paper: FRC Seeding World Rankings!

[samir13k]

Originally Posted by sv2198

Sorry to be a little impatient, but when do you think the week 4 world rankings will be posted?

Sorry, i didnt know if the interest was there, i'm a little busy right now trying to get some code done, but I will try to have it up later tonight.

[rulesall2]

The rankings for WPI are incorrect: because of a mistake in the data entry (Edit: Not your data, the data entry at the competition which actually caused a re-do of the alliance selection), the data you have is missing the final qualification match, which impacted the top 8 rankings.

The match can be found here: http://www.thebluealliance.net/tbatv/match/2010wor_qm58

Overall very impressive. Thank you for posting.

[samir13k]

Ok, the updated revision with week 4 has been released! Enjoy

[mayhemscout1519]

Thanks samir for posting this - interesting to look at!

[Bruceb]

Are you missing the Wisconsin regional? I don't see 706 listed at all. I think that was week 3. Maybe I'm missing something.
Bruce

[Racer26]

Interesting, but not surprising that 1114 owns 2 podium spots on this list, sandwiching 2056 in second. They both played some stellar matches at WAT, including 2 matches against each other (1114 won both), and one together (against us, 24-0 [yeah, we played it 6v0]).

Also interesting is that the lowest team from WAT (854) sits at #620 on this list of 1632. Suggests that WAT was one of the most competitive regionals.

Also, what happened to 48?

[musicspeaks]

Originally Posted by Josh Murphy

Seconded, Its an awesome document but it is missing everything from the Michigan districts.

Agreed

[bobrenjc93]

how is 217 seeded so low, when they've won all 3 regionals they have attended?

[Nuttyman54]

Originally Posted by bobrenjc93

how is 217 seeded so low, when they've won all 3 regionals they have attended?

Because they haven't won all 3 regionals they've attended. They've won one regional (during week 1), and two districts. Unfortunately, the districts haven't been included in this chart. It's notably missing many top teams such as 67, 469, 27 and other Michigan powerhouses that haven't played any events outside of the districts

Also, teams that played week 1 will be artificially seeded much lower, if the seeding calculation includes the 5 point bonus for winning that was added after week 1

[mayhemscout1519]

Originally Posted by Nuttyman54

Also, teams that played week 1 will be artificially seeded much lower, if the seeding calculation includes the 5 point bonus for winning that was added after week 1

That's correct, I looked over the spreadsheet and the seeding calculation does not include the 5-point bonus for Week 1 teams while it does for Weeks 2-4 teams. This helps to explain why 217 is ranked low (in addition to all other Week 1 competitors) - they should receive 5-points for each of their wins at FLR. Taking their 8 wins in qualifications, that's 40 points boosting their 102-point seeding score up to 142 points, making their seeding average 14.2 points. Assuming a seeding average of 14.2 points would move them up to a tie for 69th place on the most recent list.

Further, as Nuttyman pointed out, the districts are not on this list. If the districts were added to this list, I'm sure you would see their number up with those top teams!

[Tom Bottiglieri]

Can we get some week 5 lovin?

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

Can we get some week 5 lovin?

The top 15 teams from the Michigan State Championships were all higher then the previous #2. 1918, 67, and 33 all beat 1114's Waterloo score.

[samir13k]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

Can we get some week 5 lovin?

I just updated!

I have now included all week 5 regionals!

There are 2 new revisions
-One including Michigan Championship
-and one without the Michigan Championship

Hope you guys enjoy it!

thats right! there is finally some Michigan lovin!

[musicspeaks]

thanks so much for your hard work!

[Frenchie]

Would it be possible to get an excel version of the "with michigan" version (or did I miss it?)