Comparison of DIV MAX OPRs

[Joe Johnson]

I took the every division, sorted the teams by MAX OPR and then plotted all the divisions on one chart. The gap on the left side of the chart between Newton and the rest of the divisions is huge, crazy huge.

[IKE]

One thing to note with this game, the division median is about 50% top teams. Most years, there was a bigger despair if I remember correctly.

[Richard Wallace]

Newton and Hopper teams will not have a long walk to Einstein. That is convenient.

[Joe Johnson]

The more I look at the data the crazier it seems.

If you take the MAX OPR numbers at 50th, 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles for each division and then subtract the corresponding percentiles from the entire 600 team CMP, you can get a sense for just how much better the teams on NEWTON are then the other divisions. Newton's numbers are all positive and the 75th, 90th and 95th percentiles are over 5 points higher than the corresponding CMP numbers.

See the chart below.

As I said, crazy. I don't think that this means that Newton is a shoe in for winning on Einstein because that depends on how the drafts happen to pair teams into alliances, but I will say that the qualifying rounds and playoffs on Newton are going to be very different than those played in some other divisions (I'm looking at you Curie & Galileo).

[IKE]

What would happen if you took the top 4 out of Newton? I get the impression it might shift it enough that it would reduce a lot of the shift. Thoughts?

[Edxu]

So from my interpretation of the second graph, Carson's 75th percentile is better than the average, while their 95th percentile robots tend to be worse than the average 95th percentile robot. Is that right?

[Joe Johnson]

Originally Posted by Edxu

So from my interpretation of the second graph, Carson's 75th percentile is better than the average, while their 95th percentile robots tend to be worse than the average 95th percentile robot. Is that right?

Close but not quite right.

If you replace "average" with "75th (or 95th) percentile of the CMP as a whole" then you'd be right.

The idea I was trying to get at was a metric that made it easy to see which alliances were more or less competitive than others. I choose MAX OPR as the surrogate from how good a particular team is. Then I choose 4 precentiles 95th (which is the roughly the 4th best MAX OPR in the division and 30th best MAX OPR in St. Louis), 90th (roughly 8th in division, 60th in CMP), 75th (19th, 150th) and 50th (38th, 300th). And Finally, to make it easy to compare these MAX OPRs, I normalized each division percentile by subtracting the associated CMP percentile.

I think it paints a pretty clear picture. The top tier robots in Newton are about 1 high goal boulder better per match than the similarly rare top tier robots in the general CMP population. That is a big difference. Not insurmountable by any means but still pretty significant.

Dr. Joe J.

[Joe Johnson]

Originally Posted by IKE

What would happen if you took the top 4 out of Newton? I get the impression it might shift it enough that it would reduce a lot of the shift. Thoughts?

Actually, things don't change that much. That is one of the great things about using percentiles rather than averages. With averages a few high numbers can really skew the result but for populations like we have in this case, it doesn't have that much effect -- all that happens when you pull those top 4 monster teams out of the list is the shift the 95th, 90th, 75th and 50th percentile scores down 4 slots in the list.

I have done this and you can see that even without those top 4 teams, Newton is still in a class by themselves.

[microbuns]

I'd love to see the same comparisons between these divisions, district championships and some of the top regionals. I think it'd be a great indicator of how strong these worlds groups actually are.

[Joe Johnson]

Originally Posted by microbuns

I'd love to see the same comparisons between these divisions, district championships and some of the top regionals. I think it'd be a great indicator of how strong these worlds groups actually are.

I love this idea. Can someone point me to an OPR/MAX OPR spreadsheet (or website, but I'd prefer not to have to scrape all that data)? I just don't have the time right now to write my own. I just need Team numbers and MAX OPR in columns (other columns are fine but at least those so I can use Match & Offset to automatically have Excel generate the data for whatever competition we're interested in).

I scraped the CMP team data from http://frc.divisions.co/ but I need teams that are not in the CMP team list if I want to do other competitions.

Dr. Joe J.

P.S. Also, I think the Division CMP numbers are going to be higher than typical districts or Regionals but lower than the DCMPs JJ

[Caleb Sykes]

Originally Posted by Joe Johnson

I love this idea. Can someone point me to an OPR/MAX OPR spreadsheet (or website, but I'd prefer not to have to scrape all that data)?

Here you go.

2834 scouting database

4536 scouting database

[Collin Stiers]

The way things worked out this year with divisions will make things interesting. A lot of really good teams will get locked up in newton, because they won't win in the division, allowing some teams from other divisions to come out with strong alliance, or perhaps teams who normally wouldn't make it to Einstein's can make it this year. I think the possibilities of a dark horse alliance are higher this year.

[zinthorne]

I think it is possible to maybe see a situation happen on Newton like one that happened back in 2013 with 1678. 1678 seeded one and burned many of the top teams in their division then selected 148 to go on to Einstein, because some very good alliances were unable to be formed. Very smart play by 1678!

[Joe Johnson]

Here are the DCMP's compared to the Divisions at Worlds (note, the zero line is equal to the associated percentile of all teams CMP this year). I have also added an non-normalized chart. Harder to read but you can see raw numbers.

I have to say, I am surprised and I was wrong, very wrong. The DCMP's are not generally better than the Divisions at Worlds.

A wise man's mind changes, a fool's changes not...

Dr. Joe J.

P.S. Thanks for the data (several sources).

[ATannahill]

Originally Posted by Joe Johnson

Here are the DCMP's compared to the Divisions at Worlds (note, the zero line is equal to the associated percentile of all teams CMP this year). I have also added an non-normalized chart. Harder to read but you can see raw numbers.

I have to say, I am surprised and I was wrong, very wrong. The DCMP's are not generally better than the Divisions at Worlds.

A wise man's mind changes, a fool's changes not...

Dr. Joe J.

P.S. Thanks for the data (several sources).

<images snipped>

Did you intentionally leave out PNW, NC and Chesapeake? I know they were week 6.