouldn't there still be a co-op SET counted?
Does anyone have an idea of why this might have happened?
They clarified afterwards that the coop stack did count.
Aidan H.
20-03-2015, 10:10
They clarified afterwards that the coop stack did count.
That's good. It just didn't show up with the "final" score and what was immediately posted (they probably announced it over the speakers, but I'm watching the stream muted). I thought that co-op stack was pretty incredible because it seemed it was started at ~15 seconds from the end, and 2056 put the 3 on at about 5 seconds; just in time.
cmrnpizzo14
20-03-2015, 10:23
I hope everyone is ready for match 14.
http://www.thebluealliance.com/match/2015onwa_qm14
Jared Russell
20-03-2015, 12:46
How are 1114 and 2056 partners in back-to-back qualification matches?
There are 30 teams in attendance, and each team gets 13 qual matches. That means there are 26 spots for partners...
Given that who you are competing "against" doesn't matter this year, why would the match making algorithm possibly come up with a schedule with this quirk?
Christopher149
20-03-2015, 12:51
How are 1114 and 2056 partners in back-to-back qualification matches?
There are 30 teams in attendance, and each team gets 13 qual matches. That means there are 26 spots for partners...
Given that who you are competing "against" doesn't matter this year, why would the match making algorithm possibly come up with a schedule with this quirk?
Last year, at a 36-team event, we played against 107 in three consecutive matches.
IronicDeadBird
20-03-2015, 12:54
How are 1114 and 2056 partners in back-to-back qualification matches?
There are 30 teams in attendance, and each team gets 13 qual matches. That means there are 26 spots for partners...
Given that who you are competing "against" doesn't matter this year, why would the match making algorithm possibly come up with a schedule with this quirk?
Hold on I have something for this
http://wasdarwinwrong.com/images/464988a-i1.0.jpg (http://wasdarwinwrong.com/images/464988a-i1.0.jpg)
I knew it would be useful one day....
Waterloo is always fun to watch...
e.g. QM16, 1676,2702,1285 and 5406 4917 1334 just put up 138 and 148 points during day 1 of qualifications.
Dat intensity.
Lil' Lavery
20-03-2015, 12:59
The schedule isn't random, though. There are parameters that are used by FMS to generate the schedule. Things like minimum turnaround time for teams between matches can make it difficult to get a full sampling of alliance combinations.
Bryce Paputa
20-03-2015, 13:09
284 points
:ahh:
pacoliketaco
20-03-2015, 13:33
Are we going to see 300+ this weekend? Can't see how 1114 + 2056 + ____ won't cross that.
wow... 252 just put up... im VERY impressed with the level of competition at waterloo
1114's qualification average is now higher then the old world record high score.
Mark Sheridan
20-03-2015, 13:57
5406 is a phenomenal rookie team.
284 points
:ahh:
Here's HD full-field footage of the record-breaking match: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTz0ezZKMHQ
donkehote
20-03-2015, 21:39
Here's HD full-field footage of the record-breaking match: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTz0ezZKMHQ
Closer view with some full field and live scoring here.http://watchfirstnow.com/archives/122770292
Thanks Bochek! As always I love the quick match uploads and live video feeds from watchfirstnow!
cmrnpizzo14
20-03-2015, 22:03
5406 is a phenomenal rookie team.
I would say that they are phenomenal for any team!
How are 1114 and 2056 partners in back-to-back qualification matches?
There are 30 teams in attendance, and each team gets 13 qual matches. That means there are 26 spots for partners...
Given that who you are competing "against" doesn't matter this year, why would the match making algorithm possibly come up with a schedule with this quirk?
Makes me wonder: Has anyone out there tried writing a better scheduling app? Were you successful?
plnyyanks
21-03-2015, 01:10
Given that who you are competing "against" doesn't matter this year, why would the match making algorithm possibly come up with a schedule with this quirk?
Makes me wonder: Has anyone out there tried writing a better scheduling app? Were you successful?
FMS uses the same scheduling algorithm this year it has in the past: MatchMaker (http://www.idleloop.com/matchmaker/). The output of the algorithm shows the number of unique partners and "opponents" (which doesn't matter this year), and the scorekeeper makes sure they're all the same. This is harder to ensure at small events, especially when the algorithm also prioritizes a gap between teams' consecutive matches. It's typically common for a few different schedules be generated until the output is even, again especially with smaller events. Or, a schedule could be selected to try and have the teams who haven't passed inspection play their first match as late as possible, to make sure they can pass. So there are a lot of variables that go into generating a schedule, and sometimes these anomalies sneak through while selecting for other things.
While FIRST probably could have had IdleLoop update MatchMaker for this year and treat "opposing" robots the same as different matches, it probably wasn't worth the time/money/testing and they instead went with what was already known to work pretty well. Go figure.
I can't be the only one who's noticed the sheer depth of this field.
29th seed in Waterloo has a QA high enough to be 4th alliance captain at Palmetto in week 1. Or 2nd alliance captain at NYC.
I can't be the only one who's noticed the sheer depth of this field.
29th seed in Waterloo has a QA high enough to be 4th alliance captain at Palmetto in week 1. Or 2nd alliance captain at NYC.To be fair, part of that is Waterloo and part of that is week number. Waterloo's #29 (of 30) 57.1 QA would get you #32 of 39 in Central IL right now, #35 of 39 at Purdue, #39 of 40 at West MI, and #40 of 40 at St. Joe's. Yes, last place out of 40. Now that's nuts (#39 has 57.33).
I'm also not sure that QA is really a good proxy for depth, particularly after teams have played 10 matches in a field of 30. (The other events are at 8-9 matches each now--round of applause to the Waterloo field crew.) I haven't done any math to that effect, but Waterloo actually has the lowest #25 OPR of the events I mentioned, losing to next-to-last Central IL by almost 10 points (18.41 to 27.58).
Without knowing, I'd suspect that QAs might be less about depth all the way through and more about the density from the top being spread through their qual alliances. And it is really, really dense at the top: the #1 OPR at St. Joe's would put you #5 at Waterloo. I'd be interested in a fuller analysis, though. Let me think about the stats options.
FMS uses the same scheduling algorithm this year it has in the past: MatchMaker (http://www.idleloop.com/matchmaker/). The output of the algorithm shows the number of unique partners and "opponents" (which doesn't matter this year), and the scorekeeper makes sure they're all the same. This is harder to ensure at small events, especially when the algorithm also prioritizes a gap between teams' consecutive matches. It's typically common for a few different schedules be generated until the output is even, again especially with smaller events. Or, a schedule could be selected to try and have the teams who haven't passed inspection play their first match as late as possible, to make sure they can pass. So there are a lot of variables that go into generating a schedule, and sometimes these anomalies sneak through while selecting for other things.
While FIRST probably could have had IdleLoop update MatchMaker for this year and treat "opposing" robots the same as different matches, it probably wasn't worth the time/money/testing and they instead went with what was already known to work pretty well. Go figure.
The cost function used by MatchMaker already prioritizes maximizing the number of partners over maximizing the number of opponents.
In my experience in the District model it's not a good idea to run MatchMaker several times since you're introducing more bias by manually selecting for specific features.
Makes me wonder: Has anyone out there tried writing a better scheduling app? Were you successful?
Matchmaker does a very good job for typical regional sized events, where the set of reasonable solutions is fairly large, but it does not perform as well as smaller District sized events. I've played around with several other scheduling algorithms with some success for Districts where having a fixed number of qualification rounds makes it possible to pre-calculate much of the schedule.
Closer view with some full field and live scoring here.http://watchfirstnow.com/archives/122770292
Thanks Bochek! As always I love the quick match uploads and live video feeds from watchfirstnow!
Waterloo is always one of my favourite events to watch, but this year's event is even more spectacular than usual.
It's very impressive how easy Q20 looked. If that's a preview of top level division play at Worlds, it's going to be fascinating, if not the most exciting for a casual spectator.
Here are the elimination alliances:
http://i.imgur.com/eLmQ4wI.png
Makes me wonder: Has anyone out there tried writing a better scheduling app? Were you successful?
I've often wondered if the scheduling problem could be formulated as linear program and solved with a large LP solver.
Bluman56
21-03-2015, 16:03
Something interesting to note... all 3 robots on the 1st seeded alliance have a wild card. So their opponents in the finals all qualify for champs. However, (this is where it gets interesting) 5406 is very likely to win Rookie All Star, so they also have a wildcard which I am guessing gets passed onto 4678? Can someone confirm?
EDIT: Scratch that. Got rookie qualifying awards confused.
JohnFogarty
21-03-2015, 16:10
That 2nd seeded alliance took most of the cans and still lost F-1 :O
Something interesting to note... all 3 robots on the 1st seeded alliance have a wild card. So their opponents in the finals all qualify for champs. However, (this is where it gets interesting) 5406 is very likely to win Rookie All Star, so they also have a wildcard which I am guessing gets passed onto 4678? Can someone confirm?
