![]() |
paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Thread created automatically to discuss a document in CD-Media.
FIRST Championship History Results by Jim Zondag |
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Why does the data on your graph for 1114 start in 2002 if their rookie year was not until 2003?
|
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
I see two errors off the bat in the 2009 Archimedes alliance selection:
Alliance 2 was 1503/1538/1649 Alliance 6 was 488/118/343 |
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Quote:
|
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
3 posts and not one Thank You?
Jim, Thank you for posting this! Although the numbers aren't what matter, it is always fun to look at stats, just like in any other competition/sport. Any chance you could add 97, 98 and 99 tabs? Not to calculate into your analysis, just so all that information will be in one place. Thanks again, Eric |
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Thanks Jim for putting this together. Couldn't you have picked a factor that put 33 in the Top 10?
The waiting factor Jim used is pretty neat. If you ask yourself "how much influence should history have"? For the "team of the decade", it should probably not have a weighting factor, but if you are curious as to the trend, the effect of weighting is very interesting. The 0.66 weighting allows for: Current: 1 Last year: 0.66 2 years ago: 0.66*0.66=44% 3 years ago: 0.66^3=29% 4 Years ago: 0.66^4=20% Jim picked this factor as it best followed the "Student cycle" of 4 years. Not only do you loose those students, but you may also loose some really great parent involvement. This factor also helps up and coming teams like 1625 and 2056 get the respect due to them. For instance 1625 is just 1 ranking position below 33 even though total points over 10 years, they are less than 50%. The weighting factor is kind of fun to look at. You can play around with different weightings and see the effect. If you go much lower than 50%, then history really has very little to do with the ranking. For example if you had the same result 2 years in a row then scoring would be 1+0.5 which means that last year has less than 33% influence on your current standing. P.S. Very cute with the color scheme. There is a way to do Tie-die markers if you are interested. |
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
very cool. Thanks for posting this database.
|
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Thanks, I saw some data about Team 85 I could not have found on the bluealliance
|
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Thanks Jim for posting this great data base!!!!
I'd like to throw a shout out to teams 217, 111, 254, 469, 33, 71, and 175, attending Championship 10 years in a row is an accomplishment, never mind making the finals every YEAR OF A DECADE!!!.. Thats an amazing accomplishment...I'm floored... Thanks again Jim, |
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
lol...I guess we're the "Go Big or Go Home" team of FIRST!
2 Elimination appearances...2 World Championships This sheet is awesome! Thank you for putting in the effort to compile the information. I especially like the weighting factor - it really levels the playing field between "rookies" and vets. |
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Looking through the data some interesting things struck me.
All 4 #1 seeds have never made it to Einstein, however in 2007 no #1 seeds made Einstein. 2007 Also produced the lowest seed champion with #8, also the only 8 seed to ever advance to Einstein. In general it looks like 1 and 2 seeds are most successful at advancing from their division. 7 teams have been in 10 consecutive elimination rounds at the championship. 6 Teams now have 2 or more championships during this decade where as only1 team had multiple wins for the first 18 years of FIRST. All multiple champions other than 71 have won their second since 2008. 2 Teams have won back to back championships. 3 Teams have at least 3 consecutive appearances on Einstein. Teams with multiple trips to Einstein teams that have won are bolded: 6: 177 5: 67, 217 4: 71, 233 3: 25, 60, 111, 175, 254, 469 2: 33, 64, 144, 173, 294, 494, 503, 968, 1114, 1126, 1218 ~0.66% of FRC Teams registered each year make the Championship. ~1.26% of all FRC Teams registered this year have made Einstein more than once. ~.678% of all teams ever registered has made Einstein more than once. 58 teams have made Einstein once for a total of 81 unique team numbers appearing in the "Final Four" meaning ~2.39% of all teams have made the final field at some point since the current format for the championship started in 2001. I'm amazed you able to collect all this great data, thanks for posting it. |
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
I have updated this championship history database with the 2011 Results.
Congrats to Wildstang for moving into 1st place overall on the weighted history scale. :) |
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Jim,
Thank you! I alway love looking into this data and trying to determine which team is #1. Congratulations to Wildstang for taking over the title....for this year. ;) One error I noticed was, in the data for Archimedes you have 2106 instead of 2016. Also, I am not exactly sure how the weighted data is calculated but we seem to be taking a significant dive in value compared to other past year champions, even though we had similar performances. I guess when you pull ahead by so much, the expectations are that much higher. Interestingly enough 217 is showing a decline, even though they did better this year than last year. Yet, 469 shows an improvement even though they declined compared to last year. Interesting, thanks. |
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Thanks for posting such an interesting database.
I noticed a few mistakes though, it seems that the database has us (816) listed as the 11th pick in the Curie 09 draft, when we were the 6th Alliance Captain. Also I believe the draft position of 1771 is wrong as well. Probably won't change anything, but it caught my eye. |
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Really nice paper.
I guess 111 is up there in the ranks with 67, 3-time world champs. :P Congrats again, guys. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 13:25. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi