![]() |
Currie SCAM Ranking
I’d previously published a list of all team qualifying average scores greater than 90. There were 50 teams on that list. But since there was a large variation in Regional Event averages (eg. 41 @ Pittsburgh; 73 @ West Michigan), comparing robots solely on the basis of average score is misleading…..So, I tried to neutralize the effect of Regional differences with an equation I called “Scoring Capability Analysis Model”. The acronym SCAM was purposely chosen so that no one would take this too seriously.
The SCAM number was calculated using the ratio of Team Average (TA) to Regional Average (RA) and makes an adjustment for performance consistency using the Team’s Standard Deviation (SD). The equation identifies teams that had high scoring averages relative to the other robots they competed against, and who also demonstrated consistently high scores – without a large variation from match to match. If you find yourself paired with one of these robots, expect a high score. If you’re competing against them, you might want to consider defense. SCAM = (TA-SD)/RA The Curie Division Top 10 SCAM Robots are: 1. 522 2. 233 3. 1114 4. 279 5. 66 6. 57 7. 11 8. 977 9. 292 10. 61 Honorable Mention goes to Teams 74, 224, 1243, 126, 175, and 302 (who all had scoring averages over 90, but didn’t make the top 10 SCAM list). |
Re: Curie SCAM Ranking
out of curiosity.. which teams have the highest QP avgs.? by that i mean the win/tie/loss point averages (2=win, 1=tie, 0=loss)
It's not that I think the regular point averages are unimportant, but it is my experience that the teams that win more often do not necessarily score that many points, especially if defense is a part of their strategy |
Re: Curie SCAM Ranking
Quote:
Rourke, Can you post the actual value of the SCAM for the top teams? Did anyone get a value above 2? |
Re: Curie SCAM Ranking
Quote:
Of the SCAM robots listed above, between them there are 13 Regional Winners or Finalists! (some multiple times) These 'bots seem to know how to score AND win too. |
Re: Curie SCAM Ranking
Team Number........Rank .......Average Seeding Points
340.....................1 ........2 501................... 2........ 2 967................... 3........ 2 1405...................4........ 2 233................... 5........ 1.85 179................... 6........ 1.8 60..................... 7........ 1.778 222................... 8........ 1.778 360................... 9........ 1.778 492................... 10........ 1.778 522................... 11........ 1.778 945................... 12........ 1.778 1359................. 13........ 1.778 254................... 14........ 1.764 138................... 15........ 1.75 :yikes: 311................... 16........ 1.75 538................... 17........ 1.75 27..................... 18......... 1.714 292................... 19........ 1.714 859................... 20........ 1.714 those are the stats i was looking for, if anyone else wanted to see them |
Re: Curie SCAM Ranking
Rourke, Can you post the actual value of the SCAM for the top teams? Did anyone get a value above 2?[/quote]
1. 522..........1.65 pts 2. 233..........1.59 3. 1114.........1.55 4. 279..........1.33 5. 66............1.2 6. 57............1.14 7. 11............1.13 8. 977...........1.1 9. 292...........1.07 10. 61............1.0 Note - Curie has the highest SCAM teams of all the divisions Galileo's highest is 1.34 (Team 5) Archimedes' highest is 1.4 (Team 945) Newton's highest is 1.6 (Team 254) (and then the next closest is 1.2) |
Re: Currie SCAM Ranking
Curie has got the highest SCAM teams ?
If you don't mind me asking what do u mean by SCAM and is it a good or bad thing. otherwise nice stats for the top 2 robots in that last post (522, 233) I don't see how 254 isn't in the top 5 though. they have had many successful yrs as well as this yr all by itself. oh well we shall see in but just a few days on who will win what which reminds me In the first curie thread. I would like to start up like a "ventures related thing) CD members may post who will win what award and the chances of them winning that said award. Same goes for the semi / quarter / finalist in both division and main national event no fancy program to do all the figures just a normal post |
Re: Currie SCAM Ranking
I was going over the SCAM system and i have to say it is probally the best mathimatical way to rank teams. Out of curiosity did u use every regional becaus i know that we did really bad at Trenton but really well in both S.C. and Annapolis.
|
Re: Currie SCAM Ranking
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Currie SCAM Ranking
Read the first post in this thread. a high SCAM is a good thing.
Team 254 isn't on that list because theyre in Newton, not Curie. Cory |
Re: Currie SCAM Ranking
Quote:
|
Re: Currie SCAM Ranking
For anyone who is looking for SCAM ratings for all teams this season, take a look at the white paper I uploaded yesterday. http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=27656The SCAM ratings are available in the column labeled "factor".
|
Re: Currie SCAM Ranking
Quote:
The top 30 SCAM robots from all divisions are (in order): 522, 233, 254, 1114, 945, 5, 279, 56, 1305, 494, 222, 111, 311, 60, 814, 237, 1030, 66, 569, 48, 486, 456, 33, 57, 67, 11, 340, 1403, 141, 281. |
Re: Currie SCAM Ranking
Quote:
|
Re: Curie SCAM Ranking
Quote:
|
Re: Curie SCAM Ranking
Quote:
|
Re: Curie SCAM Ranking
I like defensive outcomes, it's much easier to figure out the score. He he I also enjoy being really low on the Scam list.
|
Re: Currie SCAM Ranking
I truthfully did not expect our team to be at the top of the list. I am also suprised that our alliance partner at the New York City Regional, Team #522, is at the top as well. Although I have to remind you guys that there is some luck involved. You cannot help it if you get teamed up with an "okay" team. But hey, that is part of the game.
Yes, I have to agree that defensive outcomes are a lot easier to score, but why would you want to be really low on the SCAM list? (unless you are being sarcastic) :confused: |
Re: Currie SCAM Ranking
WOW! #6 Sweet
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:19. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi