![]() |
Re: California Rankings
Quote:
|
Re: California Rankings
Looking forward to the day when district points are interchangeable from region to region (you go where ever you want to and the points you accumulate add up regardless).
|
Re: California Rankings
Only one team from California played in week 3, team 1836 traveling all the way to Israel. Here are the updated rankings.
Code:
Rank Team Points |
Re: California Rankings
I started to do this for MO & KS teams but gave up because I didn't have time to slog through all of the various places I'd need to get all of the information. Do you have a convenient source of data all in one place, or reasonably automatic?
|
Re: California Rankings
Joe,
In Michigan, we only count the first two district events for points. |
Re: California Rankings
Quote:
I use the FIRST rankings page for event the W/L/T points. I then use the 2013 Alliance selection thread for the elimination results. That is 24 different manual assignments for pick position, and 12 different manual assignments for elimination finish. Then I do the awards manually, which probably takes the longest, but isn't too bad. It's not more then half an hour per event. Next week will be the hardest, 2 CA events and CA teams attending 3 regionals outside CA. |
Re: California Rankings
Quote:
Did you build a spreadsheet with lookup tables for the points, or did you calculate manually? If the former, care to share? I might try again now that I'm recovered (mostly) from the weekend. It'd be a great excuse not to start on our taxes.... |
Re: California Rankings
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: California Rankings
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: California Rankings
Quote:
I have no experience with web scraping so here's the automatic approach I thought of first: Because 2834 scouting databases include event results, you could grab qual W-L-T records automatically. But differentiating 1st pick from 2nd pick is problematic to do automatically in any fashion. Awards seems impossible to do automatically without scraping, but I can't imagine it'd be complicated. The awards are always in the same order and the tables are formatted pretty regularly. |
Re: California Rankings
Quote:
|
Re: California Rankings
Quote:
I have another spreadsheet that I use to get all the data prepared and then copied to a separate file for publication. Nothing is done manually because it is so easy to introduce errors. But it is not just pressig one button either. Award points are calculated automatically by getting data from FIRST website and through a converter (Excel lookup table) it will put the team number into the correct awards. However some events award no judges awards and some award 2 judges awards so I still have to double check. I also use a pivot table to take care of teams winning more than one award so there is no manual adding of award points. 1st and 2nd round picks info are not available through FIRST website even though we tried to ask for it for many years. The FTAs for each district put the Alliance Selection report in a Google doc folder that is shared with me so I can retrieve them when I run the report. Again lookup tables are used so there is no manual typing in team numbers and selection order. I have macros and Excel formulas to detect and take care of substitutions automatically so it is not done manually but I have to feed that information in. Tiebreak is the hardest part. It requires many sheets and formulas and is complicated. But it is fully automated. All other information I already have in the Team2834 Scouting database. I have a macro to output the three highest match scores from each event and then use that in tiebreak calculations. I don't mind sharing the spreadsheet with other regions with the person who has to do this job but it is not very easy to understand. You have to be very knowledgeable in Excel to figure out what I was trying to do. I wrote it for my own use and wasn't planned to be user friendly. Also if there are different number of events, different number of teams extra would require extensive reprogramming of the formulas which is very time consuming to setup although it is a one time thing each year. It would be easier if someone knowledgeable enough in Excel to develop their own spreadsheet rather than modifying mine. I would certainly be willing to help. |
Re: California Rankings
Our team coach showed us this thread which we were very excited about, however I think there may be some minor miscalculations (unless i'm forgetting something), from our record at CVR it looks like our score should be 60, not 68.
We had 7 wins (14 points), 6th seeded alliance captain (11 points), won the regional as alliance captain (30 points), and received the innovation in control award (5 points). Please correct me if I'm wrong.::rtm:: |
Re: California Rankings
Quote:
Here are the corrected rankings Code:
Rank Team Points |
Week 4 Rankings
After week 4, 30 California teams have yet to play, 160 have played 1 event, and 26 have played 2 events.
I have added calculations of each team's maximum event score and average event score, to go along with the sum of the team's first two events. Team 973 is has the highest after two events (43 at Madera and 57 at Los Angeles). Team 192 had the best event, 67 points from Utah. 254 has the best first event, 61 points from San Diego. Code:
Team Events 1st 2 Rank Max MaxRank Avg AvgRank CAMA CASD ISTA ORPO TXHO CALB CASA UTWV MABO AZCH |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:26. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi