White Paper Discuss: Karthik's 2005 Championship Scouting Database

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Nice going, I am impressed. Thanks for compiling all the data.

[Karthik]

Here's the latest version...

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/pa...le&paperid=486

I'll be publishing an update on Monday once the divisions come out.

Thanks to everyone who has sent me updates. Keep them coming.

[Joe Johnson]

Originally Posted by Karthik

The more data the better. I know the reported data for Pittsburgh and St. Louis is incomplete, but the GLR qualification rounds look alright. If you've complied, please send it over. I just sent you a PM with my contact info (it's also in the spreadsheet).

Please double check -- make sure team #1 is ranked #1 with the data as reported. I THINK I recall that the GLR data was reported with the scores backwards or upside down or inside out or something. I am not sure, but I think my brain has a tingly feeling. For what it's worth.

Joe J.

[thoughtful]

WOW, comprehensive data. Scouting at the nationals is never easy with a handfull of people. This will be a great resource for all of us. Does anyone know how Karthik has soo much time on his hands?

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Joe Johnson

Please double check -- make sure team #1 is ranked #1 with the data as reported. I THINK I recall that the GLR data was reported with the scores backwards or upside down or inside out or something. I am not sure, but I think my brain has a tingly feeling. For what it's worth.

Joe J.

Joe,

I have yet to use the data from the FIRST website regarding the GLR qualification rounds. You're right, something seems fishy about it. If I stay in tonight, I'll try and figure it out.

[Bill_Hancoc]

Great Job first off (no pun intended) and the format is amazingliny simple to use!

[Tytus Gerrish]

cool

Last time I checked the issue with the great lakes data was that red/blue scores were flipped.

It seems to be right, when I check now, though...


Oh and that's incredibly useful. Thanks so much...

[dubious elise]

Karthik, you are my hero! Consider this post a "digital hug" from me to you.

[PatrickN]

wow, nice job Karthik.

I feel kind of bad that you're only missing info from a couple of regionals and two of them are pittsburgh and southern california, must be the crazy Canadians screwing up the scoring systems down south. Anyways, I'll see what I can dig up from 188's scouting (some things unfortunately get tossed when you do everything with paper and pencil ).

-Got pittsburgh stats done, it was like a puzzle since we had bits and pieces and they just needed to be put together and have the blanks filled in, don't worry everything worked out mathematically (i think). Now for the tougher job of socal...

[Joshua May]

Wow Karthik, this is amazing. Excellent work.

[Karthik]

The latest version, with all the divisions...

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/pa...le&paperid=487

[petek]

Originally Posted by Karthik

The latest version, with all the divisions...

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/pa...le&paperid=487

Thanks for getting this out so quickly! FIRST doesn't go alphabetically for the division names, though, so Galileo and Newton are switched. That is, they went A, C, N, G where yours go A, C, G, N.

[Mark McLeod]

It's correct in Karthik's "Raw Data", so the queries return the correct division.
It's only the titles on the "Division" worksheet that are switched.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Mark McLeod

It's correct in Karthik's "Raw Data", so the queries return the correct division.
It's only the titles on the "Division" worksheet that are switched.

Thanks to both Peter and Mark for noticing that.

I made the "Division" sheet up as a quick reference. Note to self: Don't do things quickly...

As Mark said, the "Raw Data" sheet is correct, so all data which is fetched through the "Interface" sheet will be correct.