Red Advantage ?

[elknise]

Yeah, i don't know why a coach would want to look at the screen. They have the best view in the house as it is.

[Captain Rich]

Hey! In Sacramento I can tell you why red had more wins, the winning alliance was only red during the finals! My alliance (245, 766, and 1072) did not lose a single match during all of the finals, and may I add that most of our wins were obvious, like 70 to 25 ish. I doubt that the colour red had anything to do with it, but our alliance being better did. I must admit, I did like red better, but that was because the FIRST worker who took off the hanging tetra on that side was cool and we had many conversations with him.

[AmyPrib]

I'm not going one way or the other on the theory, but it was coincidental at Pittsburgh in Saturday afternoon matches that Red seemed to win a lot of matches. And the observation was made by my friend who had absolutely no knowledge of the game or FIRST. She said "Wow, the Red side seems to win an awful lot"... and then I noticed it too.. Sure it's just a random thing at some events..

[whakojacko]

its probably as people have said a result of what happens in elims. I dont remember us every being red in the elims (but im stupid and might have missed something) and we (with 245 and 766) won sacramento. I really think its just a combination of luck and how the elim system seems to work (unless thats luck as well )

[Kit Gerhart]

Since most people are right-handed, the human players might have an advantage on the blue side since the tetras would be placed on the side of their "dominant" hand.

[Warren Boudreau]

Assuming that the FIRST match scores are correct: At the UCF regional this weekend, during qualifying the red alliance won 28 matches while the blue alliance won 42. One tie.

It looks like the theory is a little shaky.

Anyone want to do an analysis of all matches to date? I have to get back to work.

[Fred Agnir]

Originally Posted by Krystine T.

Does the Red alliance have an advantage over the Blue?

George Williams (60) asked my dad if he had noticed that the red alliance had an advantage over the blue in the finals at the Sacramento Regional. He went on to say that he noticed blue only won two matches during the finals at that regional. George’s thought was that the red tetras had better visual perception than the blue tetras.

The higher seed in the elimination matches have been put on the red side. That being said, our alliance went undefeated as the #2 seed, defeating the #1 seed in the finals. We were red in the quarters and semis, but blue in the finals.

Fred

[Silent_Stryker]

at the GLR, i was in the finals and was red and (in gamer terms) got owned

[Anthony Kesich]

Originally Posted by Krystine T.

In Sacramento the number one alliance (1097, 254, 114) were blue in the final match at the Sacramento Regional. and 1097 was seeded number one, 254 was seeded number two. Therefore the highest seeded alliance is not always red.

The reason we were put on the Blue side was due to a computer glitch. Accoriding to everyone, we were supposed to be on the red side, and they tried to fix it, but the computers weren't co-operating, so they instead just moved us to the blue side.

-Tony K

[RyanMcE]

Originally Posted by Warren Boudreau

Assuming that the FIRST match scores are correct: At the UCF regional this weekend, during qualifying the red alliance won 28 matches while the blue alliance won 42. One tie.

It looks like the theory is a little shaky.

A little shaky? This thread needs to DIE A HORRIBLE DEATH. This is the second set of REAL HARD numbers anyone has offered on the subject. Once again, Blue won significantly more matches dduring qualification matches, the only truely random matches. Results of Final matches are not statistically valid because in many regionals, one color was always the higher seeded alliance. Let me reitterate the results from the PNW Regional:

Originally Posted by Ryan McE

blue won 37 times to red's 24 wins
blue scored 1640 total points to red's 1332

With hard numbers like these, I think its hard to say that red had any advantage this year.

If anything, blue has some sort of advantage. But I doubt even that. I think there is absolutely NOTHING to this theory. Lets move along.

[894|mike]

Originally Posted by JosephM

I think this assumption is just a feeble human mind trying to find some sort of correlation in truly random events, like saying your iPod is playing favorites while on shuffle mode.

I agree with Joe on this one. And someone had also said it...In the finals, the better teams(1-4) were on Red and the others(5-8) on blue, if I recall correctly.

[DDRAngelKurumi]

But at portland, none of the bots were designed to pick up color tets during atonomous... so there really is no advantage there...

[DDRAngelKurumi]

Not to mention... color should have nothing to do with it. The bots are supposed to be designed to dtect the neon green colors, not red or blue. SO the is no advantage...

[whakojacko]

i think when someone reffered to colors they were talking about how easily visible they are to drivers, not the camera stuff

[Krystine T.]

I started this thread not to say this side or that side is unfair…but simply to observe how color affects us. For example, why are stop signs red and caution signs yellow? Do certain colors catch our eye better then others? Can this affect our performance? I wanted to test this hypothesis with the FIRST competition. So far we do not have enough data to prove or disprove this theory. Maybe the red tetras are easier to see. But does this affect our ability to play the game?

FIRST has removed most of the data that we had, even though that was incomplete. Once we have more data, I will put the qualifying matches into my spreadsheet and see if red my have an advantage based on the number of wins and points scored.

--Krystine