A statistical analysis of the "autonomous advantadge"

[Greg Marra]

Update:

I have created sheets so that anyone attending a Regional can help collect data. Simply watch the match, and write down the information the sheet asks for. Don't feel obligated to do every single match. If you are only able to do a handful, it is better than nothing. I just ask that you don't record practice matches, since they are often played very differently than real matches.

Here is a nice printable version of the sheet (http://www.twoplustwoequalsfive.com/autonomous_advantage.html). There are twenty rows per sheet, so you will probably need about 4 or 5 to completely cover a regional. If you really want a .xls version, PM me and I'll send it to you.

Once you have filled out a sheet either scan it, take a digital photo of it, or type it back into a spreadsheet. Then e-mail it to: aim.high.autonomous [at] gmail [dot] com. I'll take everyone's data, compile it, make it available, and then run some statistics on it.

[/update]

Today, while observing the competition at BAE, there was something odd occurring. In the elimination matches, whoever won autonomous won the round. Every time. Fourteen of fourteen times (excluding the ties). This seems to be telling.

However, how can we tell if it is winning autonomous that is actually the root of causation here? There are many other variables. If a team has a working autonomous mode, maybe they just have a better team and a better robot. If a team wins autonomous, is it the ten point bonus plus the points they score that gives them the game? Is it possible that going on defence first is such a large advantage that the other alliance cannot come back to reverse the tide?

This is an interesting question that deserves study. However, you can not study a question without data. Here is my call:

Either by analyzing Week 1 video or by collecting information at Week 2, we can carefully determine what is the deciding factor here.

The information of interest are: What are the scores following the end of autonomous (including the 10 point bonus)? Which alliance went on offence first? What are the scores at the end of the match (and how many came from ramping and penalties)? Was this match a qualifier, or an elimination match?

This will let us carefully separate out to see exactly what the underlying cause is. If it is a point differential, we can compare the lead at the end of auto to the lead at the end of the match. If it is going on defense first, then analyzing matches where autonomous was tied and defense is randomly selected, we will be able to deduce this.

Is anyone else interested in helping me collect data to analyze this? I think the answer might be interesting, and could help everyone gain a better understanding of the game.

[Lil' Lavery]

While it wasn't AS LARGE of a choakhold at VCU, the winning autonomous alliance typically did win matches, especially in the eliminations (and watching 1731 finally lock on with their turrent and drain 6 shots was quite impressive!)

[ldeffenb]

While it wasn't AS LARGE of a choakhold at VCU, the winning autonomous alliance typically did win matches, especially in the eliminations (and watching 1731 finally lock on with their turrent and drain 6 shots was quite impressive!)

Videos of VCU's finals are being posted (see http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45009). However, they seemed to have quit posting the score visually and I didn't take the time in some of the matches to find the audio announcement, so you might have to look elsewhere to find the final score. Sorry 'bout that!

Lynn (D) - Team Voltage 386 Software

PS. I'm anxious to see the outcome of the analysis. We are planning to WIN autonomous in our matches this coming weekend in the Central Florida Regionals. That is, IF the mechanical folks can get our ball storage and feeder working!

[Lil' Lavery]

PS. I'm anxious to see the outcome of the analysis. We are planning to WIN autonomous in our matches this coming weekend in the Central Florida Regionals. That is, IF the mechanical folks can get our ball storage and feeder working!
I don't know many teams that planned to lose it..... :rolleyes: :D

[Nuttyman54]

they seemed to have quit posting the score visually and I didn't take the time in some of the matches to find the audio announcement, so you might have to look elsewhere to find the final score. Sorry 'bout that!


The final scores can be found on the FIRST website (http://www2.usfirst.org/2006comp/Events/VA/matches.html).

[Ryan F.]

The final scores can be found on the FIRST website (http://www2.usfirst.org/2006comp/Events/VA/matches.html).

