[FRCTop25.com] Week 1 Results Broadcast LIVE tonight!

[Chris Hibner]

Originally Posted by JABot67

My point is that if a team isn't scoring in qualifications, it's hard for scouts to figure out how well they will score in eliminations.

To an extent that is true. However, you have to change your scouting focus from number of baskets made to expected value per shot attempt, then have some metrics for gathering efficiency.

Another scouting method would be to only scout baskets made during the first minute of the match (or some other time during the match at which most robot abandon scoring in favor of balancing.

[Greg Leighton]

Originally Posted by JABot67

My point is that if a team isn't scoring in qualifications, it's hard for scouts to figure out how well they will score in eliminations.

This one isn't totally related to the thread topic, but its hard to resist responding.

IMO, scouting is not easy and it's certainly not just about tabulating the numbers. Your team should understand this, picking 3601 was a fabulous pick, and they were exactly as you stated "a team that wasn't scoring in qualifications."

[Blackphantom91]

Originally Posted by Zach O

I would agree with that. We took a chance by going for the coop bridges that teams would see that we were going for ranking score, and not trying to score balls in teleop. In a perfect world, we would have been able to demonstrate our shooter during Friday and Saturday morning, but we weren't going to risk losing the coop bridge to shoot balls.

Scouting wise, we gave teams points for being able to balance the coop bridge with another robot. In our scouting data, it put us at a pretty accurate spot by calculated contribution.

In some cases we took 60 seconds out of our match to do it Its just far to important to not do or even attempt I really hope this catches on and teams understand how it can help both teams as a game within a game.

[JABot67]

Originally Posted by Greg Leighton

This one isn't totally related to the thread topic, but its hard to resist responding.

IMO, scouting is not easy and it's certainly not just about tabulating the numbers. Your team should understand this, picking 3601 was a fabulous pick, and they were exactly as you stated "a team that wasn't scoring in qualifications."

Thanks! 3601 was really high on our list because they could balance very well and could feed us balls in autonomous. They were scoring in qualifications, having way more balance points than all the teams around their rank. We didn't pick them to be a scorer, though.

I'm sorry that this thread has been derailed, but I think some great points were made and I've learned a few things.

[Paul Copioli]

Note that I have not voted yet as I think I am not informed enough to vote accurately. I was at Kettering on Saturday and watched it on the webcast Friday, so I can tell you this with definite certainty:

3322 is a deadly, deadly shooter in both teleop and hybrid.

33 got way, way better on Saturday and was fantastic in the elimination rounds.

2337 is also a deadly, deadly shooter especially in the last 30 seconds.

3322's alliance had between a 6 and 12 point lead after hybrid in the finals in all three matches. 33 and 2337 worked together to score as many as they could until the 30 second mark. That is when 2337 absolutely took over the match. They scored an insane amount of baskets in the last 30 seconds. In my opinion, 2337 was the best individual robot at Kettering. 3322, 33, and 51 were all second (on Sat) to 2337. In any case, I really like how this game plays in elims and it looks like there are some new faces in the "top robot" race. These are all good things for FRC and for the robotics community in general.

[Greg Leighton]

Originally Posted by JABot67

Thanks! 3601 was really high on our list because they could balance very well and could feed us balls in autonomous. They were scoring in qualifications, having way more balance points than all the teams around their rank. We didn't pick them to be a scorer, though.

I'm sorry that this thread has been derailed, but I think some great points were made and I've learned a few things.

Ah yes, this is true, they did have bridge points (I was thinking mainly about shooting). They were a good support bot.

[jyh947]

Originally Posted by Greg Leighton

Ah yes, this is true, they did have bridge points (I was thinking mainly about shooting). They were a good support bot.

Team 3601 couldn't shoot. I was one of the student who were scouting around the pits for a good second pick. I was particularly attracted to team 3601 because they could balance well and could tip the bridge. However, I noticed that a lot of robots at Kettering were a fender shooter, so I was looking for a robot with 4 CIMs in the drivetrain and a good choice of wheels (no nylon or rubber) to play defense. Team 3601 matched this description and amazingly enough, not too many other teams had 4 CIMs in the drivetrain at Kettering. Sadly, my alliance never took the defensive position during the elims. Beyond this, I also eyed 3601 because I already had the idea of having 3601 spit balls into our robot during Hybrid period to score 24 points. Team 862 was originally going to run into the bridge at an angle to get the balls off the coopertition bridge until some brilliant person decided to have them shoot their balls into 3601's mega-hopper.

Back to topic, I honestly think that team 1477 should have ranked higher than 148 and 118, which were both very impressive robots. Team 2337 should have been on par with team 33, as team 2337 was a highly accurate robot with their shooting. Finally, team 341 should have been ranked #1 due to their exceptionally high level of shooting.

[Zach O]

Originally Posted by jyh947

Finally, team 341 should have been ranked #1 due to their exceptionally high level of shooting.

I call hacks! Yeah, 341 should have been top. But Top 25 is just for fun, regardless of where people land. At the end of the day, the best bots will still be the best bots, regardless of where 76 random people on the Internet rank them.

[Drivencrazy]

Originally Posted by Zach O

regardless of where 76 random people on the Internet rank them.

I take offense to that!

[jspatz1]

Let's assume he meant "...where 76 people randomly rank them..." instead of "...where 76 random people rank them..."

[kstl99]

Did this webcast get recorded and will it end up on the FRC TOP25 website?

[JABot67]

Originally Posted by jspatz1

Let's assume he meant "...where 76 people randomly rank them..." instead of "...where 76 random people rank them..."

Haha, to me that sounds even worse... We've got 76 non-random people ranking teams, but the order in which they rank them is completely random?

[Zach O]

Originally Posted by jspatz1

Let's assume he meant "...where 76 people randomly rank them..." instead of "...where 76 random people rank them..."

I hope you don't RANDOMLY rank teams!

Originally Posted by kstl99

Did this webcast get recorded and will it end up on the FRC TOP25 website?

The webcast got recorded, but it didn't get recorded until around ~21 pick. They then went back, reviewed the picks, and continued from 21. It's on their LiveStream account in the recorded section.