View Single Post
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 27-03-2009, 12:32
Lil' Lavery Lil' Lavery is offline
TSIMFD
AKA: Sean Lavery
FRC #1712 (DAWGMA)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,608
Lil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Lil' Lavery
Re: National Rankings

Is this being used for serious ranking, or just fun?

QS is quite simple. Win percentage . QS is a function of W-L-T anyway, so create a win% (with ties counting as .5 wins), and it would accomplish the same thing.


As a serious ranking, it simply isn't feasible. No currently existing metric, whether official FIRST or Chief Delphi-created, can give accurate rankings from different events (even ignoring the issues of sample size). Even OPR and DPRs are skewed by different opponents (a team is going to score a lot more at an event with more "easy targets").
If you could somehow create a complex algorithm based on teams who competed at multiple events to create a standard across those events, then maybe. But even then you run into problems with teams who change their robot, or otherwise get better or worse, from event to event. Israel literally has no crossover teams to be used, and many events have very few teams who compete at other regionals.
__________________
Being correct doesn't mean you don't have to explain yourself.
Reply With Quote