How many times is enough to prove consistency?

[z_beeblebrox]

Another important consideration is when failures occur, since teams often improve over the event. I'd feel better picking a team with 5 failures in their first couple of matches and none later in the event than a team with 3 failures in matches 3, 9 and 10.

[Chief Hedgehog]

Once is luck; three times is a trend. However, to accomplish a task without human error is consistency.

Since this is a game involving humans, there is no true measure of consistency.

[asid61]

If they try and fail, that shows inconsistency. If they do not try at all some matches, but succeed in others, that shows consistency.
I think a scout can look for how "naturally" they vault the defenses to determine consistency with only a few trials rather than depend on pure numbers (although those are important as well).

[tindleroot]

Originally Posted by Chief Hedgehog

Once is luck; three times is a trend. However, to accomplish a task without human error is consistency.

Since this is a game involving humans, there is no true measure of consistency.

While you present a great theory, scouting depends on some sort of measurement. I am trying to consider a good compromise in order to minimize data accumulated and still determine consistency to a predictable degree. For me, if I saw a robot cross 5 times successfully, I would trust them to continue doing it (as long as those 5 crosses were not among a sea of failures, and the trend does not change sporadically throughout the competition). Hanging, I would want to make sure they make it every time.

Honestly, I don't expect teams to be particularly inconsistent with the defenses they are intending to cross. Either they will cross or they won't. But now that I say that, the opposite will probably happen.

[pandamonium]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yg_ssvGBqEs

[Chief Hedgehog]

Originally Posted by tindleroot

While you present a great theory, scouting depends on some sort of measurement. I am trying to consider a good compromise in order to minimize data accumulated and still determine consistency to a predictable degree. For me, if I saw a robot cross 5 times successfully, I would trust them to continue doing it (as long as those 5 crosses were not among a sea of failures, and the trend does not change sporadically throughout the competition). Hanging, I would want to make sure they make it every time.

Honestly, I don't expect teams to be particularly inconsistent with the defenses they are intending to cross. Either they will cross or they won't. But now that I say that, the opposite will probably happen.

Five times is great. But most events have 7-10 rounds. Did your team accomplish this task 5 times out of 7, or 10? Did they do this within traffic, or did this do this with impunity?

Consistency is great - but your scouting better be ready to address the other issues involved or the better scouting from another alliance may beat you.