FRCTop25.com- Submit Your Picks for Week 1!

[Mike Starke]

Hey all!
Well Week 1 Regionals are now over! There have been some excellent matches played this weekend! Hope you all had fun participating and watching the Regionals!

FRCTop25.com is now accepting submissions for your Top 25 teams in FRC through week one. Head on over to FRCTop25.com to make your picks! Please please please read the instructions and rules on the voting submission page (please remember you can't vote for teams who haven't played yet). You have until 9PM EST on Tuesday to cast your votes!

If you're unaware of what FRCTop25.com is, please refer to this thread! http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=92941

Thank you for all your support! Justin and I, as I'm sure the rest of you, look forward to seeing who you guys vote as the top robots through week one!

- Mike and Justin

[Justin Montois]

Woohoo! I cannot wait to start seeing the lists come in.

Just so there is no confusion, Each week will NOT be an isolated list of only that weeks teams. Once a team has competed, it can be included in your list from then on. IE in your week 2 list, teams that competed week 1 can still be included.

[remulasce]

Originally Posted by 340x4xLife

Woohoo! I cannot wait to start seeing the lists come in.

Just so there is no confusion, Each week will NOT be an isolated list of only that weeks teams. Once a team has competed, it can be included in your list from then on. IE in your week 2 list, teams that competed week 1 can still be included.

I think this unfairly benefits early week competitors. Take, for example, a pretty good robot in week one. They obviously are better than the rest in week one, so are rated highly. In week two, they don't compete, but they still are better than average and thus are rated highly. By week six, they have gotten five weeks of good reviews, when another team shows up with a demigod as a robot, and their drivers have the force. They are ranked really highly, and the week one teams is ranked a lot lower now that people have seen the demigod, but the week one team has been ranked highly by more people, so in total rankings, they win.

TLDR; you can't keep the voting window open longer for some teams than other teams, and you can't vote until you see all the teams.

[Mike Starke]

These are all great concerns! Thank you so much for all of your feedback! Please remember, we have a secret list of "experts" who will also be voting. So you can decide which list you think will be accurate; between the public poll and the expert poll. Our experts know that they need to go through each regional and spend a lot of time sorting through data and teams. On some of their submissions you will also see why they voted why they did. It's in my opinion that regional biases (the reason why no NJ teams made that one list) will get balanced out by the number of voters that we will have. Some one may heavily weight Alamo, while someone will heavily weight FLR. So i think it will be well rounded by the end. We have over 20 submissions so far, with just being open for about a day. We'll see how it goes.

And please remember, this is just for fun.

[Justin Montois]

I'm going to echo what Mike said in that this is just for fun! Are some people going to vote based on little to no knowledge? Yes. Are people going to disagree with the eventual week 1 top 25? Yes. Just try to have fun with this and if you want to disagree with someone's list then feel free to submit your own list.

We fully expected this and will enjoy reading the discussion.

Also, if you feel as though you don't have enough knowledge to fill out 25 teams out of the over 200 teams that competed week 1 then your more then welcome to either do some more research to become more informed (looking at OPR would be a great place to start) or you could hold off and vote next week.

Thank you all for your feedback and participation.

[GGCO]

Ok, this is a feature request.

Filling out 25 boxes is tedious and I can't even think of 25 teams that I like. How about allowing users to enter just 5 or something like that.

[rees2001]

Originally Posted by GGCO

Ok, this is a feature request.

Filling out 25 boxes is tedious and I can't even think of 25 teams that I like. How about allowing users to enter just 5 or something like that.

Agreed, I would say to limit it to a top 10 list or 15 at most. I got through the first 10 and then didn't have enough info to make educatedish assessments on other teams.

[BGiraud]

Originally Posted by lineskier

Here's mine.

My ranking is based solely off the numbers.
Total Points Scored in Qualifying Matches.

Proves the FIRST ranking algorithm is seriously flawed
especially this year
for BAE team 40 was ranked 12th...
had our team not hit the estop button, we would have been ranked 11th.
(we capped 2, maybe 3 tubes all competition)
absolutely crazy
we would have been ranked ahead of a team with a 2 tube autonomous!!!?????

The following form submission was sent.
1: = 33
2: = 40
3: = 131
4: = 148
5: = 1519
6: = 1918
7: = 836
8: = 2137
9: = 138
10: = 176
11: = 16
12: = 69
13: = 78
14: = 302
15: = 201
16: = 126
17: = 58
18: = 2337
19: = 894
20: = 3074
21: = 118
22: = 494
23: = 811
24: = 175
25: = 67
Mentor/Student = Mentor
ChiefDelphi_Username = lineskier

Yeh. I don't get it. Not a single team from the NJ regional? I am losing faith that I will put a lot of weight in these results.
I am not judging your opinion, but rather highlighting the difficulty involved in developing the system.

