Michigan District Event Difficulty

[April_robo]

It's nice to see one of my teams actually emerging as a competitor now. Even though it says 8th at Troy I'll take it

[SeanKwobot141]

First time at Howell, Looking forward to it!

[FIMAlumni]

Fun with numbers from the two Week 1 events posted. Assuming this is 100% accurate, alliances always pick best robot available (SCOUTING IS IMPORTANT), and teams don't interfere with each other.

Howell:
Alliance: Captain, First pick, second pick: combined score
1: 862, 1918, 3536: 142.2
2: 107, 494, 4327: 116.3
3: 2771, 3322, 3658: 104.7
4: 245, 141, 1504: 100
5: 4956, 4384, 830: 96
6: 4362, 1189 66: 91.8
7: 4003, 302, 5114: 87.7
8: 3572, 4325, 4004: 80

Southfield:
Alliance: Captain, First pick, second pick: combined score
1: 33, 1023, 5014: 163.3
2: 548 573, 5695: 110.8
3: 910, 3604, 5467: 84.8
4: 2960, 1701, 5673: 76.5
5: 453, 3667, 5642: 68.3
6: 3548, 94, 5619: 63.7
7: 3547,2673, 5577: 57.5
8: 5167, 835, 3302: 50.7

[Bryce Paputa]

Originally Posted by FIMAlumni

Fun with numbers from the two Week 1 events posted. Assuming this is 100% accurate, alliances always pick best robot available (SCOUTING IS IMPORTANT), and teams don't interfere with each other.

Howell:
Alliance: Captain, First pick, second pick: combined score
1: 862, 1918, 3536: 142.2
2: 107, 494, 4327: 116.3
3: 2771, 3322, 3658: 104.7
4: 245, 141, 1504: 100
5: 4956, 4384, 830: 96
6: 4362, 1189 66: 91.8
7: 4003, 302, 5114: 87.7
8: 3572, 4325, 4004: 80

Southfield:
Alliance: Captain, First pick, second pick: combined score
1: 33, 1023, 5014: 163.3
2: 548 573, 5695: 110.8
3: 910, 3604, 5467: 84.8
4: 2960, 1701, 5673: 76.5
5: 453, 3667, 5642: 68.3
6: 3548, 94, 5619: 63.7
7: 3547,2673, 5577: 57.5
8: 5167, 835, 3302: 50.7

Speculation like this is always interesting, but the numbers include points for awards like chairman's and dean's list. Stuff like that might have a tiny influence on picks, but no where as big as the score weights it. IIRC, The scoring system gives (50/number of district events attended) for winning chairman's, which puts it approximately equal to winning the event as first seed. It's the same system that fantasy first uses, you can look at the rules in that forum for more details.

[FIMAlumni]

Originally Posted by Bryce Paputa

Speculation like this is always interesting, but the numbers include points for awards like chairman's and dean's list. Stuff like that might have a tiny influence on picks, but no where as big as the score weights it. IIRC, The scoring system gives (50/number of district events attended) for winning chairman's, which puts it approximately equal to winning the event as first seed. It's the same system that fantasy first uses, you can look at the rules in that forum for more details.

Thanks for the input, of course this is all just fun speculation. If the numbers matched up perfectly we should just crown the state champions now. Side note, winning awards like chairman's and dean's list will help a team get picked. Brand recognition and wow factors do influence teams picking.

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

Originally Posted by SeanKwobot141

First time at Howell, Looking forward to it!

Howell is a good event. Nice layout, and a roomy arena. Competed there last year, and will be returning this year as well. But eeeeeeeeeewwwwww; week 1...

See you there!

[Boltman]

chairman's and dean's list don't enter into my scouting...as they have little to do with robot performance directly , there are better metrics

[Brandon Ha]

Chairman's and Dean's have far reaching impacts upon every aspect of robotics , not only within sponsorships and community. Please never mistake the fact that while some teams maybe a chairman's team to be one of lesser quality.
In reality, these are hallmarks for successful teams because they have a history of doing things right, which is why they are "better" over the years.

[FIMAlumni]

Originally Posted by Boltman

chairman's and dean's list don't enter into my scouting...as they have little to do with robot performance directly , there are better metrics

I never meant to imply that Chairman's and dean's list enter onto your scouting sheets. Winning the big awards does however make your team stand out from the crowd. If your robot is about as good 5-6 other robots, these awards as well as loud cheering sections, bright shirts, flashy LED lights, funny costumes, ect. all help your team stand out from the crowd. Best example of bright shirts in Michigan are the Thunder Chickens. Granted this team rarely needs help being recognized but it certainly doesn't hurt. I'm not saying these awards are going to suddenly move you up 20 picks, but it could help 1-3 picks.

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by FIMAlumni

I never meant to imply that Chairman's and dean's list enter onto your scouting sheets. Winning the big awards does however make your team stand out from the crowd. If your robot is about as good 5-6 other robots, these awards as well as loud cheering sections, bright shirts, flashy LED lights, funny costumes, ect. all help your team stand out from the crowd. Best example of bright shirts in Michigan are the Thunder Chickens. Granted this team rarely needs help being recognized but it certainly doesn't hurt. I'm not saying these awards are going to suddenly move you up 20 picks, but it could help 1-3 picks.

Agreed..however this thread is on "Event Difficulty" and ranking relative team strength and ranking "best robots"... all I am saying is that Deans and Chairman's does not have a direct effect and may very well skew the choice based on those factors in the wrong direction when ranking "robot/driver strength" any one particular year versus overall "Team strength/community involvement/ popularity". There are better metrics to use that aren't as subjective. IMO. That's the thing with statistics make sure your main metrics are not subjective. I should know I had plenty of statistics classes to obtain my degree and that's the way statistics work primarily. Its math.

[Bryce Paputa]

Originally Posted by Boltman

Agreed..however this thread is on "Event Difficulty" and ranking relative team strength and ranking "best robots"... all I am saying is that Deans and Chairman's does not have a direct effect and may very well skew the choice based on those factors in the wrong direction when ranking "robot/driver strength" any one particular year versus overall "Team strength/community involvement/ popularity". There are better metrics to use that aren't as subjective. IMO. That's the thing with statistics make sure your main metrics are not subjective. I should know I had plenty of statistics classes to obtain my degree and that's the way statistics work primarily. Its math.

There are two different types of difficulty, difficulty in qualifications and eliminations, and difficulty for winning awards. These numbers should be a roughly equal combination of the two. They're definitely related to each other, but not strongly enough to use for picking. Our scouting process this year is extremely objective, but some important factors are very hard to objectivise. We haven't completely decided how to include these factors, but they will be included. These factors aren't chairman's success or other award history though, more like how well their robot complements our skills and how prepared they are.

[SeanKwobot141]

Originally Posted by Boltman

chairman's and dean's list don't enter into my scouting...as they have little to do with robot performance directly , there are better metrics

Really! I find this interesting Why Deans list?

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by SeanKwobot141

Really! I find this interesting Why Deans list?

Deans List: Celebrates outstanding student leaders whose passion for and effectiveness at attaining FIRST ideals is exemplary

How does that directly affect Robot/driver strength in any particular match or year?

Its a great accomplishment but not much of a factor in specific robot/drive team performance. I chose not to use those to scout unless its an absolute TIE. then these factors could help break a tie. But then again there are other more relevant metrics for performance on field IMO.