Here is an excel file of the final match results and final rankings from the 2012 IRI.
These results have been independently evaluated and confirmed by the accounting firm of Dean, Simmons and Kamen, LLP.
There are two tabs in the excel file. One for match results and one for final rankings.
2012 IRI FINAL MATCH DATA.xlsx (20.2 KB)
2012 IRI FINAL MATCH DATA.xlsx (20.2 KB)
Anyone want to tell me how the bridge points were calculated? We tripped three time and had one of the lowest BP’s.
One of the FTA’s or the lead scorer can confirm this, but I believe the max bridge points in qualification matches was 20, the scoring system won’t let you do any more than that. The scores were manually adjusted to add the extra 20 for any triples.
I don’t see a final ranking in this file. Am I just being stupid or can nobody else see it either? All I see is match data.
Down at the bottom you should see a tab that says “Final Ranking”
I always like to point out how win-loss record does not matter when it comes to alliance selection, unless you win enough to be picking. Highest seeded team not picked - #13. Lowest seeded team picked - #58. 6 teams with 6-3 record not picked, 7 teams with losing records picked, including all 3 of the winning alliance’s picks.
Teams need to be more concerned with performing well and marketing your abilities than with winning or losing during qualification matches.
That’s funny. After a terrible Friday of qualification matches, we were 2-4 and ranked 50th.
Coming into Saturday morning with 3 matches to play, my only goal was to showcase our scoring abilities and successfully triple balance in those 3 matches, regardless of winning matches.
Of course you have to balance your own needs with those of your partners. If we were all out of Top8 contention, I suggested we all try to highlight our abilities and triple regardless of the score. Only in our last match was 3322 ranked in the Top8. I let them dicated the strategy, since it was important for them to win the match.
We ended up winning all 3 matches…but only triple balancing in one of them, for various reasons.
A strategy like that might be beneficial if you find yourself ranked, say, 100 of 100 in your division … :rolleyes:
I guess i didn’t word that too well. What I was trying to say is, if you find yourself 6-3 don’t get too confident, if you find yourself 3-6 don’t count yourself out, and especially don’t overreact if you happen to drop from 20th seed to 30th seed sometime during the weekend after you lose one match or vice versa.
I was also told that it was only possible for them to add those 20 extra points to each team’s tele-op score. If this is true it would explain why your bridge points seem to be low.
Here is the OPR data for IRI if anyone is interested in looking at it. It is not adjusted for bridge balancing.
IRIopr.xlsx (15.8 KB)
IRIopr.xlsx (15.8 KB)
341s OPR was 11 points (!!) higher than the next highest. That is just ridonkulous.
-Brando
Chris and Matt are right. During Qualification rounds FMS can only handle a maximum of 20 Bridge Points because during the regular season that is all that was allowed. Bravo (the scorekeeper) added the 20 points manually if there was a triple balance. There was no way to record these as bridge points so that is why the ranking sheet and the displays at the end of the matches are inaccurate.
methinks the column labels for BP and TP may be swapped 
Here are the OPR numbers including total, hybrid, bridge and teleop OPR.
OPR Rank/Team/OPR/OPR Hybrid/OPR Bridge/OPR Teleop
1 341 52.46 15.85 10.14 18.46
2 624 41.46 14.10 9.91 16.15
3 118 37.00 2.92 6.60 23.44
4 1023 36.84 8.30 10.66 11.37
5 2826 36.57 13.18 2.08 24.41
6 67 36.40 15.39 5.72 17.20
7 2056 34.26 12.73 7.56 17.51
8 233 33.98 7.88 5.24 22.92
9 469 33.97 3.13 4.65 23.59
10 51 33.80 5.29 10.45 16.84
11 68 33.00 12.51 4.30 9.13
12 2614 32.60 8.62 9.28 10.69
13 33 31.66 6.00 10.10 16.07
14 48 31.23 10.14 8.22 13.18
15 16 31.16 10.80 4.17 12.57
16 1676 30.72 9.35 5.87 16.47
17 2168 29.88 11.47 -1.05 8.35
18 548 29.79 9.43 9.93 11.04
19 1114 29.09 9.60 2.50 15.39
20 125 28.79 11.10 3.75 13.52
21 359 27.54 5.05 2.99 22.88
22 1741 26.97 8.94 7.06 7.65
23 1714 26.68 8.19 7.21 10.81
24 340 26.55 11.95 6.84 7.14
25 111 26.11 13.99 2.53 9.62
26 148 25.98 5.50 8.57 14.30
27 1640 25.74 9.67 5.76 7.46
28 3322 25.39 9.26 6.85 11.35
29 330 24.37 1.28 7.43 13.74
30 2590 23.89 7.17 2.41 14.07
31 192 23.38 5.50 1.32 9.42
32 2337 23.03 13.71 6.07 3.84
33 868 22.41 6.71 2.15 13.22
34 3947 21.38 8.92 6.36 8.84
35 1732 20.87 7.59 6.78 8.73
36 2194 20.04 4.29 5.26 7.30
37 234 20.03 9.86 3.93 6.91
38 573 19.91 4.99 6.49 11.93
39 3357 19.66 4.22 1.81 9.60
40 2949 19.58 6.34 5.49 8.42
41 3193 19.27 7.12 6.81 6.75
42 503 19.26 7.25 0.45 14.00
43 461 19.20 2.85 4.65 8.39
44 2834 19.16 7.60 6.13 1.79
45 2481 19.11 10.93 0.63 4.14
46 3940 18.77 7.95 6.06 1.81
47 973 18.77 7.22 6.92 4.49
48 447 18.67 3.70 -1.89 13.57
49 3138 17.80 6.60 3.53 9.80
50 71 17.13 5.48 1.72 3.15
51 1538 16.15 9.76 2.11 6.29
52 2054 15.78 7.04 3.04 6.37
53 45 14.67 7.20 7.00 3.60
54 27 14.11 2.07 3.42 10.23
55 4334 13.56 2.18 4.55 3.62
56 399 13.37 6.08 -0.32 7.32
57 829 13.08 2.10 -1.89 8.55
58 781 12.65 1.40 5.37 7.35
59 379 12.20 6.15 -2.11 8.62
60 3310 10.97 7.14 4.09 -2.50
61 245 10.58 6.33 0.51 4.13
62 217 9.73 6.88 0.54 2.14
63 1730 9.40 9.72 0.91 0.40
64 744 9.20 3.82 1.57 4.06
65 772 8.73 2.75 5.86 1.73
66 1592 8.10 2.00 -3.31 8.58
67 907 7.51 0.21 -2.47 10.07
68 292 3.19 3.54 -2.67 4.06
69 1902 1.37 3.63 -0.31 -1.24
70 1024 -0.43 0.71 -2.81 2.70
Anyone know what matches had triples in them?
Here are the ones I recall off the top of my head.
3 triples were in matches involving 48 - Matches 28, 62, and 99.
Whether or not they were helpful or particularly entertaining for yours truly, I leave as an exercise for the reader to determine. 
233 lost Match 75 to a triple after they were leading.
2826 lost Match 97 to a triple after they were leading.
340 tripled twice, one time with 341 and 447, in Match 72, defeating 469, 359, and 2337. I believe their other triple came during Match 101.
By the way, why did all the scouting geniuses picking for elims overlook 3940? They are peppered throughout these qualifying triple results.
1592 tripled twice but 1 was disallowed. Match 57 when we were with 1538, this was the disallowed triple, and match 103 when we were with 340 and 1023.
They were also close to 4334’s width, too. I am disappoint.
In match 76, teams 27, 4334, and 2194 balanced even though they didn’t need the triple balance.