New Vs Old Qualification 2010

[sircedric4]

I put together a small program that went over very well at the Bayou Regional this year, which computed how each team would have fared under the old qualification system of win/loss/rank vs this year's new coopertition system. At the Bayou we had a monitor with this data available being fed real-time. Several teams were using this program for scouting purposes.

Our team intends to have the same system running on a monitor in the pits at the Nationals this year. It took me a bit to reprogram it from using Twitter to using the FIRST raw data, but now that it is fixed, I thought I would go ahead and run all the regionals so far, and put the data up here.

If any team is interested in the program send me a PM and I'll send you a copy. It is written in Excel and requires a web connection to run. I don't want other teams using my same file in their pits at Nationals, so you gotta ask. :-)

The attached Excel (inside the .zip) file contains all the data from the Regionals so far.

Here's the data for the Bayou:

Bayou Regional:

NEW TEAM RANKING SYSTEM							LAST YEAR'S TEAM RANKING SYSTEM						
PLACE	TEAM	PLAYED	SEED	COOP	HANG		PLACE	TEAM	PLAYED	WIN	LOSS	TIE	RANK
1	1912	10	94	54	2		1	1912	10	8	0	2	1.7
2	1421	10	74	26	0		2	2078	10	8	1	1	1.2
3	2587	10	72	34	2		3	1421	10	7	1	2	1.4
4	2078	10	72	28	0		4	2992	10	6	1	3	1.4
5	2992	10	71	34	2		5	1927	10	7	2	1	1.2
6	2091	10	68	32	2		6	2221	10	6	1	3	1.1
7	3411	10	68	22	2		7	1477	10	6	1	3	0.6
8	2920	10	67	24	2		8	1339	10	6	3	1	1.4
9	1927	10	66	24	12		9	3039	10	5	2	3	0.8
10	1339	10	63	18	4		10	2080	10	5	3	2	1.4
11	2221	10	59	30	0		11	2587	10	5	3	2	1.2
12	2080	10	58	18	0		12	3337	10	4	2	4	1
13	2190	10	54	14	4		13	2091	10	3	2	5	1.6
14	231	10	54	14	4		14	3411	10	4	4	2	1.7
15	2206	10	52	10	2		15	2817	10	4	4	2	0.8
16	364	10	51	8	0		16	1398	10	4	4	2	0.6
17	1398	10	50	18	2		17	231	10	3	4	3	1.7
18	57	10	49	14	0		18	2556	10	3	4	3	1.1
19	3337	10	45	16	2		19	2920	10	4	5	1	1.1
20	2973	10	44	10	4		20	2206	10	4	5	1	0.8
21	2242	10	44	10	0		21	3364	10	3	4	3	0.6
22	1477	10	42	20	0		22	57	10	3	5	2	1.4
23	2817	10	42	12	2		23	2190	10	3	5	2	1.2
24	3228	10	41	12	2		24	364	10	3	5	2	1
25	2815	10	41	6	0		25	3228	10	3	5	2	1
26	2183	10	40	6	2		26	1348	10	1	3	6	0.7
27	2173	10	37	10	0		27	2242	10	3	5	2	0.7
28	3039	10	36	12	0		28	462	10	2	4	4	0.3
29	1818	10	36	4	2		29	2173	10	2	5	3	0.9
30	1348	10	34	8	2		30	1304	10	2	5	3	0.5
31	3364	10	33	10	0		31	2183	10	2	6	2	0.9
32	462	9	33	8	0		32	1818	9	2	6	2	0.2
33	2975	10	33	0	0		33	2973	10	1	6	3	1.2
34	1304	9	29	8	0		34	1920	9	1	6	3	0.7
35	1920	10	29	0	0		35	2815	10	1	6	3	0.6
36	2556	9	25	0	4		36	2975	9	1	7	2	0.3

It's interesting to see some of the swings from top to bottom depending on which ranking system is used. I think last year's is easier to understand for a layman, but I guess we'll see how this year's plays out.