Amusing...apparently there must be some really really good shooters ;) .

From First Website-

Q11 3/2/2006 11:40:00 AM
804 11106
384
540
1610 7

[George A.]

I'd say winning autonomous by either means (either winning it by points, or by getting the randomization in the event of a tie) is a HUGE advantage. Because most teams will unload their 10 preloaded balls in their autonomous mode, so whoever loses autonomous then has to spend time reloading balls. Whereas the winner of the autonomous can reload and be ready to go during their scoring phase.

I can't tell you how many times (as an arbitrary example) red would win and go reload, blue lost and would spend so much time reloading that they can't get a shot off. Meanwhile the red team is already set up and as soon as the whistle sounds red fires up their shooters before blue can do anything about it

Even if you don't get the 10 pt bonus, the way the match is set up, using that 40 seconds for 80 seconds of non stop scoring is unbelievable.

[Joel J]

Alright.. I have only observations to go on. You can all collect the data, together, and we can compare sometime later.

I'm saying this after watching VCU.

- When both alliances scored zero in autonomous, the randomly selected "defense" alliance still seemed to come out on top.

- If you win in autonomous, then you most likely have a good shooter, good software, good 1pt dumper, or a decent mixture. That is, if you are making it happen in autonomous, then you have what it takes to make it happen in the rest of the match.

- Teams on defense first get time to load up their robots with balls (either from the floor or human player) without cutting into their scoring time. They are then able to align themselves for shooting before their turn on offense begins allowing them to score points BEFORE their opponents can get into a defensive posture. Teams on offense after autonomus are usually close to their opponents (giving their opponents perfect positioning for playing defense), far away from the 3pt goal, and have very few balls.

- With the amount of points I saw being scored, the 10 point bonus gained from winning autonomous is significant. That is, if winning alliances are averaging 30 points (very realistic number, IMO), then that 10 point bonus accounts for 1/3rd of their score!

- The amount being scored in autonomous vs. the rest of the match makes the point deficit placed on the autonomous loser quite significant. Both alliances still get the same number of time on offense and defence, so the loser of autonomous has to work extra hard to make up for the points scored in autonomous while keeping pace with what the winners are scoring during the match.

The most significant advantage of winning autonomous, IMO, is being able to defend first. It is very common, early on, for people to not be able to bounce back (as they become edgy and nervous), and for people on the attack to grow increasingly comfortable.

[GaryVoshol]

I'd say winning autonomous by either means (either winning it by points, or by getting the randomization in the event of a tie) is a HUGE advantage.Is this not what was asked for? A big criticism of Triple Play was that there was not enough of a benefit for getting the vision tetra.

[David55]

I'm interested in doing such an analysis.
Watching almost the entire 3rd day of VCU, there were many questions that came to my mind about all the different aspects of the game.
The different scoring mechanisms (perfect ball dumper vs. middle level shooter), shooting balls or going back to the ramp, autonomous winning, alliance picking and the outcome (seeing that robots placed 6 and 7 beat robots 2 and 3, and the significance of the robots picked)...etc.

[Greg Marra]

I will create a data collection sheet that can be printed out and taken to Week 2 regionals so we can get the information we need to do a proper analysis. I'll put up both an HTML document for easy printing, and a .xls file for if anyone wants to collect data digitally. All you'll need to do is scan or photograph or type back in the information on the sheet and send it to me and I will compile the master list.

It is interesting that people are saying that when auto was a tie, the team on defense first still won. Once we have a decent set of data to work from, we can start to try to figure out all the variables going on.

[Bill Moore]

I will create a data collection sheet that can be printed out and taken to Week 2 regionals so we can get the information we need to do a proper analysis. I'll put up both an HTML document for easy printing, and a .xls file for if anyone wants to collect data digitally. All you'll need to do is scan or photograph or type back in the information on the sheet and send it to me and I will compile the master list.

It is interesting that people are saying that when auto was a tie, the team on defense first still won. Once we have a decent set of data to work from, we can start to try to figure out all the variables going on.
Greg, make sure to include the # of shots taken in your sheet.

Teams that shoot all their balls in auto are obviously aggressive shooters, and may continue to shoot aggressively throughout the match.

I don't care if I only shoot 40% and you shoot 60% if I'm shooting twice as often as you do. I'll win every time just by shooting so much more frequently.

Winning the match may not have anything to do with winning auto, but with the aggressiveness with which the game is played.

[SwitchBlade430]

Even though this is very advantageous, there were a couple of matches in which unstoppable teams like 25 came back and won the match. Congratulations to 25, 103, and 1279 for winning the NJ regional.

[Lil' Lavery]

No, it definately was tied into autonomous mode. The most "Aggressive" shooter at VCU was easily 435, who could unload 5 balls a second and would try to do it 3 or 4 times a match. People quickly caught on and started putting 1 and even 2 defensive bots on them. Because of this, 435 lost 3 matches during qualification, and would lose in the finals (and some, not I, argue should have lost in the semi-finals, because of a semi-controversial DQ). Even when paired with another high caliber shooter, 384, defensive maneuvering and high precision scoring when left open allowed for teh 384, 435, 1522 alliance to be toppled.

[CraigHickman]

This sounds like a really good idea, and I'd be quite interested in getting the data after it's gathered. However, Our team still lost a match after being able to shoot into the center goal during autonomous, and winning it almost every time.

So yeah, Good luck gathering data!

[Kevin Ray]

Joel J--- "If you win in autonomous, then you most likely have a good shooter, good software, good 1pt dumper, or a decent mixture. That is, if you are making it happen in autonomous, then you have what it takes to make it happen in the rest of the match."

That's it in a nut shell!!




BTW Joel, how's it up there in the North Country of Potsdam? I was the guy who, after the Long Island, correctly picked you guys to win the nats the year of your picture--a month in advance!

[BobC]

A few questions if you won autonomous period what was your record?

What was record when you were RED?
Did you win by more than ten points? How many wins?
Did you win by ten points? How many wins?
Or did you win by less than ten points? How many wins?

What was record when you were BLUE?
Did you win by more than ten points? How many wins?
Did you win by ten points? How many wins?
Or did you win by less than ten points? How many wins?

[Master Dictator]

Ok I saw team 25's robot at NJ and I must say do offence but it wasnt that spatacular design or that different from anyother robot but for 1 thing.... Autonomous. No other robot except for 375 could shoot like them. Every match in autonomous they got 9/10 or 10/10. Thats 30 points plus 10 to make 40-0 right from the getgo. After that is hard to make a comeback from that. Luckly our robot got 10/10 most of the time but in the low goal.

[George A.]

Ok I saw team 25's robot at NJ and I must say do offence but it wasnt that spatacular design or that different from anyother robot but for 1 thing.... Autonomous. No other robot except for 375 could shoot like them. Every match in autonomous they got 9/10 or 10/10. Thats 30 points plus 10 to make 40-0 right from the getgo. After that is hard to make a comeback from that. Luckly our robot got 10/10 most of the time but in the low goal.

I'd have to argue with you about 25's robot. Yes their autonomous made them amazing, but also they were strong fast and even when they were pushed they could still shoot thanks to their auto-aiming camera. If you don't believe me I'm sure there is video somewhere when in the finals they were almost at the wall and still made an inordinate number of shots.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

I'd have to argue with you about 25's robot. Yes their autonomous made them amazing, but also they were strong fast and even when they were pushed they could still shoot thanks to their auto-aiming camera. If you don't believe me I'm sure there is video somewhere when in the finals they were almost at the wall and still made an inordinate number of shots.
I am not going to argue 25 looked great, if not amazing.

But, will they be able to live up to the hype against teams from other (possibly more competitive) regionals than NJ?

