[FRCGameSense]Chezy Champs Live

[Navid Shafa]

The GameSense crew is excited to be doing live match analysis and commentary at Chezy Champs this weekend!

All six members of the GameSense crew will be in attendance, bringing you analysis and on-site event coverage from start to finish. We've been working hard with the Chezy Champs team to create a fun, professional and cohesive viewer experience for attendees and online viewers alike. All-new GameSense graphics will be integrated directly with the Chezy Arena field system for live-updating information on upcoming matches, team statistics, history and rankings, balanced with live interviews and highlight reels.

We're hoping to help make Chezy Champs the most viewer-friendly and entertaining FRC event ever, so make sure to tune in! This weekend, you will be able to watch live and chat via a twitch client on our new website:

www.frcgamesense.com

We'll begin streaming today, August 30th starting at 9:30 AM PDT

We'll be checking in with social media live, be sure to tweet at us and tell us what you think about the matches and commentary live!

[dcarr]

I'm sure you are all aware, but the stream performance has been pretty terrible so far. Plays smooth for a few seconds and then turns very choppy Goes down every few minutes. This is on a gigabit connection with a high end machine so I can rule those out as possible causes.

Love the graphics though!

Edit: improved a lot, things are looking good

[Nuttyman54]

Thanks David, the problem was most definitely on our end.

There were several issues through the first few matches with internet connectivity and encoder bitrate settings that were found and solved, so everything should be smooth running from here on out.

We really appreciate the feedback, please let us know either in the stream chat or here on CD if you see any more issues throughout the event!

[Jacob Bendicksen]

Originally Posted by Nuttyman54

We really appreciate the feedback, please let us know either in the stream chat or here on CD if you see any more issues throughout the event!

Not sure if it's on my end or not, but the stream freezes every few minutes for me, then skips around a little while it gets back to the live version.

EDIT: my brother was watching high-def YouTube videos. Sorry for any unnecessary stress.

[thinker&planner]

This stream is the best FRC stream that I have ever seen, aside from the initial A/V issues. The overlay is super clean and informative. Although there were some technical problems early on in the stream, it seems that they have all been fixed.

[mwtidd]

Originally Posted by Jacob Bendicksen

Not sure if it's on my end or not, but the stream freezes every few minutes for me, then skips around a little while it gets back to the live version.

EDIT: my brother was watching high-def YouTube videos. Sorry for any unnecessary stress.

Yeah, unfortunately you need a decent internet connection to watch the stream. I'm stuck in Maine this weekend, and on a 1Mb line, and can't get anything.

When they had the option to switch to the low quality stream, I was able to get the stream, but that option was lost when they resolved this morning's issues.

All that being said, I was able to pull up the stream on my phone while I was on a walk, and from a UX standpoint, this showing is really solid. The animations and transitions for all the Chezy Stuff is really slick and clean.

It's also cool seeing the GameSense crew do a great job with their overlays as well.

Really solid job to everyone involved.

[Navid Shafa]

Make sure to tune in for the Pre-show tomorrow, Sunday August 31st @ 9:15 AM! Here are a couple shots from tonight's Post Show:

[g_sawchuk]

The first day of Chezy Champs was awesome, I was watching at home, and it was pretty entertaining. The GameSense crew did a fantastic job, and I love all the graphics! CORNDOG is the best though. Legit.

[Navid Shafa]

We're live with Day 2 of Chezy Champs. Tune in!

[Abrakadabra]

Can someone please explain the wonky scoring going on here? Primarily, how is 148 considered the current top rank when they have one less win than 1678? Every tournament I've ever been to ranks teams based on their actual matches played, not some prediction of what they might do in future matches, as seems to be the case here.

I listened in to the pre-game show hoping they might explain, but ... didn't happen.

What happened in the scheduling algorithm that skewed so many of 148's matches into today? One could argue an unfair advantage there?

It's also interesting how all of the TBA data was taken down last night. Did the highly-touted "live update" not work so well? When I was watching yesterday, it was interesting how 148 was not given a loss for their third match (although their two partners were), and that allowed them to stay high in the rankings all day.

(EDIT: TBA just came back up, but in the rankings screen, it says that 148 has only played 7 matches (and stand 6-1). However, if you look at 148's team page, it clearly shows that they have played 8 matches, and should be 6-2. Something is still wrong with the data - is this the only issue, or are there more?)

It may sound like I have something against 148, but that's not true at all. They just happened to be the team that I noticed the wonky scoring on yesterday, and now they are up in first place with no logical explanation. I am, in fact, cheering them on as one of the 3 non-CA teams in attendance, so I wish them lots of luck!

