|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Jim...Thanks for putting this together. I only have a ??? it shows that 16 was a QF last year 2012. Should that not show them as WC?
Again...Thank you very much for taking the time to gather and present these #'s for us. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
I'm wondering, do WC's count less in 2013 (looking at the Elimination Points Table on the 13 Year History Result)?
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Quote:
. I reviewed the whole thing and reposted. Serves me right for trying to do this on a plane. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
I've become a huge fan of all of your stats over the years. I keep gravitating towards your spreadsheets whenever I'm doing any research of my own. Just today, I noticed the 2013 tab of the newest spreadsheet seems to have a team and location mismatch. I noticed this first when I saw 1718 is next to Goleta, CA. I thought it might be an Off by One error, but there are some other funky things going on here...
While I have you here, I presume you are responsible for this? As I mentioned over here, I was mulling over what this would look like with MAR, PNW, NEF and Canada added to it. If I end up doing it, i'd rather not start from scratch. Heck, I might even be able to snag nearly everything I need from something the Great Zondag made ![]() |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Quote:
Can't wait for the 2014 Championship History update! |
|
#6
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
|
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: paper: FIRST Championship History Results
Quote:
I will scritinize this a little more and fix any errors when I get a chance. I did most of it in an airport, so it may need some additional review ![]() Yes, I was planning to add analyses for PNW, NEF, Canada, Minnesota and a few other areas to this summary. I am a math guy and I like numeric proof over opinion. I did that analysis earlier to justify to some people that the District system helps to make teams better. It is not the only way, but it is effective. The main thing that makes teams better is playing (duh). In some regions like Ontario, we see a similar phenomenon that we see here: the culture has shifted so that many/most teams play multiple times each year and as a result, the average capability of the region increases. Districts make it cheaper, but geography is still one of the main factors. If you can get a lot of events close to lots of teams, then the region will improve compared to others which are more diffuse. The FRC appears to finally be "over the hump" on number of plays per year. 2014 is the first year in FRC history where less than 50% only played one event. In 2014, 2696 teams have played events according to the FRC database. Events Played: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5+ Percentage: 47%, 35%, 13%, 4%, 2% Num of Teams: 1254, 945, 350, 106, 4126% of the FRC is now in District Systems. (702/2696) |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| paper: FIRST Drive Trains and Implementation, Championship Conference Presentation | Madison | Extra Discussion | 2 | 07-05-2008 13:44 |
| paper: Fantasy FIRST: Championship 2007 | Jessica Boucher | Extra Discussion | 0 | 19-04-2007 00:24 |
| paper: 2006 Niagara FIRST Public Championship Scouting Database | Karthik | Scouting | 17 | 20-04-2006 19:26 |
| White Paper Discuss: Championship 20004 results for all divisions | CD47-Bot | Extra Discussion | 1 | 23-04-2004 02:05 |