Week 1 Stats

[TerryS]

Here's some stats from the six Week 1 tournaments covering 605 matches:

Average winning points: 43 (all), 37 (qualification only), 75 (elimination only)
Average losing points: 16 (all), 11 (qualification only), 36 (elimination only)

Highest score: 135 by Teams 16, 148 & 3481 in the Alamo finals
Highest scoring match: 199 total points (117 to 82) by Teams 175, 176 & 1519 over Teams 20, 40 & 131 in the Granite State finals. [edited 03/06/11 to correct winning alliance]

Matches with over 100 points by the winning alliance: 26
Tied Matches: 40 (7%)

Matches determined by minibot scoring: 102 (17%)

Matches with four minibots scoring: 5 (1%)
Matches with three minibots scoring: 32 (5%)
Matches with two minibots scoring: 103 (17%)
Matches with one minibot scoring: 193 (32%)

Matches determined by penalties: 58 (10%)
Penalty free matches: 212 (35%)

And...in what I hope is a statistical anomaly, 5 of the 6 finals were won by the RED alliance!

[Alexa Stott]

Originally Posted by TerryS

And...in what I hope is a statistical anomaly, 5 of the 6 finals were won by the RED alliance!

The higher seed is always the red alliance. It's not a statistical anomaly; it's a side effect of the way the alliance colours are assigned in elims. Basically all that statistic is is that the higher seed won 5/6 times.

[SGK]

Please note that in "199 total points (117 to 82) by Teams 20, 40 & 131 over Teams 175, 176 & 1519 in the Granite State finals" that 175/1519/176 had the 117 points.

[JB987]

Originally Posted by TerryS

Here's some stats from the six Week 1 tournaments covering 605 matches:

Average winning points: 43 (all), 37 (qualification only), 75 (elimination only)
Average losing points: 16 (all), 11 (qualification only), 36 (elimination only)

Highest score: 135 by Teams 16, 148 & 3481 in the Alamo finals
Highest scoring match: 199 total points (117 to 82) by Teams 20, 40 & 131 over Teams 175, 176 & 1519 in the Granite State finals.

Matches with over 100 points by the winning alliance: 26
Tied Matches: 40 (7%)

Matches determined by minibot scoring: 102 (17%)

Matches with four minibots scoring: 5 (1%)
Matches with three minibots scoring: 32 (5%)
Matches with two minibots scoring: 103 (17%)
Matches with one minibot scoring: 193 (32%)

Matches determined by penalties: 58 (10%)
Penalty free matches: 212 (35%)

And...in what I hope is a statistical anomaly, 5 of the 6 finals were won by the RED alliance!

So 45% of matches had absolutely no minibot scoring? And 32% just one? An important reminder of the value of being able deploy and run any kind of (legal) minibot up the darn pole!

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Alexa Stott

The higher seed is always the red alliance. It's not a statistical anomaly; it's a side effect of the way the alliance colours are assigned in elims. Basically all that statistic is is that the higher seed won 5/6 times.

Not true. The red/blue designation in the next round is "inherited" by the winning of the previous round. So if the #8 seed upsets the #1 seed in the quarter, the #8 seed will be red in the semis against the 4/5 seed. Likewise, if the #3 seed happens to face the #7 seed in the semis, the #3 seed is still going to be blue.

[DonRotolo]

Originally Posted by JB987

So 45% of matches had absolutely no minibot scoring? And 32% just one? An important reminder of the value of being able deploy and run any kind of (legal) minibot up the darn pole!

Indeed. At NJ, we found that only 17 of the 62? (27%) teams had successfully deployed at least one minibot al day Friday.

30 points is a LOT in this game, it behooves teams to have a minibot - even a 4 second one - that can deploy.

[Fred Sayre]

How many matches were won by an alliance not deploying a minibot against a team that had a successful minibot?

[DonRotolo]

Originally Posted by Fred Sayre

How many matches were won by an alliance not deploying a minibot against a team that had a successful minibot?

Several matches (sorry, no details) were decided by minibots.

Edit: Looking at FRC-Spy (up top on every page) you can easil see which matches were decided by minibots. One out of 6 or so in NJ.

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

Several matches (sorry, no details) were decided by minibots.

Minibots are a big deal statistically. At BAE the average winning/losing alliance scores were separated by about 30 points. After running through the numbers for FLR, Kettering, and BAE, a single winning minibot with no tubes scored could've won 75%+ of all qualifying matches.

[Zuelu562]

Originally Posted by Ian Curtis

Minibots are a big deal statistically. At BAE the average winning/losing alliance scores were separated by about 30 points. After running through the numbers for FLR, Kettering, and BAE, a single winning minibot with no tubes scored could've won 75%+ of all qualifying matches.

yea, our very first match would have been a 36 to 12 win if the minibot was not deployed early, leading to a match score of 3 to 12. (It's a penalty and a tower disable if you deploy early).

On that note, for week two regionals, make sure you deploy as the color goes solid again, NOT on the Flintstones feet sound (like we did our first match). I have 0 idea why they did that.

[Stephi Rae]

Originally Posted by Alexa Stott

The higher seed is always the red alliance. It's not a statistical anomaly; it's a side effect of the way the alliance colours are assigned in elims. Basically all that statistic is is that the higher seed won 5/6 times.

And...in what I hope is a statistical anomaly, 5 of the 6 finals were won by the RED alliance!

If the 8th seed alliance beats the 1st seed alliance, they are then the red alliance when they play the next set of matches. If they win again, they are again the red alliance because they are in the "top" bracket. Which means even though 8 is playing against 4/5 and is the lower seed alliance, they will be red and 4/5 will be blue. Red alliance regional wins mean alliance 1,4,5 or 8. Not necessarily just the 1st alliance, were possibly a blue alliance at one point, and could easily be a lower seeded alliance than their opponent in the finals.

[TerryS]

Originally Posted by SGK

Please note that in "199 total points (117 to 82) by Teams 20, 40 & 131 over Teams 175, 176 & 1519 in the Granite State finals" that 175/1519/176 had the 117 points.

Sorry, my bad, apologies to teams 175, 176 & 1519 and congratulations to both alliances on what must have been an exciting match to see! I edited my original post to correct this.

[TerryS]

Originally Posted by Alexa Stott

The higher seed is always the red alliance. It's not a statistical anomaly; it's a side effect of the way the alliance colours are assigned in elims. Basically all that statistic is is that the higher seed won 5/6 times.

Didn't know that. I don't see this in the tournament rules. Is this just a tradition? I would think they'd give the top seed their choice of colors.

Has there ever been a case where there was a side of field bias at a tournament? It's possible that some subtle environmental factor like lightning, air currents (could affect tube throwing this year), crowd noise or maybe a undetected field difference could give a side of field advantage.

In most other sports the teams switch sides for half of the game.

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by TerryS

Didn't know that. I don't see this in the tournament rules. Is this just a tradition? I would think they'd give the top seed their choice of colors.

It's a limitation imposed by the Field Management System (FMS). It's the same reason that each team has a random driver station location.

[pandamonium]

the average total score is important too. At FLR it was 33.