2012 IRI MATCH RESULTS AND STANDINGS

[Chris Fultz]

Here is an excel file of the final match results and final rankings from the 2012 IRI.

These results have been independently evaluated and confirmed by the accounting firm of Dean, Simmons and Kamen, LLP.

There are two tabs in the excel file. One for match results and one for final rankings.

[IndySam]

Anyone want to tell me how the bridge points were calculated? We tripped three time and had one of the lowest BP's.

[Chris Fultz]

One of the FTA's or the lead scorer can confirm this, but I believe the max bridge points in qualification matches was 20, the scoring system won't let you do any more than that. The scores were manually adjusted to add the extra 20 for any triples.

[Alex2614]

I don't see a final ranking in this file. Am I just being stupid or can nobody else see it either? All I see is match data.

[CalTran]

Originally Posted by Alex2614

I don't see a final ranking in this file. Am I just being stupid or can nobody else see it either? All I see is match data.

Down at the bottom you should see a tab that says "Final Ranking"

[Gary Dillard]

I always like to point out how win-loss record does not matter when it comes to alliance selection, unless you win enough to be picking. Highest seeded team not picked - #13. Lowest seeded team picked - #58. 6 teams with 6-3 record not picked, 7 teams with losing records picked, including all 3 of the winning alliance's picks.

Teams need to be more concerned with performing well and marketing your abilities than with winning or losing during qualification matches.

[Adam Freeman]

Originally Posted by Gary Dillard

Teams need to be more concerned with performing well and marketing your abilities than with winning or losing during qualification matches.

That's funny. After a terrible Friday of qualification matches, we were 2-4 and ranked 50th.

Coming into Saturday morning with 3 matches to play, my only goal was to showcase our scoring abilities and successfully triple balance in those 3 matches, regardless of winning matches.

Of course you have to balance your own needs with those of your partners. If we were all out of Top8 contention, I suggested we all try to highlight our abilities and triple regardless of the score. Only in our last match was 3322 ranked in the Top8. I let them dicated the strategy, since it was important for them to win the match.

We ended up winning all 3 matches...but only triple balancing in one of them, for various reasons.

[Chris Fultz]

Originally Posted by Gary Dillard

Teams need to be more concerned with performing well and marketing your abilities than with winning or losing during qualification matches.

A strategy like that might be beneficial if you find yourself ranked, say, 100 of 100 in your division ...

[Gary Dillard]

Originally Posted by Chris Fultz

A strategy like that might be beneficial if you find yourself ranked, say, 100 of 100 in your division ...

I guess i didn't word that too well. What I was trying to say is, if you find yourself 6-3 don't get too confident, if you find yourself 3-6 don't count yourself out, and especially don't overreact if you happen to drop from 20th seed to 30th seed sometime during the weekend after you lose one match or vice versa.

[mdaniel462]

Originally Posted by Chris Fultz

One of the FTA's or the lead scorer can confirm this, but I believe the max bridge points in qualification matches was 20, the scoring system won't let you do any more than that. The scores were manually adjusted to add the extra 20 for any triples.

I was also told that it was only possible for them to add those 20 extra points to each team's tele-op score. If this is true it would explain why your bridge points seem to be low.

[stingray27]

Here is the OPR data for IRI if anyone is interested in looking at it. It is not adjusted for bridge balancing.

[Brandon Holley]

341s OPR was 11 points (!!) higher than the next highest. That is just ridonkulous.

-Brando

[qzrrbz]

Originally Posted by stingray27

Here is the OPR data for IRI if anyone is interested in looking at it. It is not adjusted for bridge balancing.

methinks the column labels for BP and TP may be swapped

[Ed Law]

Here are the OPR numbers including total, hybrid, bridge and teleop OPR.

OPR Rank/Team/OPR/OPR Hybrid/OPR Bridge/OPR Teleop
1	341	52.46	15.85	10.14	18.46
2	624	41.46	14.10	9.91	16.15
3	118	37.00	2.92	6.60	23.44
4	1023	36.84	8.30	10.66	11.37
5	2826	36.57	13.18	2.08	24.41
6	67	36.40	15.39	5.72	17.20
7	2056	34.26	12.73	7.56	17.51
8	233	33.98	7.88	5.24	22.92
9	469	33.97	3.13	4.65	23.59
10	51	33.80	5.29	10.45	16.84
11	68	33.00	12.51	4.30	9.13
12	2614	32.60	8.62	9.28	10.69
13	33	31.66	6.00	10.10	16.07
14	48	31.23	10.14	8.22	13.18
15	16	31.16	10.80	4.17	12.57
16	1676	30.72	9.35	5.87	16.47
17	2168	29.88	11.47	-1.05	8.35
18	548	29.79	9.43	9.93	11.04
19	1114	29.09	9.60	2.50	15.39
20	125	28.79	11.10	3.75	13.52
21	359	27.54	5.05	2.99	22.88
22	1741	26.97	8.94	7.06	7.65
23	1714	26.68	8.19	7.21	10.81
24	340	26.55	11.95	6.84	7.14
25	111	26.11	13.99	2.53	9.62
26	148	25.98	5.50	8.57	14.30
27	1640	25.74	9.67	5.76	7.46
28	3322	25.39	9.26	6.85	11.35
29	330	24.37	1.28	7.43	13.74
30	2590	23.89	7.17	2.41	14.07
31	192	23.38	5.50	1.32	9.42
32	2337	23.03	13.71	6.07	3.84
33	868	22.41	6.71	2.15	13.22
34	3947	21.38	8.92	6.36	8.84
35	1732	20.87	7.59	6.78	8.73
36	2194	20.04	4.29	5.26	7.30
37	234	20.03	9.86	3.93	6.91
38	573	19.91	4.99	6.49	11.93
39	3357	19.66	4.22	1.81	9.60
40	2949	19.58	6.34	5.49	8.42
41	3193	19.27	7.12	6.81	6.75
42	503	19.26	7.25	0.45	14.00
43	461	19.20	2.85	4.65	8.39
44	2834	19.16	7.60	6.13	1.79
45	2481	19.11	10.93	0.63	4.14
46	3940	18.77	7.95	6.06	1.81
47	973	18.77	7.22	6.92	4.49
48	447	18.67	3.70	-1.89	13.57
49	3138	17.80	6.60	3.53	9.80
50	71	17.13	5.48	1.72	3.15
51	1538	16.15	9.76	2.11	6.29
52	2054	15.78	7.04	3.04	6.37
53	45	14.67	7.20	7.00	3.60
54	27	14.11	2.07	3.42	10.23
55	4334	13.56	2.18	4.55	3.62
56	399	13.37	6.08	-0.32	7.32
57	829	13.08	2.10	-1.89	8.55
58	781	12.65	1.40	5.37	7.35
59	379	12.20	6.15	-2.11	8.62
60	3310	10.97	7.14	4.09	-2.50
61	245	10.58	6.33	0.51	4.13
62	217	9.73	6.88	0.54	2.14
63	1730	9.40	9.72	0.91	0.40
64	744	9.20	3.82	1.57	4.06
65	772	8.73	2.75	5.86	1.73
66	1592	8.10	2.00	-3.31	8.58
67	907	7.51	0.21	-2.47	10.07
68	292	3.19	3.54	-2.67	4.06
69	1902	1.37	3.63	-0.31	-1.24
70	1024	-0.43	0.71	-2.81	2.70

[AdamHeard]

Anyone know what matches had triples in them?