Week 1 Stats

[stingray27]

Here are some stats for week one:

Rank based on alliance average score:

341 45.58333333
1986 39.55555556
1218 37.75
3528 37.33333333
118 35
16 35
716 33.8
1208 31.77777778
1982 30.88888889
935 30.11111111
1987 29.88888889
1477 29.55555556
3467 28.6
148 28.44444444
131 27.90909091
486 27.75
3322 27.08333333
1730 26.33333333
357 26.08333333
1997 26
1825 26
126 25.45454545
58 25.3
319 25.18181818
811 24.9
3284 24.55555556
525 24.55555556
2590 24.41666667
95 24.4
1775 24.2222

Rank based on (average alliance score / regional average score):

341 3.382968601
1986 2.935616873
1218 2.801617507
118 2.7804632
3528 2.770694577
16 2.597526166
716 2.508468126
1208 2.358388836
1477 2.347946703
1982 2.292419918
148 2.25967803
935 2.234697114
1987 2.218204884
3467 2.122549952
131 2.071274111
486 2.059467174
772 2.038277512
3322 2.009990485
234 1.990430622
1730 1.95432921
357 1.935775452
1997 1.929590866
1825 1.929590866
2393 1.90430622
126 1.889109939
58 1.877640343
319 1.868869475
2386 1.866028708
811 1.847954329
175 1.844815

Rank based on Average alliance score - Average opposing alliance score (I believe this is irrelevant but its still a way of ranking teams):

118 31.55555556
341 30.75
1218 25.41666667
1986 25.22222222
3528 23
716 21.1
148 20.77777778
1477 20.44444444
3322 18.08333333
1987 17.77777778
772 16.55555556
1208 15.22222222
16 13.77777778
1997 13.55555556
1775 13.55555556
131 13.54545455
488 13.33333333
538 13.22222222
234 13.11111111
1982 12.77777778
2393 12.77777778
862 12.58333333
2016 12.41666667
2468 12.22222222
2949 12.22222222
2386 12.11111111
935 11.88888889
1730 11.88888889
3035 11.44444444
3568 11.33333333

Regional Stats:

Regional, Total Alliance Pts, Max Alliance Pts, Avg Alliance Pts
KC 10950 72 19.01041667
PAH 8565 74 18.78289474
NH 9393 54 18.59927273
GG 6306 44 13.47435897
STX 7167 60 12.58783069
TN 5643 52 11.61111111
SDC 5091 40 9.01525974

[dodar]

Hatboro-Horsham had a match that was 103-0, so you need to update your stuff. Good post otherwise.

[PayneTrain]

To exemplify how much teams are struggling, notice that every regional, with the exception of San Diego, has an average alliance score under 20.

If you aren't sinking in any balls, JUST GO FOR THE BRIDGES. PLEASE.

[JABot67]

Where is Gull Lake? I don't see any aggregate stats for MIGL, and don't see any teams from there on your lists...

http://www2.usfirst.org/2012comp/Eve...chresults.html

Originally Posted by dodar

Hatboro-Horsham had a match that was 103-0, so you need to update your stuff. Good post otherwise.

I think he's just doing qualification rounds; otherwise, the high score at Kettering would be 80.

[stingray27]

Originally Posted by JABot67

Where is Gull Lake? I don't see any aggregate stats for MIGL, and don't see any teams from there on your lists...

http://www2.usfirst.org/2012comp/Eve...chresults.html



I think he's just doing qualification rounds; otherwise, the high score at Kettering would be 80.

For the Gull Lake regional, the link was not working when I ran the stats so no data is up there from that regional. I will work on getting that information soon. In addition, I only ran the data for Qualifications, not Eliminations.

[Ether]

Originally Posted by JABot67

Where is Gull Lake?

Attached:

[MagiChau]

Originally Posted by stingray27

For the Gull Lake regional, the link was not working when I ran the stats so no data is up there from that regional. I will work on getting that information soon. In addition, I only ran the data for Qualifications, not Eliminations.

For some reason the FMS was not connected to the internet so they did not upload any scores until Friday evening.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by MagiChau

For some reason the FMS was not connected to the internet so they did not upload any scores until Friday evening.

At that time, that was the least of our worries.

[DMetalKong]

Do you have an aggregate average for all matches? (a histogram showing the distribution would be really cool as well) It would be interesting to compare against the predictions from this thread.

Also, I agree very much with the point about balancing. Despite the fact that most teams could not score enough points to make up for a balance, balancing seemed to be a complete afterthought in most of the matches that I watched (the matches involving 148 in the elims being a spectacular exception).

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by DMetalKong

Do you have an aggregate average for all matches? (a histogram showing the distribution would be really cool as well) It would be interesting to compare against the predictions from this thread.

Also, I agree very much with the point about balancing. Despite the fact that most teams could not score enough points to make up for a balance, balancing seemed to be a complete afterthought in most of the matches that I watched (the matches involving 148 in the elims being a spectacular exception).

Working on it, I have a paper due tomorrow too.

To exemplify how much teams are struggling, notice that every regional, with the exception of San Diego, has an average alliance score under 20.

If you aren't sinking in any balls, JUST GO FOR THE BRIDGES. PLEASE.

Interesting this year is the huge gap between the 'deep' regionals, and the 'shallow' ones. Last year there was a gap... but IIRC the shallow ones were not as far off the deep ones.

While I agree that an average match score of around 15 points is not great, I don't think it is a sign of teams doing worse than is typical. My rule of thumb from the last 9 years of FIRST has been the mean robot can score it's starting load in the middle task. Otherwise, it can do the main scoring task once give of take a half. For example, this year that would be 2 balls in the middle goal. times 3 and you've got 12 points. Last year, 1.5 tubes scored per robot (although the Minibot kind of messed that one up). In 2010, 1.5 soccer balls per robot per match.

[kjohnson]

I just threw this together for my own interests. Simply alliance score averages for each event, separated by Qualification, QF, SF, F, and all Eliminations.



As you see, scores essentially doubled between Qualifications and QF.

[DMetalKong]

Originally Posted by nukemknight

I just threw this together for my own interests. Simply alliance score averages for each event, separated by Qualification, QF, SF, F, and all Eliminations.



As you see, scores essentially doubled between Qualifications and QF.

The averages you have listed in the last column seem to be based on the averages per event rather than for all matches at once. The difference probably wouldn't be too much, but it probably will be noticeable.

[Ian Curtis]

Attached are two histograms of winning (and tying) and losing (and tying) alliance scores in qualifying rounds at the Granite State Regional in 2012. Interesting distribution shapes... winning scores are essentially normal, but losing scores are very positive skewed. 84 matches were played, the mean winning score was 25.4 points, mean losing score was 11.8 points. Standard deviation of winning scores was 11.2, standard deviation of losing scores was 8. Max winning score was 52, max losing score was 30.

[kjohnson]

Originally Posted by DMetalKong

The averages you have listed in the last column seem to be based on the averages per event rather than for all matches at once. The difference probably wouldn't be too much, but it probably will be noticeable.

Thats correct, it was just easier to do. I'll throw an accurate average together and post it here.

EDIT:
Here are the total averages for Week 1, not just each regional averaged together. The difference is negligible.
All Qualification: 15.36
Quarter-Finals: 32.09
Semi-Finals: 39.01
Finals: 46.18
All Eliminations: 36.00