Standardized District Point Model

[Kims Robot]

Originally Posted by DevenStonow

Now, I had started researching an analysis to see how the teams that won Chairman's in NE regionals this year and last year would have qualified based off their robot performance using these rankings, but then I realized that it contains the original NE point proposal. Has anyone applied the FiM/MAR ranking style to NE for last year?

Lot of discussion in a bunch of different threads... the short answer is yes, I & others have looked at applying the FiM model to NE teams... (one of the models I looked at included applying the FiM points)

Originally Posted by Kims Robot

This depends on the model that is used. As it is possible/likely that FIRST will be standardizing the system across the districts, and its hard to tell what the final result will be. Using several points model simulators (ie the ones in this thread), of the 5 NE winners, only one was even close to the cutoff of the 53/60 line in one model I've seen (and easily made it in several others). Yes if you add 4 more, there is a slight possibility that the robots will not be as high in points, but in general, I think the District points wont produce as wide a variation as the CA performance at Worlds correlation.

Back to the general topic, I am all for the standardization... it's one less thing for the District Organizers to worry about, and it will get us much more quickly to a system that will allow for cross district play.

My only hope is that FIRST does (or involves the people that have done) countless hours of simulation on whatever model they come up with to help prove that compared to past years this new model will send the "right" teams to Championship based on whatever philosophy the group deams appropriate. (ie I want to know that someone "did the math")

And I agree with some of the previous suggestions that Im not a huge fan of the Auto-bids, but I do think CA & at least winning captain, possibly EI & RAS too should end up with high enough points that its almost no question they get into DCMP. Now the award winners shouldn't be slackers on the robot side. I wouldnt expect to see a CA robot that was 39th/40 and didnt make elims at both their district events have a robot at DCMP or even WCMP, but looking at the past data, CA teams seem to have relatively strong robots. I'm ok with EI or RAS teams only getting to "present" at DCMP... but if they then get to bring their robots to WCMP... they end up with a disadvantage at WCMP as they have had fewer plays than everyone else. So I think whatever model is adopted for Districts would likely have to be applied to WCMP as well... or maybe have a 5th Division that allows all these teams to play at WCMP, but doesn't qualify them for Einstein?? I dunno... plenty of ideas/discussion to kick around there.

At any rate, I'm excited to see what FIRST comes up with (and secretly happy to not have to deal with it at the NE level! ).

[Brandon Holley]

I definitely welcome a standardized point model- even though it may take away some of the flexibility and customization some people were looking forward to with a district model.

I believe it is important to maintain qualification and performance based on the same metrics wherever we can. As someone stated above- I could see a huge point of contention being slight differences district to district that cause teams to qualify/not qualify for whatever reason.

The task force (I assume there is one) that is currently trying to bake up a standardized points system does not have an easy job, and I do not envy them. I do feel however, this work will go a long way to 'reconnecting' the districts into the mainstream of FRC by tying them (loosely for now) to each other.


-Brando

[Rosiebotboss]

As a member of the NE FIRST point model team and without naming names (because it would be a diservice to them to have them personally under the scrutiny of this community and added pressure and possible inundation of PMs) I have seen the list and I am completely confident in the abilities of each and every committee member. They represent all 4 current districts, 2 districts "to be", WFAs, CCA reps as well as FIRST staff.

Just for a point of reference, we in NE, during our discussions, ran several iterations of our point model (based on 2010 Karthik scouting data) and the differences in outcomes were minimal. (The columns in the spreadsheet were labled FiM, MAR, NE 1, NE 2, NE 3 so we could see changes real time) In other words, the top 20 teams, regardless of algorithm, stayed top 20, the middle 20 stayed middle 20, the bottom 20 were the only ones effected. And that effect was 7 or 8 teams dropped out and 7 or 8 teams got in. There was movement within each sector, but the general rankings stayed pretty consistent.

Hang in there, the road may be rocky, but FIRST will be better coming out the other end.

[IKE]

Originally Posted by Rosiebotboss

As a member of the NE FIRST point model team and without naming names (because it would be a diservice to them to have them personally under the scrutiny of this community and added pressure and possible inundation of PMs) I have seen the list and I am completely confident in the abilities of each and every committee member. They represent all 4 current districts, 2 districts "to be", WFAs, CCA reps as well as FIRST staff.

Just for a point of reference, we in NE, during our discussions, ran several iterations of our point model (based on 2010 Karthik scouting data) and the differences in outcomes were minimal. (The columns in the spreadsheet were labled FiM, MAR, NE 1, NE 2, NE 3 so we could see changes real time) In other words, the top 20 teams, regardless of algorithm, stayed top 20, the middle 20 stayed middle 20, the bottom 20 were the only ones effected. And that effect was 7 or 8 teams dropped out and 7 or 8 teams got in. There was movement within each sector, but the general rankings stayed pretty consistent.

Hang in there, the road may be rocky, but FIRST will be better coming out the other end.

Underline emphasis is mine...

Having good values and measurable deltas at the cut points are crucial. Pay close attention to those areas. While who is #1 is important from an inspirational point, who is one above and one below your cut point is the biggest deal.