![]() |
OPR after Week Seven Events
The OPR/CCWM numbers up to Week 7 events have been posted, please see
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/2174 If you find any error or have any questions, please let me know. I will post this again after the division data of the World Championship is announced. |
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
So after 7 weeks, what is the final verdict on OPR in 2013? I feel like it's a pretty good measurement as scoring is mostly linear.
|
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
Quote:
|
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
I'm not sure how it's calculated, but I feel like it's a decent way to scout as long as it's followed up by actual scouting of a team. It's going to sound like I'm whining here, but it's true. Except for one match, our team scored above 50% (in some cases we scored above 65%) of our alliance's total points during the competition (including elims). Our average points per match was 40 (and this is including a match where we jammed and only scored 25 points). If we take that match out, I believe that we averaged over 44 points per match. Yet our team only won two matches during the entire competition. So, I mean, it's a good measurement, but teams are going to be missed.
Generally, however, I do think it's an invaluable tool for smaller teams who don't have the resources to do a bunch of scouting themselves. For the most part, robots can be measured by those metrics and it's mostly accurate. |
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
Quote:
-How valuable is a scouting system that everyone else is using? How do you differentiate your picks from other teams' picks if you're all picking from the same OPR/CCWM-derived list? -OPR doesn't take into account a robot's type and how it interacts with other robots. You can get a high OPR in qualifying simply by supplying discs to a floor loader that then scores them for you. But an alliance of disc-suppliers would score very poorly in eliminations. -OPR doesn't compare well at all across events. Waterloo had a ridiculous average OPR (even excluding 1114/2056), but that was probably because nearly every robot there was offensive, and so little defense was played. If you added 10 defensive robots to the pool, everyone else's OPR would have fallen drastically. You can do a "global OPR", but I doubt it corrects that much. OPR seemed to do very well this year as far as its ability to reflect robot's effectiveness within a regional, but there are broader issues with it than just that. IIRC, Karthik's main complaint about OPR was that people were using it for scouting and comparing robots without really understanding it or understanding its shortcomings like those I listed above. |
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
^It was just a joke, bro. If a team bases scouting off of a singular statistical value (that they may not even fully understand).
I would say OPR is really good at figuring out at what level a robot can play at, but without the context of knowing the "class" of the robot, the number is meaningless. Teams 11 and 245 are some of the better known "cyclers" that may have a high OPR, but would a cycler pick another cycler over a floor loader because the cycler has a higher OPR? I guess they always could, but that probably means scouting wants to take the rest of the day off and not worry about scouting any elims. But maybe the cycler also played some impeccable defense and was very agile in transition so they could easily switch between offense and defense... and the rabbit hole get's deeper. |
Quote:
|
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
OPR (specifically CCWM) is better than I expected at separating teams, and seems to be ~85% accurate based on a comparison to a few events of data.
That said, you have to remember that OPR is an approximation of skill that is better than average score but no replacement for a real scouting system. It's a decent "sanity check" to see if you missed an outlier or two but if you have actual data I wouldn't even touch it. During and after the season, it's a very good approximation of skill that is very useful for Internet debates. :P |
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
OPR is an excellent indicator this year.
What OPR does not clarify, however, is autonomous and climbing. Autonomous is indefensible. I would much much rather have a robot that has an opr of 55 because it scores a 7 disk every single time in auton, then climbs quickly at the end. Even if it has a zero teleop score. Because that's the perfect robot to have play defense. OPR will never be an end-all measurement, and you really have to understand the mechanics of the game. Another place that OPR fails is defense. There were several extremely well-scoring machines at MSC that had low OPR's because they spent half their matches playing defense. Unless you scouted and knew that, you'd assume they were just poor robots. That's the kind of third round sleeper pick that high seeded teams dream of. |
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
Quote:
OPR in 2013 as a primary or solitary scouting tool = Thumbs Down OPR in 2013 as a tool to complement effective match scouting = Thumbs Way Up OPR in 2013 as a stat that is blindly quoted by those without a fundamental understanding of what it means = Thumbs Way Down For a more detailed analysis, come check out my seminar in St. Louis. |
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
Quote:
|
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
Quote:
|
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
Quote:
Though at some point, if there is a redundant robot that is a certain amount better than a complimentary robot, you definitely have to consider the redundant robot over the complimentary. How much of a difference must there be to do that? That is a great subject for a team meeting on Friday night. |
Re: OPR after Week Seven Events
Quote:
![]() |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:41. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi