![]() |
Northwest Rankings
I applied the FiM ranking system to teams in the Northwest over the course of the regional season. This includes the 179 teams in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana and Alaska.
I included every team from the Northwest, even if they competed in event(s) outside of the Northwest. It's exciting to see the top 64 teams who would have gone to the Northwest Championship, if we were already following a district model. I can't wait for a regional championship! :D Here's the scoring system, from the FiM Rules Supplement: Code:
POINT CATEGORY POINTS POINTS Code:
Rank Teams PointsThose would be as follows: Code:
3 spots – one for each of the three State Championship Chairman’s Award winners Let me know if you find any errors. * I didn't apply tie-breaking rules as it didn't effect the outcome of who would qualify and I'm tired. ** I only used each team's first two competitions, so 1983's score of 68 in Spokane was ignored. |
Re: Northwest Rankings
Oh, man... and I thought I spent too much time on CD! :]
Awesome analysis, though... it would be fun to see what a tournament with the top 64 teams from that list would look like. Jason |
Re: Northwest Rankings
I needed something to do on the bus ride to and from Spokane :p
|
Re: Northwest Rankings
Well done in Spokane, Navid... Three regionals, three wins - but never the alliance captain... A strange record for a great team.
|
Re: Northwest Rankings
Quote:
|
Re: Northwest Rankings
Of course.... Was it just me, or was alliance selection strange? Why did 2130 pass you guys up? I see 4061 had very strong qualifiers, but we all know that you had better have a very good reason for passing on the skunks!
|
Re: Northwest Rankings
How many teams in the PNW were 1 event vs. 2 event teams this year?
I can't wait for the District model. More matches at more events will be better for everyone. Also it would be super cool if they could be at places with a softer floor than the concrete at the WaMu Theater, because my back was all kinds of messed up after 3 days on that. :D |
Re: Northwest Rankings
Quote:
We wanted a strong full-court shooter on our alliance. We knew Alpha+ was good at both that and pyramid shooting, but they were short and easy to block and we didn't want another pyramid shooter like us. Having two pyramid shooter's often causes delays while waiting to share the spot. I think both Alliances got what they needed and I was almost sure that 2130 and 4061 would be battling us in the finals after their high-scoring match. We won our last two regionals with FCS bots and if it ain't broke, don't fix it. :p It was really nice that 2471 was able to pyramid shoot too, because some tough defense and FCS blocking was inevitable in Spokane. |
Re: Northwest Rankings
Quote:
-47 teams of the 179 went to two regional events (including 1983 who attended 3 events). I am also looking forward to districts. I would love to see the number of 2 event teams go up. This will only increase competitive play in our region and allow teams to better utilize their funds. The nice part about having tons of district events will mean smaller competitions, and hopefully more comfortable venues :) |
Re: Northwest Rankings
I'm definitely looking forward to the district model too. More events, more matches, more competitive, less travel, less cost... the best of the Northwest facing off in our own championship! what's not to like?
I guess the qualifying for the world championship in week 7 could create some logistic problems... travel arrangements, airfare, hotels, etc... |
Re: Northwest Rankings
That is awesome. I'm glad to see we are ranked 51st with only 1 event. Districts is going to make this region excellent.
Something I do hope they do is if the entire system moves to districts is I hope they push championships back. Because at that point everyone would qualify week 7, and it would be really tough to find travel. |
Re: Northwest Rankings
Quote:
|
Re: Northwest Rankings
Quote:
We had indications that Skunks were going to turn us down. Our scouting team also liked the combo shooters strategy and 4061 had great stats. Their team is very well run and we will be seeing lots from them. See ya in St Louis |
Re: Northwest Rankings
Don't be fooled by 1540's relatively low rank. We fixed all of our jamming and loading problems that we had in Oregon while we were in Oklahoma, and even put up 93 points on our own in the following semi-final match:
http://www.thebluealliance.com/match/2013okok_sf2m1 (and we'll be tuning our 7-disc auto and adding a 10 point climb before champs) |
Re: Northwest Rankings
Quote:
Team 2130 is a class act and so is 4061. i would expect to see both of these teams continually improving and they are both pretty darn good right now!! We look forward to being able to play together with 2130 in both St. Louis and the years to come. They are a fine team and everyone should expect great things from them in the future. Thanks 2471 for coming through in the elimination rounds... it was fun playing with you for once instead of against you. It was the first time. Thanks 4125 for getting through your tech problems and providing a solid third force for the alliance. It was quite a ride. The toughest elimination rounds we faced all year. Spokane is a fun place to compete... |
Re: Northwest Rankings
We really enjoyed being on the same side of the field as Skunkworks this year. It's only my sophomore year as a mentor, but I've been told that we have never played with you in the entire history of the team. That's pretty amazing! Ultimate Scent just gets better and better with every regional. I guess that's an advantage of doing three. The district system will make this possible for many more teams which will be great for our area.
The eliminations, I likened to a Rugby match. Very rough, and very difficult the entire way. There were a number of alliances at Spokane without a tall blocker, but we never saw that match up in our three eliminations. When we got home, we found the software bug that was locking out our driver controls from time to time. Yay! That was very frustrating, and we kept blaming the rough field, along with anything else we could think of. :] Thanks to Confidential for coming back after a couple of big scares in the quarter finals. We came the closest to going home in that match up, but we all buckled down and got it done somehow. Watching the videos where the skunks were almost pulled over on their side in the finals was amazing and scary. I pretty much missed it live. Navid, I really appreciate you doing the footwork on the Northwest rankings. I'm super into statistics, and when California started calculating theirs here on CD, I was very tempted to do the same for the Northwest, but I never took the time. I'm sure it was significant work. Leaving out your third regional hurts your score. Is that how it's done in Michigan, or do they count all the district events you do, average them, throw out the worst? I really liked the Eastern Washington University facility for the regional. Big enough to hold everyone, but small enough to see it up close. I hope we have a chance to go there in the future. Thanks to everyone for a great time. Now I need a little time for my finger nails to grow back before St. Louis! See ya next time. -Bob |
Re: Northwest Rankings
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Northwest Rankings
Spotted some mistakes, edited version below:
Code:
Rank Teams Points |
Re: Northwest Rankings
Here's the original data for just the 156 teams in Washington and Oregon, with a point average (divided by events attended):
Code:
Rank Teams Average Events Original |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:30. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi