View Single Post
  #75   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-03-2009, 16:37
Ed Law's Avatar
Ed Law Ed Law is offline
Registered User
no team (formerly with 2834)
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Foster City, CA, USA
Posts: 752
Ed Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond reputeEd Law has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Easy to use Offensive Power Rankings (OPR) program for mid-regional scouting

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bongle View Post
The most interesting correlation I've found is that the robots that get to go into eliminations correspond very strongly with the PM rating. At FLR, all but one of the top 20 robots ranked by PMR were either captains or were selected to go into eliminations. The correlation is less strong with OPR.
Hi Bongle,

I referenced your work in my white paper. I didn't realize you are mentoring Team 2702 now. I still associated you with Team 1281 in my presentation. I will update it. I really like your insight/explanation how to interpret these rating numbers.

I want to discuss with you about correlation between OPR and CCWM/PMR. I think we both agreed that it changes from year to year depending on the game. One way, as you suggest in your post, is to see whether the teams that were alliance captain or got picked and went to the elimination round have higher OPR rankings or higher CCWM/PMR rankings. This will tell us whether teams value pure offensive power or contribution to winning margin when they select teams. Perhaps we should exclude the alliance captains when we do this comparison.

Another way to look at correlation is how "predictive" the two different ratings are to outcome of elimination round matches. I did a study of the prediction of match results using OPR and CCWM. Through the first two weeks including those events that have complete data published, in the elimination round, the prediction using CCWM is 59.5% and using OPR is slightly better at 63.6%. One reason the correlation is not that good is because there were a lot of close matches that could have gone either way.

We should be careful not to draw conclusions from just one regional. Each of the two ratings correlate better for some regionals but not for others.

Regards,

Ed Law
__________________
Please don't call me Mr. Ed, I am not a talking horse.
Reply With Quote