I guess we will see.

;)

[Bill Moore]

No, it definately was tied into autonomous mode. The most "Aggressive" shooter at VCU was easily 435, who could unload 5 balls a second and would try to do it 3 or 4 times a match. People quickly caught on and started putting 1 and even 2 defensive bots on them. Because of this, 435 lost 3 matches during qualification, and would lose in the finals (and some, not I, argue should have lost in the semi-finals, because of a semi-controversial DQ). Even when paired with another high caliber shooter, 384, defensive maneuvering and high precision scoring when left open allowed for teh 384, 435, 1522 alliance to be toppled.
Sean,

Could the 10 bonus points for autonomous be too much of an advantage?

[Faith]

A few questions if you won autonomous period what was your record?

What was record when you were RED?
Did you win by more than ten points? How many wins?
Did you win by ten points? How many wins?
Or did you win by less than ten points? How many wins?

What was record when you were BLUE?
Did you win by more than ten points? How many wins?
Did you win by ten points? How many wins?
Or did you win by less than ten points? How many wins?

You may want to say 20, because although the points are equal to 10, if you switch the those points to the other alliance it adds 10 to them AND subtracts 10 from you, which is a 20 point difference.

[KenWittlief]

I dont see an automatic clincher if your side gets the high score in auton mode.

If you know your bot cant score well in auton mode you can set it to get into field position and score immediately after. Your opponent, if they have fired all their shots off cannot reload and play defense at the same time. In fact, if you have fired nothing into their goals they have nothing to reload their robot with!

You on the other hand, can fire your shots into the goal, retreat to your side, reload and play defense while your opponents are busy getting the balls you just fired to reload their bot.

Nothing is cut & dry about this game.

[petek]

I'll be interested to see what these stats reveal. If being on defense for the first period is a big advantage, will they show that when no one won autonomous the randomly picked alliance has the advantage, too?

If the finals in NJ are anything to go by, it would appear that besides the 10 points for winning the period, there is a real advantage to the autonomous winner. The 25/103/1279 alliance scored an average of 96.5 points in their elimination rounds, but in F1 they lost autonomous and just barely won the round 78:71.

Looking over my notes, I believe that the autonomous winning alliance won 11 out of 16 matches in the eliminations.

One of the things which really impressed me about the game play in NJ on Saturday was how teams adapted their autonomous defense to counter teams like 25 and 375. It was interesting to see the defensive robot driving into a blocking position in front of the goal rather than trying to ram their opponent.

[Joel J]

I dont see an automatic clincher if your side gets the high score in auton mode?

If you know your bot cant score well in auton mode you can set it to get into field position and score immediately after. Your opponent, if they have fired all their shots off cannot reload and play defense at the same time. In fact, if you have fired nothing into their goals they have nothing to reload their robot with!

You one the other hand, can fire your shots into the goal, retreat to your side, reload and play defense while your opponents are busy getting the balls you just fired to reload their bot.

Nothing is cut & dry about this game.
huh?

There isn't an automatic clincher, from the looks of it, but it is almost clear that recovering from an autonomous loss is not easy.

The stats will probably confirm that defense first is advantageous (from those matches when the score was 0-0 after autonomous). We shall see.

The human players have ten additional balls to play with, if they load the other 30 into each robot.

If the robots fired ALL there balls into the goals to win autonomous, then that's 100 points.. which is a HUGE defecit for the loser to overcome. If the winner of autonomous missed some, then they are on the floor waiting to be picked up.

If the winner of autonomous is playing defense against the losers, and the losers save their balls, and don't score, because they don't have a good shot, then the winner has zero reason to go and load up. If the winner of auton plays defense and the losers fire (and misses because of defense) all their balls, then they HAVE to go and reload, otherwise they have nothing to score. When they are on their side reloading, the autonomous winner is doing the same.

Ok, ok.. I'll stop and wait for the stats as well, but I see a correlation.