[Vikesrock]

Originally Posted by BGiraud

Yeh. I don't get it. Not a single team from the NJ regional? I am losing faith that I will put a lot of weight in these results.
I am not judging your opinion, but rather highlighting the difficulty involved in developing the system.

His vote was not based on opinion. He used statistics based on the final score of qualification matches to generate that list.

It's clear that the results of such a query at questionable at best. The 8th team on the list (the new one) did not make elims at Granite State and some of the great teams from New Jersey such as 2016 and 1676 didn't make the list at all.

I'm personally eager to see both the user and expert polls to see what everybody else thought of the robots that played this weekend.

[Adam Freeman]

Originally Posted by lineskier

25: = 67

Interesting a team that essentially sat still for 5 straight matches would even get a vote.

Its a great robot....when it moves.

Thank you.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Adam Freeman

Interesting a team that essentially sat still for 5 straight matches would even get a vote.

Its a great robot....when it moves.

Thank you.

Well, I only saw the eliminations at Kettering...

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by lineskier

:-D eek...

that's one thing about this years game, it seems there are only a few powerhouses, and they tend to define the matches they participate in.
The consequence of this: when you look solely at the numbers, some teams sneak in there.

Just proves the need for me to speed up the development of my match by match analysis, to find a team's estimated contribution to a single match. That way point inflation doesn't occur like it did here .

I was happy with many of the teams on the top 25 so I chose to stick with it, knowing there would be some mistakes. Also I wanted to avoid any regional bias I had.

one question... did you sit still for 5 qualifying matches or were they other types?
my numbers are based solely off qualifying matches.

By not including a single team from the New Jersey regional?

[BGiraud]

Originally Posted by lineskier

teamnumber opoints/nummatches
217 84.0000
2056 79.3000
33 65.5000
1676 65.1111
1126 64.9000
148 63.6667
40 60.6000
131 58.0000
2016 58.0000
1218 56.6667
191 56.5000
1519 55.2000
156 54.1000
16 53.3333
836 52.8000
340 51.2000
138 50.2000
176 49.4000
2234 49.1111
3015 48.0000
69 47.9000
118 47.1111
78 47.1000
1918 45.9167
1089 45.5556
1923 45.2222
229 45.0000
1559 44.7000
126 44.0000
25 43.7778

WOW! 7 teams from NJ.
I agree about including elim matches. High seeds will get favor, but I guess it would be deserved. This would help out good teams in a regional with fewer good teams to support them in qualifying matches.

[mwtidd]

Originally Posted by BGiraud

WOW! 7 teams from NJ.
I agree about including elim matches. High seeds will get favor, but I guess it would be deserved. This would help out good teams in a regional with fewer good teams to support them in qualifying matches.

you see major point inflation when you include the finals.
not sure which is better for a top 25...

theres one thing thats still for sure, 217 is a monster
#1 overall
#1 minibot
#2 robot (behind 148 )

this is including elims...

217 91.9375
2056 86.3750
148 85.1429
1676 79.9286
16 77.3571
2016 77.0000
33 73.6111
1126 72.7500
1519 68.2143
303 68.1538
40 67.3529
176 67.0000
340 66.4667
131 66.1765
25 61.5000
1923 61.3000
1518 60.8824
175 60.2000
2137 58.2778
191 58.0833
1918 56.3333
229 54.7692
118 54.6154
3074 53.9231
156 53.9000
138 53.8889
1218 53.3333
2228 53.2000
811 52.8462
69 52.3636

[BGiraud]

Originally Posted by lineskier

you see major point inflation when you include the finals.
not sure which is better for a top 25...

theres one thing thats still for sure, 217 is a monster

this is including elims...

217 91.9375
2056 86.3750
148 85.1429
1676 79.9286
16 77.3571
2016 77.0000
33 73.6111
1126 72.7500
1519 68.2143
303 68.1538
40 67.3529
176 67.0000
340 66.4667
131 66.1765
25 61.5000
1923 61.3000
1518 60.8824
175 60.2000
2137 58.2778
191 58.0833
1918 56.3333
229 54.7692
118 54.6154
3074 53.9231
156 53.9000
138 53.8889
1218 53.3333
2228 53.2000
811 52.8462
69 52.3636

Yes. There is an issue with including elims. The second alliance pick. As an example, 303 was a good enough scorer, but we (1676/2016/303) used them as a defender and they jumped from off the list to 10th on the list due to the alliance score in elims. Not really in the spirit of what you are trying to accomplish with this list.
There is value in what you are doing with this data. Thank you for sharing. I am not the kind of guy to do the full research on 25+ teams to submit a fully proper entry, but using your analysis as a starting point I may feel confident enough to submit an entry. Maybe after I see data for week 2 as well.