# Galileo standings

i used 1251 power system to get the ranking. The number next to the team number is where they ranked out of everyone. This will help everyones scouting but I feel if you use this system as your only way of scouting you need to learn more about how the system works.

1. 231 2
2. 56 8
3. 254 9
4. 1492 10
5. 1024 11
6. 1305 12
7. 126 20
8. 237 22
9. 356 23
10. 68 25
11. 103 28
12. 801 30
13. 1515 32
14. 25 40
15. 281 45
16. 1648 61
17. 75 63
18. 358 80
19. 272 89
20. 16 91
21. 64 94
22. 1089 106
23. 38 107
24. 1626 130
25. 1280 145
26. 1596 147
27. 178 148
28. 945 152
29. 316 154
30. 224 159

I don’t get this. It is incomplete, and the numbers don’t make any sense

team 231 is ranked first and was ranked 2 overall etc…
i had bigger spacing between numbers but it does not show when i posted sorry

But what is all this based on?

we’re not in the top 8, corey better get his act together

1251’s Scouting data, look at this thread.

Oh wow, its all based on win/losses… then it isn’t that great.
That was very much luck this year, well more than previous years, because there are three teams per alliance each match, randomly selected.
You should add in other factors, like in the finals… it would be a lot more accurate.
EDIT:
ok, it has some other factors, but it is still not the best:

How Does it Work?
The Relative Power Ranking system looks at multiple aspects of teams performance. The first step is to determine a Winning Percentage for each team.It then goes on to determine a strength of season. To do this, we first look at who were the opponents of a team, and then go further to look at who were the opponents of those opponents (referred to as “Opponents Opponents”). With these win percents, a season strength can be determined. To these values, wins are then compared. A win over a good team increases a teams rank a lot,where as a win over a mediocre or low team only increases the rank a little. On the same token, a loss to a good team is expected, and thus does not impact the ranking significantly, where a loss to a lower ranked team is not as expected and will lower a teams rank. The final aspect of the ranking system is to prevent a team from destroying a low rank team and increasing their rank tremendously. We look at the 90th percentile of margin of victory. This gives us a cap to prevent a team from running up a score. It is the TechTigers way of looking at “Qualifying Points” without actually using the US FIRST Qualifying Points system. A good win is one in which a team wins by only the 90th percentile margin of victory, anything more than that is “wasted” points.

Not to mention that some of the results are wrong… IE 294’s record. But still, it is a good system. Hopefully it isn’t doomed to the fate of the BCS

WOOOOOOOO 2nd!!! cant wait cheesey poofs are right behind us with an awsome bot that we got to see at the sacramento regional. our nj partners team 237 in 8th and our philly partners MOE team 365 in 9th should be a great time

There are several errors listing teams that are not in this division.

Would the creator please review the listing and formula used to help us all out.

I’m one of the creators of the 1251 RPI along with Mr.B

now we pulled in the data we could find in usfirst.org

the team names we found by going into the websites and looking for the “nickname” if we didn’t find it we used the name that stood out EX: ATCMHS robotics (name of 1251 school but we are the TechTigers)

if you have some of the data or team names that have to be corrected please let me know and I will make sure it gets fixed

now this is based on match data and we do not mean to say any bad things about other robots all we show are standings of the robots and how they did at their regionals

Sebas

The team names were obtained through the Karthik’s white paper here: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/p…gle&paperid=490 which includes teams going to nationals and their names, any team not listed was obtained through the website listed on usfirst.org or the school name.

All match information for UCF and Palmetto was obtained through first hand accounts of the regionals. For the Southern California and Arizona Regionals students attending sent us the data, and Chief Delphi had a post for Finger Lakes. Finally all other regionals were obtained from the Offical USFIRST.org site. We are aware that some data may be faulty, but it is as accurate as we could be with the limited data sets. This is not a “be-all-end-all” method of scouting, and neglects many many factors of a robot. This is a way of relatively ranking one team next to another to determine some strength attributes, and should only be used as such. Please don’t turn this into “We are ranked higher than you, so we are better than you”, it places no emphasis on external factors, and looks at win percentage / strength of schedule / and margin of victory to relatively rank teams competing. There are far better methods and procedures for determining this, and we at 1251 encourage you to develop your own systems and share them here on Chief Delphi. The more scouting data and representations of team performance the better we all will be at scouting. Use this as just one more tool in your arsenal.

-Allen

As Kyle said it isnt even close to complete it is missing statistics for atleast the manchester regional. So you only have half of 126’s record and none of 121’s the data is certainly not right if there is info missing for atleast 2 regionalwinners