Wildcards only go to the Finalist Alliance, in order of selection. No further. Admin Manual Section 7.3.3
Christopher149
21-03-2015, 16:18
Something interesting to note... all 3 robots on the 1st seeded alliance have a wild card. So their opponents in the finals all qualify for champs. However, (this is where it gets interesting) 5406 is very likely to win Rookie All Star, so they also have a wildcard which I am guessing gets passed onto 4678? Can someone confirm?
I don't think 5719 has wild card-generating potential, because Rookie Inspiration (which they won at GTRE) is not Rookie All-Star (which sends you to St. Louis).
iVanDuzer
21-03-2015, 16:19
That 2nd seeded alliance took most of the cans and still lost F-1 :O
2056 and 3683 each grabbed two cans. One of Red's RCs got stuck in the corner of the field between one of the stacks and the ramp.
Bluman56
21-03-2015, 16:21
I don't think 5719 has wild card-generating potential, because Rookie Inspiration (which they won at GTRE) is not Rookie All-Star (which sends you to St. Louis).
Yup thats what I realized soon after I posted it. :P
Yup thats what I realized soon after I posted it. :P
Wild-card scenarios right now: First two teams on finalist alliance (1114 and 2056 previous wins generating). If either rookie picks up RAS, the entire finalist alliance has a berth. Ditto if one of the alliance members from either alliance picks up EI or RCA (1114 and the rookies are ineligible for the latter). Right now, 1334 is probably really hoping for one of those things to happen (and it's highly likely).
Bluman56
21-03-2015, 17:11
As of this regional, 2056 has won 21 regionals without being defeated. Their next regional ends on April 4th. Last year The Undertaker entered Wrestlemania with a 21-0 record. On April 6th he left 21-1. Will 2056 suffer the same fate with their Undertaker streak?
orangemoore
21-03-2015, 17:23
As of this regional, 2056 has won 21 regionals without being defeated. Their next regional ends on April 4th. Last year The Undertaker entered Wrestlemania with a 21-0 record. On April 6th he left 21-1. Will 2056 suffer the same fate with their Undertaker streak?
The biggest threat (in my opinion, in Canada) to 2056 is 1114. If for some reason 1114 ends up on the other side of the glass against 2056, it could end the streak.
Stephen Liggett
21-03-2015, 17:25
As of this regional, 2056 has won 21 regionals without being defeated. Their next regional ends on April 4th. Last year The Undertaker entered Wrestlemania with a 21-0 record. On April 6th he left 21-1. Will 2056 suffer the same fate with their Undertaker streak?
I'm convinced! How could they not suffer the same fate!
I think it's safe to say Wrestlemania statistics are underused.
waialua359
21-03-2015, 17:28
The biggest threat (in my opinion, in Canada) to 2056 is 1114. If for some reason 1114 ends up on the other side of the glass against 2056, it could end the streak.
With this year's game scoring of total points (average score/match), I highly doubt you will see them on opposite sides of the glass.
In previous games of win vs loses, I can see a bad matchup where that has happened before. But this year, it doesnt matter who you play against. For past Waterloo events, people paid attention to when 1114 played against 2056. This year, the matchup doesnt matter.
In the end, the better teams just end up ranked higher. I cant remember a game where you could lock up the #1 seed after day 1 of qualifications, if ever.
Personally, I'm a fan of it. You are less affected by bad match schedules and bad alliance seeds on the way to the finals. The better alliances win, generally speaking. There is no, good 1-4-5-8 bracket and hoping to be in the 2-3-6-7 bracket if that route is "easier" to get to the finals. Last year that had huge implications, especially since wild cards were being given out.
orangemoore
21-03-2015, 17:31
With this year's game scoring of total points (average score/match), I highly doubt you will see them on opposite sides of the glass.
In previous games of win vs loses, I can see a bad matchup where that has happened before. But this year, it doesnt matter who you play against.
In the end, the better teams just end up ranked higher.
Personally, I'm a fan of it. You are less affected by bad match schedules and bad alliance seeds on the way to the finals. The better alliances win, generally speaking.
You're definitely right, I would be really surprised if 1114 and 2056 were not together.
waialua359
21-03-2015, 17:34
You're definitely right, I would be really surprised if 1114 and 2056 were not together.
And I'd bet that 1114 and 2056 likes the scoring system much better than in the past of W-L's.
Bluman56
21-03-2015, 17:37
You're definitely right, I would be really surprised if 1114 and 2056 were not together.
Agreed. I just like the narrative is all. :P
With this year's game scoring of total points (average score/match), I highly doubt you will see them on opposite sides of the glass.
In previous games of win vs loses, I can see a bad matchup where that has happened before. But this year, it doesnt matter who you play against. For past Waterloo events, people paid attention to when 1114 played against 2056. This year, the matchup doesnt matter.
In the end, the better teams just end up ranked higher. I cant remember a game where you could lock up the #1 seed after day 1 of qualifications, if ever.
Personally, I'm a fan of it. You are less affected by bad match schedules and bad alliance seeds on the way to the finals. The better alliances win, generally speaking. There is no, good 1-4-5-8 bracket and hoping to be in the 2-3-6-7 bracket if that route is "easier" to get to the finals. Last year that had huge implications, especially since wild cards were being given out.
Even as a mortal team, I really like this year's qualification system (even though we seeded low. We deserved it with constant mechanical or driver glitches). I was following along alliance selection with TBA's top-15 OPR numbers, and rarely was a team more than 1 position away from their OPR number. The alliance selection also went basically in line with what our scouts predicted.
Especially in Ontario with the inevitable essentially unstoppable 1114/2056 alliance pairing, it was nice to know that performance could get us a trip to the finals instead of sheer luck avoiding the 1-4-5-8 bracket*. I hope FIRST tries to keep the spirit of this year's qualification/elimination system next year, even if they return to W-L-T as primary sorting metric.
*Especially once the "winners' 2nd champs tickets fall over to finalists" rules were introduced, avoiding the 1-4-5-8 bracket was the #1 priority for finals. I believe in 2013 we declined an alliance selection that would've made a stronger alliance simply because it would've lead us to 1114/2056 in the semis, but we needed to make the finals.
Big shout out to 5406 and 3683!
5406 you guys are absolutely an amazing rookie team and deserve ever award you guys racked in today! Love to see more and more Canadian teams becoming so good so fast!
3683 Amazing as always! Always a pleasure to see your bot and team in action!
Thank you for the opportunity to play with you and see you again soon!
themccannman
22-03-2015, 00:15
5406 you guys are absolutely an amazing rookie team and deserve every award you guys racked in today!
5406 is looking like a team to rival 1717, or 4814 for best rookie season ever.
Christopher149
22-03-2015, 00:33
5406 is looking like a team to rival 1717, or 4814 for best rookie season ever.
What about 2056?
AdamHeard
22-03-2015, 01:27
5406 is looking like a team to rival 1717, or 4814 for best rookie season ever.
I love 1717, but their rookie season wasn't anything amazing when compared to 2056, or 5406 this year.
Interesting wildcard scenario here.
1114 and 2056 came in qualified for The Championship, so their win generated two wildcards. These were passed on to 3683 and 1334 (finalist first and second pick), as 5406 the finalist captain earned RAS.
In addition to winning the event, 2056 also won Chairman's which created a dead wildcard, as there was no one left on the finalist alliance to give it to.
1241 won EI after winning Chairman's two weeks ago which resulted in a second unused wildcard.
Interesting wildcard scenario here.
1114 and 2056 came in qualified for The Championship, so their win generated two wildcards. These were passed on to 3683 and 1334 (finalist first and second pick), as 5406 the finalist captain earned RAS.
There were only two rookies present, both of which played in the finals. This means that even if 5719 got rookie all star instead of 5406, everyone would have still qualified for worlds.
I was the ref on the red side doing the live scoring, and man was it fun trying to keep up with 1114 and 2056's stacks. It felt like every time I inputted a stack with litter another one was about to be placed.
Finally a big congrats to all teams who competed, Waterloo is always a high caliber event but it's really amazing to see the progression from Ontario's 1st event to 3rd event. We were having qualification matches that were rivaling that of other region's finals matches all day, with or without the big two.
themccannman
22-03-2015, 16:13
I love 1717, but their rookie season wasn't anything amazing when compared to 2056, or 5406 this year.
Forgot about 2056's rookie season, on second thought I think the only one to rival winning IRI their rookie year is 4814 who captained their alliance to division finals.
Pictures from The Waterloo Regional
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.926221647442889.1073741876.125661567498905&type=1
Lil' Lavery
24-03-2015, 23:52
5406 is looking like a team to rival 1717, or 4814 for best rookie season ever.
Despite their number, this is the first season that 4613 has competed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgaex5m52XM#t=440m20s
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.