OPR after Week Three Events

[Ether]

Originally Posted by Racer26

Has anyone calculated Autonomous/Tele/Hanging OPR separately?

There's also an overall World rank, in columns AA thru AC on the "World Rank" sheet.

[quad]

Originally Posted by Ed Law

Does anybody know the score of qualification match 72 at New York? It affects teams' OPR because I temporarily put in 0-0 to do the calculations.

The twitter feed says 119 for red and 46 for blue

[ahartnet]

Ed,

First off, this is an impressive collection of VBA scripts!

Second - when I try to run the refresh data script, I get an error, something about runtime error ' 13' Type mismatch.

I opened v3.0, go to the Dallas page, as thats the one I'm interested in, and make sure that I enable macros and a data connection. When I hit ctrl-shift-P it starts doing a lot of stuff but then stops at that error. When I run the step into the command and do it line by line, it seems it's because it's going through the teams list (which is blank at the time) until it hits the word "match" in C353.

Any tips? Am I missing a step? I don't see anything else suggested in the instructions page.

Thanks!
Andrew

[Ed Law]

Originally Posted by ahartnet

Ed,

First off, this is an impressive collection of VBA scripts!

Second - when I try to run the refresh data script, I get an error, something about runtime error ' 13' Type mismatch.

I opened v3.0, go to the Dallas page, as thats the one I'm interested in, and make sure that I enable macros and a data connection. When I hit ctrl-shift-P it starts doing a lot of stuff but then stops at that error. When I run the step into the command and do it line by line, it seems it's because it's going through the teams list (which is blank at the time) until it hits the word "match" in C353.

Any tips? Am I missing a step? I don't see anything else suggested in the instructions page.

Thanks!
Andrew

I am not sure what you are trying to do. While this can be used as a predictive tool in terms of match results, projected ranking at the end of qualifying round etc., it needs data to start. It is not that good a predictive tool when the match schedule has not come out yet. Try to run the macro again after each team has at least played 3 matches. Otherwise you may get an error saying insufficient data or something like that due to the ill condition of the matrix. For the OPR numbers to be meaningful, you need at least 4 to 5 matches completed for each team. I think some people have done that study so others please chime in.

[Ed Law]

Originally Posted by quad

The twitter feed says 119 for red and 46 for blue

Thanks. Do you know why the match score was not shown? Did they replay that match?

[prismiko]

Originally Posted by Ed Law

Thanks. Do you know why the match score was not shown? Did they replay that match?

Nope - match 72 was not replayed. The recording is here - http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/29852971

[Racer26]

Heh. OPR After week 4 events, *all of waterloo shoots to the top*

[~Cory~]

Originally Posted by Racer26

Heh. OPR After week 4 events, *all of waterloo shoots to the top*

Have you seen whats happening at Wisconsin?

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by ~Cory~

Have you seen whats happening at Wisconsin?

As of now, Waterloo's mean winning score (109) is 35 points higher than Wisconsin's, and the median winning score (96) is 23 points higher. The losing scores are also slightly higher.

[Ed Law]

Originally Posted by prismiko

Nope - match 72 was not replayed. The recording is here - http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/29852971

Thanks I will enter the data and rerun the OPR with the Week 4 results. It will make quite a difference for those 3 teams with 119 points instead of 0 that I entered.

[Ether]

Originally Posted by Ed Law

Does anybody know the score of qualification match 72 at New York? It affects teams' OPR because I temporarily put in 0-0 to do the calculations.

Ed,

For future reference in case you encounter this issue again, you have the following 2 recourses:

1) Twitter data for that match (for example, see here).

2) If there's only one match score missing, pick a team from each alliance that was in that match. Using the Qual Match Results data, add up the scores for the alliances that team was on. Subtract that from the sum of Auto+Climb+TeleOp for that team in the Team Standings data. That should be the alliance score for the missing match.

Example calculation, using Team 1660:

Here are Team 1660's alliances and scores at New York, with Match #72 set to a score of "0":

1340	1660	806	16
421	1660	1155	35
3059	1382	1660	45
1660	4640	514	30
1660	354	3204	71
237	3137	1660	49
4263	1660	810	0
2933	369	1660	70

			316

... and here is the Team Standings data for Team 1660 from the New York event:

26 	1660 	8.00 	142.00 	90.00 	203.00 	4-4-0 	0 	8

142.00 + 90.00 + 203.00 = 435; ..... 435 - 316 = 119

[Donut]

What is notable about Waterloo is that the top 5 teams all have OPR > 50, and the top 10 are all OPR > 37. Most events from this week I am checking have OPR < 37 by the time you are out of the top 5 showing a clear split of the top teams from everyone else. Of course Waterloo still has that, with the top 2 teams having an OPR > 90

Wisconsin has a very strange OPR set. It has 29 teams of OPR > 20 and the top 10 all have OPR > 36, but no one has an OPR > 50. And I already noted in a different thread that OPR compared to average individual robot scores was wrong by at least 5 places for most of the teams I checked.

[DELurker]

Ed,

What is the significance of the shading of the cells in columns O & R (OPR & CCWM) in the individual event pages?

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by DELurker

Ed,

What is the significance of the shading of the cells in columns O & R (OPR & CCWM) in the individual event pages?

They are the top 24 OPR/CCWM at the event. This provides an interesting way to compare OPR to alliance selections.

[Ed Law]

Originally Posted by Joe Ross

They are the top 24 OPR/CCWM at the event. This provides an interesting way to compare OPR to alliance selections.

Sorry Joe, that is not what it is. A lot of times it is true because teams can tell which teams are good without looking at any numbers. It correlates quite well to which teams were drafted.

I put in those conditional formatting back in 2008 and never took it out. Basically, when OPR is bigger than average score, or CCWM is bigger than average winning margin, it will turn green. Green is good. It means those teams contribute more than their partners to get the average score. Somebody with a lucky schedule can have very high average score but OPR/CCWM which are the calculated contribution will tell you the true story in most cases. If you only look at OPR/CCWM and ignore average score and average winning margin, the green color does not add any information.

I am surprised nobody has ever asked this question. I can take it out in the future.