|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
Quote:
![]() |
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
It's a fun club
![]() Get your strategies ready, it's going to be a bumpy ride. |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
I have created an alternate strength of schedule calculation. Essentially, it is the minimum OPR required of a team to go 8-2 in qualifications.
For me personally, I don't really care about rank unless the rank is <12. Since teams with records 8-2 or better will likely exclusively make up this group, I created a metric to see how hard it would be for a given team to achieve this record. Unsurprisngly, if this value is less than a team's OPR, then they are predicted to go 8-2 or better. If this value is greater than a team's OPR, then they can know approximately how hard they will have to work to go 8-2 or better. Code:
team # OPR required to go 8-2 1610 35.2 3138 48.1 5148 48.6 2980 52.8 3309 54.5 353 55.7 4945 58.7 494 60.5 4719 63.7 1310 67.1 4967 68 1318 70.1 45 70.3 3098 71.1 4965 71.2 3480 71.5 365 72.5 1108 73.4 4982 73.7 3504 77 3683 77.3 1266 78 4488 78 4991 78 714 80 1683 80.4 973 82.3 5098 82.8 3191 83.6 4060 85.1 3103 85.5 5012 85.6 176 85.8 228 88.5 862 89.6 1515 90.6 4176 91.5 869 93.8 1730 95.7 1218 95.8 2471 96 67 97.6 1775 98.3 79 98.6 2642 98.9 1717 99.7 5145 100.1 836 100.6 2122 100.7 4979 100.7 558 100.9 1334 101.2 188 101.7 2052 102 3008 102.4 126 104.9 3360 105.7 604 106.1 4940 108.1 2481 108.3 2665 108.5 217 108.9 2337 108.9 2424 109.2 884 109.5 1756 110.3 4985 110.4 488 110.8 2974 111.8 70 114.7 1023 118 4063 119 1011 119.1 5122 121.4 766 123 2177 123.1 4476 123.9 3316 126.5 2135 126.6 5137 126.9 2363 127.2 4917 127.2 955 128.1 857 130.5 4288 131 771 131.8 1153 132.2 3937 133.3 5320 133.3 193 133.4 225 135.5 179 137 303 138.3 148 141.4 3310 142 337 143.4 4256 144.8 4536 145.7 1885 150.1 384 154.6 standard deviation = 26.5 Last edited by Caleb Sykes : 20-04-2014 at 18:55. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
Quote:
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
Quote:
Quote:
I'm not sure if I'm being clear enough. I would be happy to answer any other questions you have about this. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
Quote:
Looking forward to St. Louis! Last edited by Boltman : 21-04-2014 at 17:49. |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
All of these new lists based upon OPR make me
.I have scouted 1885's 20 alliance partners using the schedule currently posted and the video that is available (at least 6 matches per). My mentors & students will scout 1885's 30 opponents over the next 2 days. We start from the team's latest video (including elims) and work backwards in order to see the behaviors we will most likely see at Champs. Data includes: HG shots attempted, HG shots made, Inbound attempts, inbound successes, Auto ball attempts, auto ball successes, # of HOT goals, # of truss attempts, # of truss successes, # of trusses to HP or out of bounds, # of times a ball popped out of the robot during gameplay, rough estimate of intake time in seconds (also taking into account driver skills), rough estimate of favorite shooting distance, # of time effective defense was played on other teams, # of times the robot was pushed, # of times the robot was out of offensive position due to playing or receiving defense, # of obvious penalties, # of seconds of lost comms Trivia: HOT is the 2nd most high goal scoring robot we play with on a per-match basis, but only by < 0.25 goals per match. Can anyone guess who the #1 high goal bot of the 20 is, statistically? If anyone is willing to trade data on Wednesday, we will have plenty. This data isn't quite free since it took many labor hours to get. Yet if a team can even provide realistic statistics of their own team using the categories above and online video, we'd be more than willing to share all of what we have. The point of the trade is mutual hedging against schedule changes. Unfortunately the schools were out on Spring Break last week, so our ability to get all 100 teams' worth just wasn't there. |
|
#8
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
Maybe next season I want to develop and test a new metric for FRC scouting: Bumper Quality Rating (BQR).
BQR-5: The platonic ideal of FRC bumpers. Fabric is snug and no wrinkles are visible; no extra material in the corners. Bumpers are installed or removed in one fluid motion. Milled slots or pockets in the plywood backing, sized for minor protrusions from the robot frame perimeter, allow the bumper frame to mate tightly against the robot. ... BQR-0: Moderate to heavy use of duct tape. I believe BQR would outperform OPR as a predictor of on-field robot performance. |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
This. This is awesome.
|
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
I think "BQR" would have worked at Chesapeake....I can't tell you
how many robots we saw that had saggy,wrinkled and poorly made bumpers. We saw a few that had material dragging on the floor that made me wonder how they ever got thru inspection. I recall one team there hadn't even made bumpers until they got there. |
|
#11
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
Quote:
|
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
Quote:
). Good Luck! |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
Quote:
- or not, if we fail to work together. |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
Quote:
|
|
#15
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Galileo 2014
Did anyone else get video of Q3? We want to edit together about 50 different perspectives of our human player taking one for the team at the end of autonomous. (He was fine, by the way.) Should make for a fun project on the bus ride home.
If you have raw video files, stop by our pit with an SD card... Last edited by ToddF : 24-04-2014 at 23:29. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|