Week 1 Number One Seed Score Average

[GeeTwo]

Ok, I'm puzzed. I know there's no mathematical validity in the musings below, but trying to make sense of these polls is failing me.

At the How many points do you think your robot could score individually? thread, the median answer is at the very high end of the 61-70 range, so the median responder expects to score about 70 points. (The mean isn't far off, though it's difficult to evaluate with the last, indeterminate value.)

On this poll, the median responder expects the average regional top seed to be 100. Assuming the populations of the two polls are similar, this raises the question:

Does a typical responder

• expect alliance partners to only average 15 points each, and to be top seed
• expect even worse performance from partners
• change expectations that much in four days
• something else?

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

Ok, I'm puzzed. I know there's no mathematical validity in the musings below, but trying to make sense of these polls is failing me.

At the How many points do you think your robot could score individually? thread, the median answer is at the very high end of the 61-70 range, so the median responder expects to score about 70 points. (The mean isn't far off, though it's difficult to evaluate with the last, indeterminate value.)

On this poll, the median responder expects the average regional top seed to be 100. Assuming the populations of the two polls are similar, this raises the question:

Does a typical responder

• expect alliance partners to only average 15 points each, and to be top seed
• expect even worse performance from partners
• change expectations that much in four days
• something else?

I would wager that the typical respondent here has an above-average robot, and likely does expect their alliance partners to be much worse than them. Many are also not participating in Week 1. The previous poll could also be construed as asking about potential maximum performance, not necessarily performance in the first event.

[Kevin Leonard]

Does a typical responder

• expect alliance partners to only average 15 points each, and to be top seed
• expect even worse performance from partners
• change expectations that much in four days
• something else?

I would be very surprised if average alliance partners at a week 1 regional averaged 15 points each. That's 7-8 scored totes. Being that most alliance partners won't have a point scoring autonomous, or be able to make more than one stack of totes, I'd feel very confident saying the average robot will score 15 or less points in an average match.

[Jared]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

Ok, I'm puzzed. I know there's no mathematical validity in the musings below, but trying to make sense of these polls is failing me.

At the How many points do you think your robot could score individually? thread, the median answer is at the very high end of the 61-70 range, so the median responder expects to score about 70 points. (The mean isn't far off, though it's difficult to evaluate with the last, indeterminate value.)

On this poll, the median responder expects the average regional top seed to be 100. Assuming the populations of the two polls are similar, this raises the question:

Does a typical responder

• expect alliance partners to only average 15 points each, and to be top seed
• expect even worse performance from partners
• change expectations that much in four days
• something else?

It seems people like to talk about the lack of ability from "the average team". They believe that "most teams" (people that aren't them) can't really do anything, and will fall over, get stuck on noodles, get in the way, knock their own stack over, and won't figure out how to pick up totes. Remember, we haven't seen real competition yet, and we've actually underestimated teams in the past.

[vhcook]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

Ok, I'm puzzed. I know there's no mathematical validity in the musings below, but trying to make sense of these polls is failing me.

At the How many points do you think your robot could score individually? thread, the median answer is at the very high end of the 61-70 range, so the median responder expects to score about 70 points. (The mean isn't far off, though it's difficult to evaluate with the last, indeterminate value.)

On this poll, the median responder expects the average regional top seed to be 100. Assuming the populations of the two polls are similar, this raises the question:

Does a typical responder

• expect alliance partners to only average 15 points each, and to be top seed
• expect even worse performance from partners
• change expectations that much in four days
• something else?

Something else. The linked question asks how much your robot could score individually in ideal conditions. A team's average contribution in actual match conditions is most probably lower than their response to that poll, which is also likely to have been a bit optimistic on average. They may also assume that the median robot at an event may not score as well as the typical team that would respond to a poll on CD. Also, it's week 1, so scores are typically lower, and many respondents to the original poll may not be competing this week or may have been estimating their ideal performance during the entire season (second event improvement).

[Rypsnort]

We have to remember we are talking #1 seed here. I feel that, even though it is week 1, the top teams will still preform at a high level. I think that OPR of top teams will be more prevalent in week one than score average because of the lower level of play that comes with week one events. (ie. The top teams will really stand out early in the year.)

[Green Potato]

Statistics to the rescue!

We have the data right here, and through a bit of math, we can sort of get an idea of where the real average score will fall according to those polled. I'll use a 95% confidence interval for this, just to keep things standard.

First are the assumptions. We appear to have independence, as I really doubt anyone who voted secretly collaborated with someone else just for a poll, but because opinions were expressed below and that may have affected people's argument, I'll proceed with caution. As for the sample being random, it's far from perfect, but it's close enough. The people voting here are cognizant of what teams will be competing, and are generally good at taking educated guesses. However, this really can't easily extend into the general community's opinion, as people posting on this site are much more likely to be from better, more established teams than the weaker ones. Again, this is a reason to proceed with caution when analyzing the data above.

Also, this poll wasn't purely quantitative, as an potion for more than 140 was given. For this number, I estimated the average to be about 155 based on how normal curves behave, but again, this is a point where the real and hypothetical worlds don't mix well.

Just to give some reference...

The mean is 96.96 points per match.
The sample standard deviation is 30.12 points per match.

Assuming this model is an accurate representation of performance (HUGE leap here, even though we have assumptions to back it up a bit, this will likely be a large source of error), we get a 95% confidence interval of...
(93.59 , 100.33)

And there you have it. I am 95% confident that the true mean expectation of the highest qualifier, according to the Chief Delphi community who bothered to vote on this post and who may or may not have a good grasp on the reality of week 1 competitions, is between 93.59 and 100.3 points.

And that's why the real answer is, "We'll see."

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by Green Potato

Statistics to the rescue!

We have the data right here, and through a bit of math, we can sort of get an idea of where the real average score will fall according to those polled. I'll use a 95% confidence interval for this, just to keep things standard.

First are the assumptions. We appear to have independence, as I really doubt anyone who voted secretly collaborated with someone else just for a poll, but because opinions were expressed below and that may have affected people's argument, I'll proceed with caution. As for the sample being random, it's far from perfect, but it's close enough. The people voting here are cognizant of what teams will be competing, and are generally good at taking educated guesses. However, this really can't easily extend into the general community's opinion, as people posting on this site are much more likely to be from better, more established teams than the weaker ones. Again, this is a reason to proceed with caution when analyzing the data above.

Also, this poll wasn't purely quantitative, as an potion for more than 140 was given. For this number, I estimated the average to be about 155 based on how normal curves behave, but again, this is a point where the real and hypothetical worlds don't mix well.

Just to give some reference...

The mean is 96.96 points per match.
The sample standard deviation is 30.12 points per match.

Assuming this model is an accurate representation of performance (HUGE leap here, even though we have assumptions to back it up a bit, this will likely be a large source of error), we get a 95% confidence interval of...
(93.59 , 100.33)

And there you have it. I am 95% confident that the true mean expectation of the highest qualifier, according to the Chief Delphi community who bothered to vote on this post and who may or may not have a good grasp on the reality of week 1 competitions, is between 93.59 and 100.3 points.

And that's why the real answer is, "We'll see."

So 100 like I said

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by Boltman

So 100 like I said

I'm all out of gold stars, consider this an iou

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

I'm all out of gold stars, consider this an iou

Marked down

[MrForbes]

and the answer is.....80