[Joel J]

Joel J--- "If you win in autonomous, then you most likely have a good shooter, good software, good 1pt dumper, or a decent mixture. That is, if you are making it happen in autonomous, then you have what it takes to make it happen in the rest of the match."

That's it in a nut shell!!




BTW Joel, how's it up there in the North Country of Potsdam? I was the guy who, after the Long Island, correctly picked you guys to win the nats the year of your picture--a month in advance!
Hi, yes I remember you. Potsdam is awesome.. lovely weather :).

[KenWittlief]

If an alliance can fire 30 balls into the center goal in the ten seconds of auton mode, and your side cannot score well in auton mode, then yes, the game is pretty much over

but thats the extreem - Im referring to more evenly matched games, where both sides have a chance of winning.

If your bot cannot fire into the goals reliably in auton mode then you might be better off not firing at all. In fact if you are sure your side will loose auton mode you might be better off if none of your bots fire.

Because:

1. your bots can get into scoring position during auton, knowing you will be on the offense

2. if your opponents fired 30 balls they only have ten left in their corrals, so they cannot reload all three robots, Plus they have to keep a backbot on the opposite side, so they only have two bots on their side at a time to play defense AND to be reloaded

3. Your team has 30 balls in their robots, and 40 seconds to score (instead of just 10), so you have a better chance of making your shots count. As each one fires off its shots it can go back to your side to be reloaded AND to get ready to play defense.

the point is, if your bots cannot shoot well in auton mode you might be better off using that time to get field position for your 40 S of offensive play, and you could very well come out better in the end.

[irishninja]

Don't know what caused it but it happened at Trenton too. There was one match in which McKee's alliance was able to recover from losing autonomous.

[Joel J]

If an alliance can fire 30 balls into the center goal in the ten seconds of auton mode, and your side cannot score well in auton mode, then yes, the game is pretty much over

but thats the extreem - Im referring to more evenly matched games, where both sides have a chance of winning.

If your bot cannot fire into the goals reliably in auton mode then you might be better off not firing at all. In fact if you are sure your side will loose auton mode you might be better off if none of your bots fire.

Because:

1. your bots can get into scoring position during auton, knowing you will be on the offense

2. if your opponents fired 30 balls they only have ten left in their corrals, so they cannot reload all three robots, Plus they have to keep a backbot on the opposite side, so they only have two bots on their side at a time to play defense AND to be reloaded

3. Your team has 30 balls in their robots, and 40 seconds to score (instead of just 10), so you have a better chance of making your shots count. As each one fires off its shots it can go back to your side to be reloaded AND to get ready to play defense.

the point is, if your bots cannot shoot well in auton mode you might be better off using that time to get field position for your 40 S of offensive play, and you could very well come out better in the end.
Maybe you missed the point of what I was saying?

[Greg Marra]

I have created sheets so that anyone attending a Regional can help collect data. Simply watch the match, and write down the information the sheet asks for. Don't feel obligated to do every single match. If you are only able to do a handful, it is better than nothing. I just ask that you don't record practice matches, since they are often played very differently than real matches.

Here is a nice printable version of the sheet (http://www.twoplustwoequalsfive.com/autonomous_advantage.html). There are twenty rows per sheet, so you will probably need about 4 or 5 to completely cover a regional. If you really want a .xls version, PM me and I'll send it to you.

Once you have filled out a sheet either scan it, take a digital photo of it, or type it back into a spreadsheet. Then e-mail it to: aim.high.autonomous [at] gmail [dot] com. I'll take everyone's data, compile it, make it available, and then run some statistics on it.

It should be interesting to see what we find out!

