View Single Post
  #136   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-04-2013, 16:51
Jimmy Cao Jimmy Cao is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jimmy Cao
no team
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 295
Jimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant future
Re: Archimedes 2013!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868 View Post
If I understand the original model,
Code:
For each team
  For each match
    Add opponents ranks to current team's difficulty of schedule
    Subtract alliance ranks from current team's difficulty of schedule

Rank team's difficulty of schedule in ascending order.

In this model,

For each team
  Rerank teams without current team
  For each match
    Add opponents ranks to current team's difficulty of schedule
    Subtract alliance ranks from current team's difficulty of schedule

Rank team's difficulty of schedule in ascending order.
Yes, this is correct. However it's still important to realize that this approach has numerous shortcomings.

As an extreme, place the #1, 2, and 3 teams against #97, 98, 99.
The #1, 2, 3 teams would each get a huge boost to their result, making it seem like an easier schedule, whereas #97, 98, and 99 seem to have very hard schedules. But this is only for 1 match, and this 1 match will have a disproportional impact on the final ranking (it might account for well over half the "points", while it only accounts for 1/12 of the final seeding).
__________________
Jimmy Cao

Team 469 2006-2010 Student/Alumni
Team 830 2011-2012 Mentor