![]() |
OPR after Week Two Events
The OPR/CCWM numbers have been posted, please see
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/2174 There are a number of points I would like to make: 1) Central Valley data is now complete. 2) One match in New York regional is missing. Based on time of match, it looks like it is a replay match but there is no score. I put in 0-0 for now so I can post the results. I will recalculate the OPR/CCWM once that match data is available. 3) Toronto East regional is missing finals results. However it does not affect all the data posted since I know the outcome of the finals from other CD threads. 4) Northern Lights regional data is missing. 5) FIRST changed the headings of Team Standings page this week. Last week they were using last year's heading with HP, BP, TP and CP. This week they changed it to AP, CP and TP and took out the Coop Points (CP). Unfortunately they did not repost the Week One events with the new headings. This creates problem in my spreadsheet and creates unnecessary work. Enjoy the data! If you find any error or have any questions, please let me know. |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Wow, thank you so much for this! We are 27th... And great job 987 on being 2nd!
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
So... OPR vs CCWM. I understand how they're calculated, I'm just not sure what the meaning of the distinction is.
Many high end teams have equal or nearly equal OPR and CCWM ranks (2056, 1114, 1986, 610, 987, 118), but other strong teams, like 4343 and 1241 have significantly higher CCWM ranks than OPR ranks. I wonder what that means. Anybody have an idea of why this phenomenon occurs? That said, even MORE proud of the kids on 4343 for being 8th in the world for CCWM after 2 weeks of play. |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Ed,
At Waterford 4 of our 12 matches were played with only a two team alliance. Do you have any factor that plays into the CCWM and OPR calculation? |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Northern Lights regional is missing, but I also have noticed that the FIRST website has not updated either.
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Are the Auto, Climb and Teleop OPRs on the WorldRank sheet supposed to match the individual event teams have played so far? It looks like they did in last week's version, but this week, for instance, has 2056's OPR-T at 2.13. (Crazy enough on its own, but GTR-E has it at 46.)
EDIT: It looks like columns A-T got sorted after everything was calculated. 1640's columns AA-AC look to be listed with team 4557 at rank 290. 2590's are with 3755 at 409th. Is there a simple way to fix it? |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
If a team's score is only high when there is a strong partner and it is low without a strong partner, then their OPR/CCWM will be low and rightly so. |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Are individual event opr's supposed to match the world rank ones, even if a team has only competed once? They seem to be off by a bit, not much but a bit.
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
At events where no team had played twice, the OPRs should match. Those events are Central Valley, Hatboro Horsham, San Diego, Lake Superior, Northern Lights, and Oregon. |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
This scoring contribution is not true of other potential DQs, for instance the entire team no-showing or playing without clearing inspection, but it does apply for some. It could work if you had Disable information or no-show robots (vs 5.5.6 no show teams), but DQ might be a wash this year. |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
The reason why the data for Northern Lights is missing is because of the special match that they played between the NL winners and the Lake Superior winners. When they tried to sync the robots to the field they couldnt because of FMIS system so somehow in that process they also wiped the match data from the FRC system. Hopefully they will repost the data sometime this week.
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
What do you guys think of OPR this year? It seems like based on a comparison of WPI's rankings versus the actual data we took, it is better than using ranking to sort teams, but still pretty noisy. I know our team's OPR was a bit low. I bet this was due to getting a lot of matches with other good teams at the regional where the score was lower than you'd expect (robot failures, etc). The other teams are ranked at least in the right ballpark, but not in a very solid order. 1100's OPR rank of #6 in particular is criminally low.
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
At WPI, a few teams happened to have their non-functional matches paired with other good teams, and OPR doesn't really know how to separate that out. Additionally, defense is huge this year, making this game less separable than other games. So while our average contribution to a match might be close to our OPR, other teams were a ways off in one direction or the other due to scheduling oddities or hella technical fouls. |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
As for how well OPR is doing, the metric I typically use is % qualifying matches predicted correctly. I have 2013 OPR nearly 1% ahead of 2012 this time last year (81.5% vs. 80.6%), though the result isn't statistically significant (fwiw, p=0.29). |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
BaselA,
So do you sum the 3 team alliance OPR scores and then use the highest value to predict the match winner? |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
Also, just for fun, 2012 OPR (used teams' average of all event OPRs, but they're all pretty similar) is predicting 2013 matches at about 61% (counting any rookies as OPR = 0). Thanks to Ed for the OPRs and Ether for the Twitter Match Data. Not sure what I'd do without you two. Edit: I don't want to post too many times, but there's a couple different things here. One is OPR as a tool to predict what will happen. Ed's reply below is pretty much exactly what I do for predicting matches (except realtime OPR; that's something I'd like to do in the future). In this case, I'm talking about how well OPR evaluates teams this year vs. other years, for which I used post-event OPRs. You can't hit 80% predicting matches without realtime data. |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Great work as usual, very helpful data.
Does anyone have an update on when Northern Lights data may be available? Lots of teams from NL are coming to WI next week. |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Here's an interesting result: 294 has an OPR of 18.4 at the Central Valley. Yet it had no shooter so no auto or teleop points, and it couldn't hang. It had very strong defense (which put it very high on our #3 draft list--we picked 295, a strong defender as well instead). So something weird is happening the OPR if a team with no apparent offense is doing this well. Looks like the OPR this year is capturing defensive efforts as well.
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
This is why you can't rely on OPR as your only source of data. |
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
When will Israel's rankings be updated?
|
Re: OPR after Week Two Events
Quote:
I don't follow your logic. Teams that score points by drawing fouls are still teams that score points, and points = offense. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 21:44. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi