FRC Blogged - Share your FIRST Story, and *Preliminary* Championship Match Schedules

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Karthik

First off, let me state how absolutely awesome it is that the FRC staff released this preliminary schedule. This is a huge step. But now to the negative...

8 qualifying matches per team is simply unacceptable. FIRST has made huge strides over the past few years to get teams as many qualification matches as possible. This is a huge step backwards. Hopefully these schedules are preliminary and they find a way to squeeze in at least one extra match. I know there are many factors at play when it comes to scheduling, so I recognize there's no easy solution. But I also know that 8 matches in divisions of 99 teams, at a Championship level, is just not enough.

Qualification matches are schedule to end at 10:30. Could they squeeze in one more set and run up to noon?

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

Qualification matches are schedule to end at 10:30. Could they squeeze in one more set and run up to noon?

The spectator schedule has alliance selections from 10:30-11, break for "an hour" then division matches go from 12-2:30 (of COURSE they will...).

What's really causing this is the equal team count of last year while adding a minute to the cycle time. Sounds silly, but that's over 2 hours of dead time you didn't get last year.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

Qualification matches are schedule to end at 10:30. Could they squeeze in one more set and run up to noon?

The average cycle time in the schedule is approximately 7:32. Without adding any extra time to the schedule, they would need to turn 6:46 cycles to get an extra match in. Adding an extra 30 minutes to the schedule would mean you could get 9 matches by running a 7:00 cycle.

[CalTran]

Here's a word cloud of the blog. It's interesting to see what words are used often and not used often.

8 matches should be interesting, and I dearly hope that that's the preliminary part of this schedule, and that they're trying desperately to fit in more matches. Even though my team isn't competing, I understand the stress it puts on a team to only have 8 matches to prove their worth, and how much every disc in autonomous will have to strike fast and hard. Floor pick ups can't afford to miss a disc in their 5-7-9 runs.

[IndySam]

I always figured they could fit 9 matches into the schedule. I really don't understand why there is only 8.

I am a bit torn however because this current schedule is favorable to us.

[Mark McLeod]

Originally Posted by Karthik

The average cycle time in the schedule is approximately 7:32.

I get 7:09 (you may have played through the dinner break on Thursday), so that would mean 6:23 cycles in your scheme (and no breathing room for handling unanticipated problems).

[Jon Stratis]

I know last year at the MN State Championship we ran 6 minute cycle times. From what I saw this year, regionals were running approximately 8 minute cycle times (per the schedule), although from what I heard the fields were going "fast" and struggling to slow things down enough to match the schedule (and avoid having people upset that their match was half an hour earlier than the schedule said!). I think 7 minute cycle times are doable, but probably not 6.

[MARS_James]

Originally Posted by joelg236

Anyone feel like doing an OPR based prediction? Our schedule does not look very favourable...

I just did it for my team and came up with a 6-2 record (Not bad) though when ever I use OPR to scout I always say a match with in a technical foul worth of points are a toss up which takes my teams schedule to a 3-2-3

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Mark McLeod

I get 7:09 (you may have played through the dinner break on Thursday), so that would mean 6:23 cycles in your scheme (and no breathing room for handling unanticipated problems).

I got 7 hours of play on Thursday, 2:20 on Friday morning, 5:15 on Friday afternoon, and 2:15 on Saturday morning. That's 16:50 total, meaning 1010 minutes. Dividing this by 134 matches gives 7.53 minute cycle times, which is approximately 7:32. Did I make a counting error?

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Karthik

I got 7 hours of play on Thursday, 2:20 on Friday morning, 5:15 on Friday afternoon, and 2:15 on Saturday morning. That's 16:50 total, meaning 1010 minutes. Dividing this by 134 matches gives 7.53 minute cycle times, which is approximately 7:32. Did I make a counting error?

Saw your edit, you're right, I missed the Thursday dinner break.

[Thad House]

Originally Posted by Karthik

I got 7 hours of play on Thursday, 2:20 on Friday morning, 5:15 on Friday afternoon, and 2:15 on Saturday morning. That's 16:50 total, meaning 1010 minutes. Dividing this by 134 matches gives 7.53 minute cycle times, which is approximately 7:32. Did I make a counting error?

There is an hour dinner break on Thursday from 5:45 to 6:45. So 6 hours Thursday instead of 7.

[Patrick Flynn]

Originally Posted by kwotremb

Now who is going to link this to Max or Avg OPR and get everyones ranking. Could even link in Auto OPR to get seeding right. Screw you work, not enough time to do this.

Originally Posted by MARS_James

I just did it for my team and came up with a 6-2 record (Not bad) though when ever I use OPR to scout I always say a match with in a technical foul worth of points are a toss up which takes my teams schedule to a 3-2-3

I've added new columns to the spread sheet using each teams MAX OPR as displayed in Ed Law's sheet*.
Then summed the score for each alliance and displayed who would win based strictly on OPR.

Any recommendations for how to total the points that each team would receive and tally these other than by hand?

*Thanks for the data Ed!

[scottandme]

8 matches is pretty disappointing - I was hoping they would keep divisions to <90 teams and run 10 matches. That would have been possible if they didn't use the waitlist, but I guess FIRST wanted the extra $200k.

Ran the numbers for Archimedes using "Max OPR" - here's what it spit out (no sorting for Auton). We have a fairly ugly schedule, so I'm selfishly hoping for a change.

8-0 Record

11
3314

7-1 Record

33
126
316
469
701
948
987
1100
1334
3310

6-2 Record

20
254
955
1519
1836
2137
2165
2468
2486
2959
3467
4450

[MechEng83]

Originally Posted by scottandme

Ran the numbers for Archimedes using "Max OPR" - here's what it spit out (no sorting for Auton).

Did the same for Newton. No Auton sorting.:

8-0 Record
1538
1741

7-1 Record
79
128
180
195
829
1676
1985
2054
2252
2439

6-2 Record
68
131
225
1569
1640
1730
2612
2826
3931
3997

[nerdherdmember]

Originally Posted by Patrick Flynn

I've added new columns to the spread sheet using each teams MAX OPR as displayed in Ed Law's sheet*.
Then summed the score for each alliance and displayed who would win based strictly on OPR.

Any recommendations for how to total the points that each team would receive and tally these other than by hand?

*Thanks for the data Ed!

Unfortunately, the OPRs listed on the this spreadsheet at the moment aren't quite right. In fact, according to Mathematica,

Union[N[Round[10 ToExpression[#]]/10] & /@
StringSplit["(*OPRs from spreadsheet with spaces added before -'s*)"]]

Every single team in Galileo has one of the following OPRs, and that's after 27 and 45 changed all of their OPRs to what I assume is the correct value.

{-15.3, -2.2, 20.1, 23.5, 33.3, 37.6, 56., 83.9}

I don't know enough of data management in Excel to conjure correct values at the moment, but I'm sure there are people that can help.

- Harrison