[bombadier337]

From my own experience, the only qualifying match we lost was the one where our robot was not prepped before the match properly and our autonomous didn't work. The 10 point bonus is a huge difference is many cases, as it seemed most match scores were around 40 points. It also seemed many alliances could not score in autonomous, so even without getting many points you could get the ten point bonus. Except for 1610 and a few others, most of the high shooters were fairly inaccurate in autonomous, and the low dumpers worked well. Shooting low, we were making about 6 points in autonomous, and we then tweaked it to score 9-10 in autonomous. The only time we lost autonomous when it when it was working was against 1610.

[Ken Streeter]

Winning the autonomous mode was a huge factor at the BAE Granite State Regional. In matches where our alliance won autonomous, we never lost the match. We also never came back to win a match where we lost autonomous.

However, we did have two matches which ended in a tie. (In one of the ties, we had lost autonomous and in the other there was no autonomous winner.)

It also became clear that a real key to winning the autonomous period would be using automatic camera-based targeting in order to be able to make high goal shots despite encountering defense in autonomous. After we finally got our automatic camera-based targeting working (not until the last qualification round match on Saturday morning) we didn't lose any more autonomous periods.

[soap108]

Alright.. I have only observations to go on. You can all collect the data, together, and we can compare sometime later.

I'm saying this after watching VCU.

- With the amount of points I saw being scored, the 10 point bonus gained from winning autonomous is significant. That is, if winning alliances are averaging 30 points (very realistic number, IMO), then that 10 point bonus accounts for 1/3rd of their score!



30 was a magic number of sorts.

Judging by penalized scores...
30 pts would have won 54 of 59 (92%) matches on Friday at VCU;
and would have won 73 of 86 (85%) both days.

The highest losing scores were 46, 44, and 43.

KA-108 :cool:

[Martinez]

Definately have to agree with everything Joel said. Its very difficult to say wether winning the match due autonomus mode is due to being a strong team, being on defense first or the 10 point bonus. I feel its a mix of all three, but there is definately a strong coelation. I kept track of stats of the semis at VCU and here is what I saw.

Matches in the semi both went to 3 while the finals went to 2. 5 out of 8 matches, the team that won auto also won the match. Of the other three, the winning auto team "lost" with one being a tie, one being a DQ, and one for the 10 point bonus on the ramp.

About the game, scores were rather low compaired to past years. I did not compute an average, but it would likely be around 30 with 50 being the high end and 70 being amazing. Most teams seemed to ether miss all their shots (in auto as well), hit a few while being marked, or scoring many quickly. Often the announcer went: Score.. score.. score, score. I would like to say that was very very helpful cause the camera was not always in a good angle to see what was happening.

edit: also, most teams missed the majority of their shots in automode. Teams take note... 1 point can often make all the difference wether it was 2 to 3 or 10 to 12!

There was very little scoring in the low corner goals, outside of auto. At VCU at least, a strong focus was on shooting and "jocking for position." Several times the corners were not well guarded, and I think a quick dump would have proved better both in terms of score and time off the clock.

[Ty Tremblay]

While it wasn't AS LARGE of a choakhold at VCU, the winning autonomous alliance typically did win matches, especially in the eliminations (and watching 1731 finally lock on with their turrent and drain 6 shots was quite impressive!)


6 shots in autonomous is impressive. But did they do it consistently? Our team (319) sunk 7-10 balls EVERY autonomous. We only lost in the finals because the other alliance managed to knock our robot off course, so it couldn't find the light in time.

[mrmummert]

There is no doubt that our auto mode helped...When we shot in auto and scored it made it all that easier to have enough points to win a match.
But even when we did'nt score in auto other things we did could and did make up for this. There was one match (before finals) where we we're
unable to score in auto and we're able to pick up balls fast enough to go back and score and still win the round.

I'll let out a little secret here...we have multiple auto modes for our robot.
Between who we were going against and what our alliance decided, decided
what auto mode we used...Most of the times this worked...sometimes it
did'nt...and some teams just never caught on to what were doing and
were not able to counter this.

Looking back..were there better robots with auto than ours...yes
were there better shooters than ours....yes also....
but in the end it came down do our alliances and how we played the game.

[Greg Marra]

Ok, everyone. There's two days until Week 2 kicks off, so here's everything I've got so far:

An electronic (XLS) version of the spreadsheet (twoplustwoequalsfive.com/autonomous_advantage.xls)
A printable (HTML) version of the spreadsheet (twoplustwoequalsfive.com/autonomous_advantage.html)

Take some of them to your Week 2 event on Friday and Saturday and start recording how matches go. It's OK if you don't get every single match, even a little bit of data will help build an overall information set we can use. If your team has some extra kids sitting around just watching, this could be the perfect job ;).

After you fill it out, scan it or photograph it or type it in, and send it to aim.high.autonomous [at] gmail [dot] com. I'll compile a master list that I will post here, and then we can all analyze the heck out of it.

[Bill Moore]

I'll let out a little secret here...we have multiple auto modes for our robot.
I'll let out a bigger secret . . . SO DOES EVERYBODY ELSE! :ahh:

Ever since auto was introduced in 2003, teams have been writing dozens and dozens of auto routines that just never are needed in competition. Yet they sit at the ready on their robot.

Who needed a routine last year to stop someone from scoring a vision tetra on the center goal? Since it didn't happen, all those programs sat idle, but I know a number of teams had one. You are forced to look at what options are available both offensively and defensively in autonomous, and create the appropriate responses to an opponents potential action. This usually means a high number of auto modes.

This versatility also makes your bot an easier "fit" when selecting robots for playoffs.

[Stu Bloom]

Maybe you missed the point of what I was saying?
Joel, I don't think Ken missed your point, but I DO think you are completely ignoring his ...

I was at most 5 feet from the field for every match played at the NJ regional. And from my vantage point it was clear that most teams didn't figure out how to play this game until Saturday morning, and several never "got it" at all. This is a very complex game from a strategy standpoint and there are MANY valid strategies that can win. There is no question that there is a correlation between winning autonomous and winning the match. But as others have said, that could easily be due to the fact that the autonomous winner is simply the better alliance. Most of the capabilities needed to win auto are the same things that will ensure better performance thru-out the remainder of the match. Through the season as more teams learn "how to play the game" I predict autonomous wins will be LESS correlated to match wins.

[Heretic121]

30 was a magic number of sorts.

Judging by penalized scores...
30 pts would have won 54 of 59 (92%) matches on Friday at VCU;
and would have won 73 of 86 (85%) both days.

The highest losing scores were 46, 44, and 43.

KA-108 :cool:

Jersey was a diffrent story at least in the elims... teams had losing scores of 60+... i belive even one was 78-71... so we shall see in the coming weeks how things shape up...

[The Lucas]

I'll let out a bigger secret . . . SO DOES EVERYBODY ELSE! :ahh:

Ever since auto was introduced in 2003, teams have been writing dozens and dozens of auto routines that just never are needed in competition. Yet they sit at the ready on their robot.


About 2 sec into NJ Finals Match 2, my jaw dropped. Team 25 was running a different autonomous routine! 1860 ran the same defense that had worked in Match 1, but now they missed. What really amazed me was that they where getting hit so much in autonomous during the elims, but they choose to sit on this routine until the end.

There are many different autonomous scenarios that call for different programs. Any autonomous programmer knows that. It wouldn't surprise me if Bharat and the gang from Team 25 have a few more Aces up their sleeves for Las Vegas (Hopefully, that will not get them kicked out of town :D )

[Bongle]

If you check out my statistics thread over here (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45209), you can see that the median winning margin was 11 points. The 10 points given for autonomous could very well be the difference between winning and losing for almost 50% of the matches.

[irishninja]

Maybe this is just me, but at the UTC regional this year, there did not seem to be as large, if any, of a correlation between winning autonomous and winnign the game.

[Dylan Gramlich]

in the FLR that made a big impact and was one of the reaons we won the regional and the cooperation between teams and the defensive/offensive auto modes
also joel from 229 figured out that it was basically whoever went on defense first which was either who won auto mode or if no one scored any points then whoever the computer picked

[seg9585]

I believe that winning autonomous SHOULD be a huge factor in winning the match -- winning autonomous takes alot of mechanical and programming skill, and to have a window of 10 seconds, to be able to shoot balls accurately or defend automatically is vital to winning. After that, most of the game relies on great driving and good luck. In future years, I think that there should be even longer autonomous modes

[Tim Arnold]

Well... my mom tried her best to keep up at the UCF regional. Here are her stat sheets (matches with questions on the accuracy have a question mark symbol - you may wish to verify).

http://marsbot.org/files/2006_auto_sheet1_thumb.jpg
Sheet 1 (http://marsbot.org/files/2006_auto_sheet1.jpg)

http://marsbot.org/files/2006_auto_sheet2_thumb.jpg
Sheet 2 (http://marsbot.org/files/2006_auto_sheet2.jpg)

We hope these are of use!

[Greg Marra]

Excellent. I'm slightly sick right now, but as soon as I recover I will add that data to my collection.

If anyone else has data, post it here or e-mail it to me. Thanks!

[Jeremy L]

So far (all quarterfinals), the eliminations at Boston have yielded the following results:

EVERY AUTONOMOUS WINNER WON THE GAME.

(except for one, who won with a literally last-second third robot ramping, and would have lost by one otherwise). There was also one 0-0 auto that the starting offense robot won.

I'll post again with all the results when it's all over.

[Jeremy L]

QF 1-8
Red wins auto 31-9 Red wins game 69-33
QF 4-5
Red wins auto 15-0 Red wins game 36-19
QF 1-8
Red wins auto 16-3 Red wins game 99-42
QF 4-5
Red wins auto 17-2 Red wins game 41-22
QF 2-7
Blue wins auto 9-20 Blue wins game 38-68
QF 3-6
Red wins auto 44-3 Red wins game 81-41
QF 2-7
Blue wins auto 0-0 Red wins game 57-25
QF 3-6
Red wins auto 31-0 Red wins game 59-23
QF 2-7
Red wins auto 22-1 Blue wins game 61-47 (Blue, Red penalty -5)
SF 1-4
Blue wins auto 9-20 Blue wins game 37-41
SF 3-7
Blue wins auto 0-0 Tie game 39-39 (Blue penalty -5)
SF 1-4
Red wins auto 28-10 Red wins game 88-40
SF 3-7
Blue wins auto 25-2 Blue wins game 43-57 (Blue penalty -5)
SF 1-4
Red wins auto 37-9 Red wins game 93-26 (Blue penalty -5)
SF 3-7
?? they didn’t say Blue wins game 17-54
F 1-7
Red wins auto 25-0 Red wins game 75-28
F1-7
Red wins auto 34-0 Red wins regional 99-35

[Joel J]

Yea, its clear to me that auto matters. Especially in a match with good shooters.

[nuggetsyl]

First i would like to thank everyone for there kind words. I think winning auto makes all the difference in the world. When we did not win auto it was a dog fight to make a come back. I would much rather be on defence first where you do not have to get balls and then score in 40 secs. To the gentleman from 365 that talked about our auto if NASA decides to put las on NASA TV i think you will like what you will see. I wish i could go further on my comments but because we seem to be under a magnifine glass this year our team is keeping a tight lip about what we will do. If you rember in 03 no one knew we picked upped and stacked boxes until sf of our division.

shaun

[Greg Marra]

I didn't add the information about Boston, but here is what I have compiled so far. I haven't done all the statistics I can yet, since I'm still figuring out how to do a lot of the more fancy stuff in Excel, but maybe someone more spreadsheet inclined can work some numbers out of it. Don't forget to check out all the sheets.