Archimedes 2013!!!

[Allen B.]

Originally Posted by animenerdjohn

Thanks a bunch for this.

Is there any way to put it in numerical order its a bit hard to use currently

We've had some fun with that as well.. unfortunately the pictures have to be saved with the team number as the file name for our system. They are ordered by google drive numerically but strangely not sequentially. So as you look for teams they will be grouped together by numbers from left to right. Hope that helps

[Kevin Leonard]

3478's picture is of their last year's robot.
And you can just Ctrl+F to find the team you want to find.

EDIT: There's also no picture of 3314

[Ken Streeter]

Originally Posted by Allen B.

Here is a link to 973's collection of pictures; We are still looking for a few more.

Attached is a little better photo of 1519's robot as of the North Carolina Regional.

However, our robot, "Discobolus Rex," will hopefully look fairly different by Thursday at CMP. Using 27.0 pounds of our 30.0 pound fabricated parts allowance, we have a lot planned for Wednesday night in order to hopefully increase our OPR from the 64.1 we achieved at NCR to even more at CMP...

By an hour after the pits open on Wednesday night, we hope to have reduced the robot we pull out of the bag to nothing but a drive base! Then, we plan to mount a whole new upper frame with a revised more-accurate shooter. We'll then disassemble the old 30-point climber (we never actually managed to get above the 10-point level in a competition match, although we had it mostly working with essential human assistance on the practice field) and re-assemble it in a different configuration and a new movable carriage to re-make it into a 10-point quick-hanger. We'll also move the battery from the front of the robot to the back and accordingly move the main breaker.

We'll try to remember to get photos at opportune times -- looks like it will be a busy night!

[Ken Streeter]

Originally Posted by Allen B.

We've had some fun with that as well.. unfortunately the pictures have to be saved with the team number as the file name for our system. They are ordered by google drive numerically but strangely not sequentially. So as you look for teams they will be grouped together by numbers from left to right. Hope that helps

If you change the filenames of short-numbered teams to use leading zeros so that all numbers have four digits, you may able to fix that. (e.g. 0011.jpg or 0126.jpg)

[Allen B.]

Thanks for the responses. We are still looking for 13 pictures:
321
433
1448
1660
1756
2081
2408
2457
3008
3314
3478
4067
4553
If anyone finds any other teams with outdated/incorrect pictures, please let us know and we will try to get it updated. If there are better pictures out there send us a link and we'll get them in.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Allen B.

Thanks for the responses. We are still looking for 13 pictures:
321
433
1448
1660
1756
2081
2408
2457
3008
3314
3478
4067
4553
If anyone finds any other teams with outdated/incorrect pictures, please let us know and we will try to get it updated. If there are better pictures out there send us a link and we'll get them in.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...89&postcount=8

[Adamc4]

Not gonna lie, I'm pretty excited for Match 19... so many good teams around, it's a great experience for our North Idaho team

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by Ken Streeter

If you change the filenames of short-numbered teams to use leading zeros so that all numbers have four digits, you may able to fix that. (e.g. 0011.jpg or 0126.jpg)

The leading zero problem doesn't affect our scouting system at all. We pull pics by function of team #, and the team's are numbered in our system w/o leading zeroes obviously. If we changed to leading zero, we'd have to also change this logic.

So, sorry guys; No renumbering in our gdoc folder, but feel free to take the pics and do whatever you want with them.

[tim-tim]

I have attached a better picture of 836 to this post.

Note that we are using some of our 30lb allowance to rework the shooter to prevent the jamming issue that plagued us for so long.

Can't wait to see all the robots.

[Jimmy Cao]

Seeing http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...&postcount=136 made me curious who had the "easy" or "hard" schedules in Archimedes. Using the same analysis method, with one minor change*, I generated the following list:

Team Difficulty Rank
3627	-51	1
4810	39	2
1756	74	3
1610	79	4
1595	81	5
1747	125	6
2457	132	7
3504	146	8
2614	156	9
801	165	10
639	200	11
4499	201	12
4265	206	13
2590	208	14
172	234	15
2705	238	16
326	247	17
930	249	18
469	249	18
4466	251	20
78	253	21
433	270	22
2081	272	23
4501	274	24
2604	278	25
1660	285	26
20	288	27
1011	293	28
4471	298	29
254	299	30
812	305	31
1334	307	32
4537	313	33
379	320	34
291	326	35
71	330	36
3003	332	37
2165	334	38
4067	336	39
973	348	40
2704	349	41
1448	352	42
321	358	43
2408	358	43
4731	373	45
3044	376	46
3478	385	47
846	387	48
3245	388	49
910	389	50
2137	391	51
3145	395	52
840	399	53
525	404	54
1071	408	55
51	409	56
694	424	57
2959	425	58
868	429	59
1714	431	60
2709	436	61
3467	450	62
314	451	63
1967	455	64
236	455	64
2016	455	64
1902	456	67
1796	465	68
1075	467	69
1519	470	70
1868	472	71
948	473	72
126	477	73
11	482	74
836	484	75
4637	498	76
4585	503	77
3310	508	78
2468	529	79
3242	543	80
4470	547	81
33	567	82
4673	581	83
2486	584	84
2415	584	84
955	597	86
1100	610	87
4545	622	88
4589	648	89
3612	656	90
987	668	91
4753	675	92
316	691	93
1836	713	94
4450	737	95
701	755	96
3008	773	97
365	776	98
3314	787	99

