Division Strengths
 

From the average OPR and average CCWM numbers, I put all 4 divisions on a chart and sorted in descending order.

Using average OPR data, the mean of each division is
Curie 22.7
Newton 22.1
Galileo 21.8
Archimedes 21.5

Looking at the graph, I have the following observations
1) Galileo has the biggest gap between high and low OPR teams.
2) Archimedes has the smallest gap between high and low OPR teams.
3) Curie has fewest low OPR teams while Galileo has the most.

Using average CCWM data, the mean of each division is
Newton 6.9
Archimedes 6.6
Curie 6.2
Galileo 6.0

Looking at the graph, I have the following observations
1) Galileo has the biggest gap between high and low CCWM teams.
2) Newton, Archimedes and Curie follows the same trend with Newton's teams having slightly higher CCWM.
3) Newton has the least number of teams with negative CCWM.

It is hard to draw conclusions but Newton and Curie have the slightly higher strengths over all the teams in their division. But if we are only looking at the upper half of the teams in each division, Galileo has the strongest teams.

Have fun looking at the numbers.

If you want more data, please refer to my original scouting database white paper at
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/2174

Ed

Re: Division Strengths
 

Very interesting data here. I never thought of looking at the OPRs of a whole division. Thanks for putting this together!

Re: Division Strengths
 

What is CCWM?

Re: Division Strengths
 

It stands for Calculated Contribution to Winning Margin. It is numerically equivalent to Plus/Minus Rating that some other people use. You can refer to my white paper which explains it in detail.

Ed

Re: Division Strengths
 

Thanks

Re: Division Strengths
 

Did you calculate any measures of spread, like standard deviation? Is the median close to the mean?

Inquiring minds want to know. :)

Re: Division Strengths
 

I did calculate it but I decided not to report it because looking at the graph tells you more than just another statistical number. If you are really curious enough, you can do that in Excel. Use =STDEV(B2:B88)

Ed

Re: Division Strengths
 

I did it for my own amusement:
Division: Archimedes Curie Galileo Newton
Standard deviation 953 973 894 929
Median team number 1,302 1,108 1,124 1,138
Mean team number 1,341 1,267 1,192 1,229

... and of course "mode" doesn't mean anything when no value repeats. Sheesh...

Re: Division Strengths
 

What about doing it by years of involvement, rather than team number?

Re: Division Strengths
 

I have a tab-delimited text file that lists all of the teams and their rookie years. If that's useful to anyone, DM me.

Re: Division Strengths
 

I want to emphasize that in my scouting database, I used average OPR and average CCWM of all the regionals and districts a team attended.

If you would like to use best OPR and CCWM, or most recent OPR and CCWM you can do that and the World Ranking will be different.

Next year I am going to change it to report a weighted average so that if a team attends 2 or more events, the earlier ones will weigh less than the later ones.

Ed

Re: Division Strengths
 

I did an interesting study. A lot of people from Michigan and outside of Michigan who watched the matches of the Michigan State Championship have made comments like
1) overall high performance and evenness of the teams in the matches
2) depth of the teams based on the fact that many good teams did not get into elimination round
3) very exciting to watch because there are very few lopsided matches
4) tougher than world championship and comparable to IRI

Team 2834 was at the State Championship and played in the elimination round so we have first hand experience.

I am not expressing my opionion whether the Michigan district and state championship model is good or not or whether other parts of the country or the world championship should adopt the model that robots need to qualify and teams who won rookie all-star award can have their robot compete. Some people may not like what I am showing below. I am just reporting on numbers so please don't shoot the messenger.

I overlayed the Michigan teams who made it to the State Championship with their OPR and CCWM before the State Championship. I "stretched" it horizontally to match the 87 teams in each division. You can see that in the attached file. This is my finding.
1) In general, Michigan teams are not stronger in OPR and CCWM than any of the divisions. The average OPR is 21.9 and CCWM is 6.4 and they are right in between the 4 championship divisions.
2) The upper half of the teams in the MI State Championship are actually lower than all the divisions meaning the good teams in the championship are better than the good teams in Michigan teams overall.
3) The lower half of the teams in the MI State Championship are much higher than all 4 championship divisions which is not surprising since robots have to qualify. This could explain why the MI State Championship seems to have higher performance because of the relative evenness of the teams. This could be an argument for the MI State Championship model if you want it to be more exciting.

What do you think?

Ed

Re: Division Strengths
 

what does OPR mean ?

Re: Division Strengths
 

Offensive Power Ranking

It is a calculated quantity based on your and your alliance partners match scores. It is designed to figure out each team's individual contributions to the final score of the match.

Re: Division Strengths
 

ohhh alright :)
thank youuuu !