Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

Could try this if you can point me to the raw data (I only found the Team 2834 OPR generation scouting database):

Calculate an "effective QA" for each team by:
- For each match, sum up the final QA result of all teams in the alliance
- For each team in the alliance, their personal contribution is estimated as a percentage of their alliance's score proportional to the sum of the alliance team's original QA
- Calculate effective individual QA by averaging all matches in their competition (to normalize and account for different # of matches played at different events)

For example:

Team 1 QA = 95
Team 2 QA = 38
Team 3 QA = 56

Sum is 189
Match 1 Score = 87

Match 1, Team 1 "effective individual QA" = 95/189 * 87 = 43.7
Match 1, Team 2 "effective individual QA" = 38/189 * 87 = 17.5
Match 1, Team 3 "effective individual QA" = 56/189 * 87 = 25.8

In this case, teams with higher scores get rewarded with more credit for points in rounds when they played with normally underperforming robots. Also, the final sum of all teams represents the actual (normalized per regional) number of points scored at regionals, which more directly answers OP's question

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

Did you call?

It was a bit harder than I thought it would be to make this visualization because I wanted to make it automatic and customizable.

Here is an interactive visualization (drag the slider to see the contributions from top nth teams)

https://public.tableau.com/profile/e...mContributions

And here is a picture for those who have slower internet connections or just want to see a pretty graph.

http://imgur.com/gallery/GcfEz80/

Note: I filtered out any event that had less than 30 matches scouted in it. I could put them back in, but I trust the data for larger events more.

This was actually super fun to make. PLEASE tell your friends to use this app. If we can get more regionals in the database, frcscout.com could be a census of FRC. If anyone else is as big of a data nerd as I am, that would be a VERY exciting new opportunity for some awesome stats.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

Your "effective QA" is essentially a simplified Version of OPR.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

My team has an online OPR calculator that does something very similar to this already. We show what percentage a team contributed to their qual average (an interesting thing we noticed is at most regionals 2/3rds of teams contribute <33% to their totals). Should be easy to add exactly what you're asking for.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

Auto points are probably even more concentrated at the top than total points.

After SCH District I took a quick look at the 144 qual auto points (sum of Ranking page auto points / 3) scored there. If you take out matches involving 3 robots, 225 (stacker scored the majority of the points), 486 (consistent tote & can shove), and 365 (occasionally got 2 step cans in the auto zone), there are only 28 points left. That's the top ~9% involved in ~80% of auto points. Of course that is just one small event.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

The Qual Average of a team is the average of the alliance scores of the alliances that team played with. So it's nominally 3 times the team's OPR.

Here's the MITVC event:

Notice that about half the teams have an OPR greater than 1/3 of the sum of their alliance final scores, and half less than.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

Then the game has 6~7 different things you can build for from Auto to Teleop (very singular specialty, to very overall alone high scorer). Base that on differences between Q Matches, and Playoffs (tossing co-op, add round robin, toss out the win-loss-draw, switch to QPA), then figure other itterations for champs...oy vey.

Yes it would be nice to know the true points scored for all teams over each & all events as singular robots...OPR is as close as you'll get.

But, what you can possibly do, isn't necessarily what you will do...Whatever works for you personally as a team, to get the points up in Q matches, then what you can and will actually do for your Alliance Partners in the Playoffs rising to the occasion when 3 all can actually work together smoothly! (And stay the heck away from those already hard built stacks). LOL

Much worse when you knock your own down too. That has to hurt.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

Thank you so much for all your efforts to get a solution to this question.

So I did a little number crunching myself... as best I could with available data (courtesy of Team 995).
I did the following:

QA*(#matches)*OPR/100 to get an idea of total points scored. I then summed up all 66 teams to get a total for the regional.

Can't really get the data to cut/paste properly, but I got the TOP 8, the initial alliance captains, were responsible for 51% of total points scored at the regional.

Pretty interesting. And Los Angeles wasn't a crazy scoring regional. Might run same numbers for Waterloo!

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

Would you please explain the above calculation? Perhaps by giving a numerical example for one team.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

Sure. I changed the calculation a bit. I used Team 955's %Contribution value. That changed the Top 8 score percentage to 36.51%

I multiplied team's QA by the number of matches (9), and that is QA*9.
I then multiplied that by their "Contribution %"/100, and that is "% contr", the number of total alliance points their scored.
I then totaled up all the "% contr", and divided each team's "% contr" by the total.
That gave me "% total Scr", the percent of the regional points scored.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

That sounds better.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

In watching the Wisconsin Regional, I think something close to the economy is similar, but not as you posed (80% outscored the rest combined).

I would guess that 10% of the robots could outscore the bottom 30% combined. But, this is not that different from prior years.

What is different is how much ahead the top 10% is from the next 10%. One top 10% bot can beat an entire alliance from the next 10%.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

OPR seems this year to be statistically "input flawed" as a reliable scouting metric (Was much better previous games) . Too many every match/event variables at play for a single equation to define accurately individual offensive ranking..as in past years. Where individual bots were tracked more accurately in past games.

There are many bots with High QA 50+ that score <6 solo every match...by pure chance of other two partners being stronger masking their deficiency. Static scouting is only way to see this in action...this year.

When QA is a major variable you need many more data points than 10-20 to infer a reliable OPR in a game like this where only average is a major input variable (as well as tote, noodle, RC all averages of avg alliance)...to easy to skew QA (and other inputs) making using it troubling from a statistical perspective.

You simply need more "based on random alliance averages" data points for OPR to be more accurate at prediction this year. 100-300 matches would be better, in a game like this. Which is impossible even if all teams went to all matches within 1000 miles.

My advice this year as a scout..."eyes on bots." Take any OPR with a grain of salt.

We have all but only 10 bots personally scouted on their play and tendencies in RR for Ventura this weekend and the same in SD after. After all its really solo contribution added to your alliance score...what they do is what they do. They are mostly very predictable. Because many were very specifically designed to do their task repetitively. Not a lot of versatile bots out there. They are either good or bad predictably at the task they do.

There is a limited set off bots each team competes against in events (30-60):

Watch 2-3 matches on each that you face...compare to posted results. Easy to do...over a few weeks unless you play early.

In Worlds perhaps the fact you cannot possibly know out of 3000 who you will team up with and face ..OPR becomes more valuable. But again there are only 75 in a division and could possibly be done with archived video...once you find out who is in your division.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

OPR is flawed every year :-)

I think you meant "value" not "equation". OPR computation involves scores (for a single event) or thousands (for all events combined) of equations.

If by "static" you meant manual scouting (i.e. using humans), it has always been the case that such scouting is superior to what can be teased from the data that FIRST provides.

But yes, arguably more so this year.

Re: Teams scoring vast majority of points
 

This is an interesting argument. I know we don't have the data to address it directly, but is there are way to examine it by proxy, at least ordinally? For instance, we don't have enough live scouting data, but we do have draft order. If we posit that teams draft based on the real scouting data that OPR attempts to replicate*, are these data available in a form that allows for easy comparison? For instance, I just compared the top 15 OPRs to their draft order at 3 random 2015 events. ("Random" is used here non-technically to mean "the first three I clicked on in TBA".) I found that the average absolute value differences were 2.3, 1.2, and 1.3. The medians were even lower. This seems pretty good to me, but I haven't taken the time to do it more comprehensively or with other years.

Of course, this also only works for the top 24 teams at an event. On the other hand, that's the main reason most teams scout in the first place.

*This is an assumption whose falsity varies year-over-year. And also between events and teams, but I'll assume those variations have negligible effects on the YoY rankings for now.