*Instead of ranking teams by OPR 1-99, I ranked them by OPR if the team itself was removed from the division 1-98. I think this prevents the average result of a large number of samples from breaking down into a strictly OPR based list.

In no way do I think this is a very good way of ranking match difficulties, but it was rather easy to do.

[Grim Tuesday]

Well I'm glad we have the, uh, honor of having the 11th most difficult schedule in the division. Let's hope the scouts are watching closely!

[dodar]

Originally Posted by Lostmage333

Seeing http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...&postcount=136 made me curious who had the "easy" or "hard" schedules in Archimedes. Using the same analysis method, with one minor change*, I generated the following list:

Team Difficulty Rank
3627	-51	1
4810	39	2
1756	74	3
1610	79	4
1595	81	5
1747	125	6
2457	132	7
3504	146	8
2614	156	9
801	165	10
639	200	11
4499	201	12
4265	206	13
2590	208	14
172	234	15
2705	238	16
326	247	17
930	249	18
469	249	18
4466	251	20
78	253	21
433	270	22
2081	272	23
4501	274	24
2604	278	25
1660	285	26
20	288	27
1011	293	28
4471	298	29
254	299	30
812	305	31
1334	307	32
4537	313	33
379	320	34
291	326	35
71	330	36
3003	332	37
2165	334	38
4067	336	39
973	348	40
2704	349	41
1448	352	42
321	358	43
2408	358	43
4731	373	45
3044	376	46
3478	385	47
846	387	48
3245	388	49
910	389	50
2137	391	51
3145	395	52
840	399	53
525	404	54
1071	408	55
51	409	56
694	424	57
2959	425	58
868	429	59
1714	431	60
2709	436	61
3467	450	62
314	451	63
1967	455	64
236	455	64
2016	455	64
1902	456	67
1796	465	68
1075	467	69
1519	470	70
1868	472	71
948	473	72
126	477	73
11	482	74
836	484	75
4637	498	76
4585	503	77
3310	508	78
2468	529	79
3242	543	80
4470	547	81
33	567	82
4673	581	83
2486	584	84
2415	584	84
955	597	86
1100	610	87
4545	622	88
4589	648	89
3612	656	90
987	668	91
4753	675	92
316	691	93
1836	713	94
4450	737	95
701	755	96
3008	773	97
365	776	98
3314	787	99

*Instead of ranking teams by OPR 1-99, I ranked them by OPR if the team itself was removed from the division 1-98. I think this prevents the average result of a large number of samples from breaking down into a strictly OPR based list.

In no way do I think this is a very good way of ranking match difficulties, but it was rather easy to do.

So the lower the number, the tougher the division schedule becomes? I am kind of confused to what you actually did.

[efoote868]

Originally Posted by dodar

So the lower the number, the tougher the division schedule becomes? I am kind of confused to what you actually did.

If I understand the original model,

For each team
  For each match
    Add opponents ranks to current team's difficulty of schedule
    Subtract alliance ranks from current team's difficulty of schedule

Rank team's difficulty of schedule in ascending order.

In this model,

For each team
  Rerank teams without current team
  For each match
    Add opponents ranks to current team's difficulty of schedule
    Subtract alliance ranks from current team's difficulty of schedule

Rank team's difficulty of schedule in ascending order.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by efoote868

If I understand the original model,

For each team
  For each match
    Add opponents ranks to current team's difficulty of schedule
    Subtract alliance ranks from current team's difficulty of schedule

Rank team's difficulty of schedule in ascending order.

In this model,

For each team
  Rerank teams without current team
  For each match
    Add opponents ranks to current team's difficulty of schedule
    Subtract alliance ranks from current team's difficulty of schedule

Rank team's difficulty of schedule in ascending order.

So the lower the number means that team has a higher SOS?

[efoote868]

Yes.