paper: New Scouting Database from Team 2834

[Doc Wu]

This is an amazing spreadsheet. As someone who used to write Lotus 1-2-3 macros back in the day, I am in awe.

I was able to run the macros to update the week 3 regionals successfully. How do I get that data merged into the OPR and WM tabs?

Thanks...

[Ed Law]

Originally Posted by Doc Wu

This is an amazing spreadsheet. As someone who used to write Lotus 1-2-3 macros back in the day, I am in awe.

I was able to run the macros to update the week 3 regionals successfully. How do I get that data merged into the OPR and WM tabs?

Thanks...

I am glad it worked out for you. Every week after the events are over, I update the OPR numbers, check to make sure all results FIRST posted are correct, and then I transfer that week's data to the OPR and WM tabs. I guess I am performing the Quality Control function and make sure there is only one set of data in the CD community instead of everybody running them and potentially have slightly different numbers.

Week 3 data were already posted yesterday. There is a separate post to discuss each week's data. See http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...hreadid=104743

[marccenter]

Dr Ed Law,
Thanks for revising the database to add points for teams that elected to gather coopertition points for their alliance. At the Michigan Waterford District tournament we found ourselves often in a position that we were the most consistent bridge climbing team and other opposing alliance often met with us to discuss going together on the white bridge to gain this valuable seeding points. We could have climbed the alliance bridge for 10 points but elected to go the other route. Should the coopertition points really be 10 points instead of the 5 shown in your database? We still climbed a bridge and balanced?

[Ed Law]

Originally Posted by marccenter

Dr Ed Law,
Thanks for revising the database to add points for teams that elected to gather coopertition points for their alliance. At the Michigan Waterford District tournament we found ourselves often in a position that we were the most consistent bridge climbing team and other opposing alliance often met with us to discuss going together on the white bridge to gain this valuable seeding points. We could have climbed the alliance bridge for 10 points but elected to go the other route. Should the coopertition points really be 10 points instead of the 5 shown in your database? We still climbed a bridge and balanced?

We are giving 5 bridge points for every 1 coop point. However when you balance on the coop bridge in each match, you get 2 coop points which means you are getting 10 bridge points. If you had gone to the alliance bridge by yourselves or balance with a partner, it is also 10 points extra, so it is the same. If you feel that you want to look at it differently by sorting using more than 5 bridge points for every 1 coop point, you can change the number in cell AF1 to whatever you like.