Otherwise, great effort by all involved - the live stream is spectacular, even way out here in New Hampshire! And I love the graphics upgrades - hoping for some "inspiration" to flow to FIRST in that regard!

[Michael Hill]

Originally Posted by Abrakadabra

Can someone please explain the wonky scoring going on here? Primarily, how is 148 considered the current top rank when they have one less win than 1678? Every tournament I've ever been to ranks teams based on their actual matches played, not some prediction of what they might do in future matches, as seems to be the case here.

I listened in to the pre-game show hoping they might explain, but ... didn't happen.

What happened in the scheduling algorithm that skewed so many of 148's matches into today? One could argue an unfair advantage there?

It's also interesting how all of the TBA data was taken down last night. Did the highly-touted "live update" not work so well? When I was watching yesterday, it was interesting how 148 was not given a loss for their third match (although their two partners were), and that allowed them to stay high in the rankings all day.

(EDIT: TBA just came back up, but in the rankings screen, it says that 148 has only played 7 matches (and stand 6-1). However, if you look at 148's team page, it clearly shows that they have played 8 matches, and should be 6-2. Something is still wrong with the data - is this the only issue, or are there more?)

It may sound like I have something against 148, but that's not true at all. They just happened to be the team that I noticed the wonky scoring on yesterday, and now they are up in first place with no logical explanation. I am, in fact, cheering them on as one of the 3 non-CA teams in attendance, so I wish them lots of luck!

Otherwise, great effort by all involved - the live stream is spectacular, even way out here in New Hampshire! And I love the graphics upgrades - hoping for some "inspiration" to flow to FIRST in that regard!

They had a surrogate match in match 13

[Eugene Fang]

Originally Posted by Abrakadabra

Can someone please explain the wonky scoring going on here? Primarily, how is 148 considered the current top rank when they have one less win than 1678? Every tournament I've ever been to ranks teams based on their actual matches played, not some prediction of what they might do in future matches, as seems to be the case here.

I listened in to the pre-game show hoping they might explain, but ... didn't happen.

What happened in the scheduling algorithm that skewed so many of 148's matches into today? One could argue an unfair advantage there?

It's also interesting how all of the TBA data was taken down last night. Did the highly-touted "live update" not work so well? When I was watching yesterday, it was interesting how 148 was not given a loss for their third match (although their two partners were), and that allowed them to stay high in the rankings all day.

(EDIT: TBA just came back up, but in the rankings screen, it says that 148 has only played 7 matches (and stand 6-1). However, if you look at 148's team page, it clearly shows that they have played 8 matches, and should be 6-2. Something is still wrong with the data - is this the only issue, or are there more?)

It may sound like I have something against 148, but that's not true at all. They just happened to be the team that I noticed the wonky scoring on yesterday, and now they are up in first place with no logical explanation. I am, in fact, cheering them on as one of the 3 non-CA teams in attendance, so I wish them lots of luck!

Otherwise, great effort by all involved - the live stream is spectacular, even way out here in New Hampshire! And I love the graphics upgrades - hoping for some "inspiration" to flow to FIRST in that regard!

Two words: surrogate match. The match 148 loss was a surrogate match for them.

About TBA's data going down last night, it seems like Cheesy Arena published blank scores to TBA around midnight. I'm currently investigation to see what exactly happened.

[Abrakadabra]

Originally Posted by Eugene Fang

Two words: surrogate match. The match 148 loss was a surrogate match for them.

Thank you - didn't catch that yesterday (and I watched the entire match).

However, that still doesn't explain how only 6 wins (and a QS of 12) puts them in front of 4 other teams with higher QS?

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Abrakadabra

Thank you - didn't catch that yesterday (and I watched the entire match).

However, that still doesn't explain how only 6 wins (and a QS of 12) puts them in front of 4 other teams with higher QS?

The rankings are normalized so that (as an example) you don't have a 5-0 team displayed behind a 6-1 team, just because they've played more matches.

[Jared]

Originally Posted by Abrakadabra

Thank you - didn't catch that yesterday (and I watched the entire match).

However, that still doesn't explain how only 6 wins (and a QS of 12) puts them in front of 4 other teams with higher QS?

Chezy Arena ranks differently to allow accurate ratings between teams with different numbers of matches played. Likely, they divide all the ranking data by the number of matches played, so that the robowranglers can be compared to a team that has played more matches equally.

When all teams have played all their matches, the rankings will work like normal.