OPR after Week Four Events

[Hoover]

Originally Posted by stingray27

I know some people have already seen this, but this forum has responded exactly to what my app does. Discussion on the topic can be found here:
NEW: OPR FIRST 2013 Android App
OPR and CCMW applications

Either way, I use the OPR's to calculate a predicted score in real time. Like stated earlier, it is very accurate in terms of who wins/loses. As of scoring, the percentage varies. It would be cool to use past OPRs to predict the results. My app uses data specific to that regional and only that regional. So the longer the regional goes on, the more accurate the data is.

Hi stingray27,

I saw your thread last night and have already installed and used it. Brilliant!

You say you use OPR and not CCMW. Being new to this, what is CCMW and is it not preferable to OPR? Just asking, because I am fine with the OPR results.

[efoote868]

Originally Posted by Hoover

Hi stingray27,

I saw your thread last night and have already installed and used it. Brilliant!

You say you use OPR and not CCMW. Being new to this, what is CCMW and is it not preferable to OPR? Just asking, because I am fine with the OPR results.

CCWM is Calculated Contribution to the Winning Margin. For a given team, instead of using purely the team's score (OPR), CCWM uses the team's alliance score minus the opponent's score.

[Hoover]

Originally Posted by Ed Law

Please read the instructions tab. The answer is there. The information you are looking for is available in one of the tabs. Filters are set up for you so you can select only the teams that is going to a particular regional/district.

Hi Ed,

Thanks. I am getting the hang of it now. After filtering it gave me exactly the list that I wanted.

Now that I have done the filtering, I know its the Excel way to check all the boxes. I decided to make the list for our entire region of >100 teams. I would have to do this each week, but I am thinking I could have written a macro to do it. I think it may be done even if I have to generate the criteria statement, but if I remember right the criteria can refer to a range of cells but it has been a while. I am using Excel 2007 and so I don't think I can refer to a range anywhere but on the OPR results worksheet itself.

[Ether]

Originally Posted by Hoover

what is CCMW and is it not preferable to OPR? Just asking, because I am fine with the OPR results.

It's CCWM. "Calculated Contribution to Winning Margin"

It's just like OPR, except instead of using alliance score as input to the computation, it uses the difference between the two alliance scores for each match.

See Ed Law's paper (linked in post#1 in this thread). There's a discussion about it there.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by Ether

Here's a spreadsheet in a format which may be somewhat easier to use for various statistical analysis endeavors.

Thanks, Ether. Some other interesting phenomena:
- For matches predicted incorrectly, the median actual margin was 10 and the median OPR margin was 9. This is compared to the overall median margin of 27 and OPR margin of 23. (21% and 22% of all margins are in these upper bounds, respectively.) Pretty impressive!

- The overall median score error (note everything here is in absolute values) is 26%.
- The winning score error is 23%, while the losing is 32%. (For matches predicted correctly, the former is 21% while the latter is the same.)
- OPR underpredicts the winning score 60% of the time, and overpredicts the losing score 63% of the time.

I wonder if there's some way to identify good defense based on the over and under-prediction trends.

[IKE]

So, I did a quick scrape through our data from Grand Blanc. I found a handful off questionable values, but most of them were realtively low impact to averages.

The highest delta between OPR and what our scouts provided was 13 points. This particualr instance was 13 points favorable to that particular team. This team also had a few of the values I question as it appears that they did not score outside of auton in their final 2 matches (which I find hard to believe, but will verify later). This was one of the top scoring teams at the event.

The highest "unfavorable" OPR reading was 8.8 off from the scouts average. This particualr team also had some questionable data for one of their matches. Adjusting the values for that match to what I beleive were more accurrate (second scouting source), this delta went down to 5, and a different team became the most disadvantaged at 7.0. The team with this delta was a lower scoring team that OPR seems to be especially harsh on when comparing their 9.5 average to their 2.3 OPR.

To get average error, I took the absolute value of the error and found the average to be 3.5 pts, and the median error to be 2.9 pts.

Average OPR for the event was 24.8 and median OPR was 18.8. Thus the average error and median error for this event seems to be coming in at 15-16%.

[Hoover]

Originally Posted by Hoover

Now that I have done the filtering, I know its the Excel way to check all the boxes. I decided to make the list for our entire region of >100 teams. I would have to do this each week, but I am thinking I could have written a macro to do it. I think it may be done even if I have to generate the criteria statement, but if I remember right the criteria can refer to a range of cells but it has been a while. I am using Excel 2007 and so I don't think I can refer to a range anywhere but on the OPR results worksheet itself.

I found an easy way to do this that just takes a minute. An index look up can be used. This is what, because of a limitation in Excel 2007, that this has to be done on the same worksheet and cannot be done in another workbook or even on another worksheet within the same workbook.

For an example index statement

=INDEX($E$1:$F$2542,MATCH(A2545,$E$1:$E$2542,0),2)

where A2545 is the cell containing a team number.

[Ed Law]

I really like this year's way of ranking teams. It is very straight forward and it does not depend on whether your opponent wants to let you have more ranking points. Every team tries to score as much as they can without holding back or worse trying to score for the other alliance. It is getting closer and closer to real sports which makes it exciting to watch. I hope the GDC recognize that and continues in this direction. It also makes the OPR more accurate which is what I like to see and better chance that the right teams are ranked at the top.

[dcarr]

Originally Posted by Ed Law

I really like this year's way of ranking teams. It is very straight forward and it does not depend on whether your opponent wants to let you have more ranking points. Every team tries to score as much as they can without holding back or worse trying to score for the other alliance. It is getting closer and closer to real sports which makes it exciting to watch. I hope the GDC recognize that and continues in this direction. It also makes the OPR more accurate which is what I like to see and better chance that the right teams are ranked at the top.

I think you're right...but at large events where teams may only play 8 matches, it seems there are still scenarios where the best teams are not necessarily at the top. Not really the fault of the game or even the ranking method, though.

[Ether]

Here's a sneak peek at Week5 OPR World Rankings, while we're waiting for Ed to post the update to his amazing spreadsheet.

[EIT2]

Thanks Ed for helping Code Red & The Mavericks to Buckeye Regional Championship!

Been a big fan of your work for a long time!