Rankings! I need your input

FIRST General Forum
1

Hi guys! It’s been a while since I’ve visited Chief Delphi, but I decided to hop back on to tell y’all what I’ve been working on (as a College student, yes, I know). OPR has been a thing for a while now, but there have been several problems with it. For one, it does not account for defense. Two, it does not account for resource deprivation that opposing teams might cause (such as a lack of boulders in the middle of the field in 2016, or a lack of cubes in 2018). Additionally, OPR has traditionally been calculated on a regional by regional basis, so you can’t compare a Michigan OPR to an Oklahoma OPR. Therefore, in the following rankings I tried to fix a variety of these issues, and I think I did relatively well, but I need your input to improve it. Below, I have included the rankings, as well as a description on how they are calculated. Thanks!

  1. 2056: 3.41673461789 | 3.84507085233 | 71.0
  2. 5172: 3.39775994781 | 3.20916672107 | 48.0
  3. 3538: 3.16429315069 | 3.4091841053 | 104.0 Detroit 1st Pick (Einsteins)
  4. 973: 3.52525565716 | 3.02350836744 | 57.0 Houston Captain (Einsteins)
  5. 254: 3.14110085645 | 3.15034330817 | 56.0 Houston Captain (Einsteins)
  6. 5406: 3.26885041892 | 3.00553177585 | 80.0 Detroit Captain (Einsteins)
  7. 3707: 3.47113423593 | 2.70727885703 | 80.0 Detroit Captain (Einsteins)
  8. 1114: 3.15410395486 | 2.96766140753 | 71.0
  9. 2910: 2.43725523705 | 3.46813648534 | 85.0
  10. 179: 2.80646010992 | 2.96149534215 | 50.0 Houston 1st Pick (Einsteins)
  11. 364: 2.44286996461 | 3.31291817661 | 46.0
  12. 346: 2.89121035097 | 2.80241368601 | 78.0 Detroit Captain (Einsteins)
  13. 225: 2.84548340606 | 2.82931141161 | 66.0
  14. 3310: 2.93142173381 | 2.68231297313 | 78.0 Houston 1st Pick (Einsteins)
  15. 971: 2.74275353742 | 2.83630773385 | 57.0 Houston Captain (Einsteins)
  16. 1678: 2.44137104041 | 3.00943443026 | 72.0 Houston Captain (Einsteins)
  17. 5460: 2.69338004095 | 2.71497683212 | 78.0
  18. 1323: 2.1537199228 | 3.15429007992 | 56.0 Houston 1st Pick (Einsteins)
  19. 2046: 2.74577756429 | 2.55771280649 | 93.0 Houston 1st Pick (Einsteins)
  20. 1676: 3.01023709552 | 2.21470258485 | 85.0
  21. 525: 2.85949207391 | 2.3492353607 | 44.0
  22. 1690: 2.38256626811 | 2.74661300692 | 67.0
  23. 2403: 2.68422065823 | 2.40228621126 | 53.0
  24. 2767: 2.62357686754 | 2.45708443456 | 72.0
  25. 148: 2.46638810977 | 2.49585188616 | 76.0 Houston Captain (Einsteins)
  26. 3015: 2.50207659181 | 2.39025649151 | 49.0
  27. 20: 2.69579655763 | 2.17812010025 | 46.0
  28. 195: 2.35806327843 | 2.46529705322 | 94.0 Detroit Captain (Einsteins)
  29. 133: 2.41960514261 | 2.39269863176 | 97.0 Detroit 1st Pick (Einsteins)
  30. 1241: 2.37033289138 | 2.42297171051 | 70.0
  31. 4488: 2.44667419777 | 2.34593947565 | 66.0
  32. 222: 2.7169478697 | 2.0663050804 | 67.0
  33. 987: 2.36038618177 | 2.41830536713 | 52.0
  34. 2481: 2.42306518853 | 2.34089645207 | 48.0
  35. 176: 2.4798848182 | 2.2536600247 | 68.0
  36. 3683: 2.22368888886 | 2.49827397687 | 70.0
  37. 846: 2.34461279554 | 2.25115261427 | 47.0
  38. 118: 2.43590480349 | 2.1188347998 | 85.0
  39. 5050: 2.45211630976 | 2.02740221163 | 70.0 Detroit Captain (Einsteins)
  40. 649: 2.17542072519 | 2.30241003185 | 45.0
  41. 3674: 2.21019317777 | 2.26331830794 | 69.0
  42. 1310: 2.6382641857 | 1.83493044217 | 79.0 Detroit 2nd Pick (Einsteins)
  43. 2851: 2.01825684441 | 2.45181038404 | 64.0
  44. 3641: 2.34215020947 | 2.11038338326 | 87.0
  45. 5687: 2.1000492988 | 2.34521320135 | 84.0
  46. 2383: 2.56243639659 | 1.85712930257 | 56.0
  47. 78: 1.88837500259 | 2.52463851389 | 86.0
  48. 910: 1.97086295541 | 2.36957936436 | 81.0
  49. 33: 1.96778585268 | 2.36196656704 | 92.0
  50. 2974: 1.85551355782 | 2.43417719076 | 67.0
  51. 230: 2.15350612216 | 2.12468242809 | 83.0 Detroit 3rd Pick (Einsteins)
  52. 1025: 2.1365318197 | 2.11101089373 | 61.0
  53. 2478: 2.04538890843 | 2.2004563563 | 49.0
  54. 1325: 1.92026854572 | 2.30639964068 | 70.0
  55. 4414: 1.96347405136 | 2.25112632227 | 50.0
  56. 870: 2.16838870407 | 2.02069338193 | 48.0
  57. 548: 2.24129833108 | 1.93055039178 | 75.0 Detroit 1st Pick (Einsteins)
  58. 2075: 2.19743823827 | 1.97351124037 | 65.0
  59. 1023: 1.94547227799 | 2.22493801899 | 68.0
  60. 5801: 2.18886251911 | 1.97023481241 | 49.0
  61. 1619: 1.80072805506 | 2.3439382486 | 46.0
  62. 2576: 2.33867921169 | 1.80376908149 | 33.0
  63. 2791: 1.86920247819 | 2.25467741275 | 54.0
  64. 6672: 2.07573649439 | 2.03975311959 | 62.0
  65. 2468: 2.0136039324 | 2.10000732636 | 70.0
  66. 188: 2.15213284966 | 1.95998959279 | 62.0
  67. 4607: 2.17685371241 | 1.92367351785 | 46.0 Detroit 2nd Pick (Einsteins)
  68. 217: 1.98416394807 | 2.11164000257 | 86.0 Detroit 1st Pick (Einsteins)
  69. 1507: 1.79740411694 | 2.29824476916 | 27.0
  70. 604: 1.78985239366 | 2.28879788992 | 46.0
  71. 4043: 2.19111665985 | 1.82729662817 | 68.0
  72. 234: 2.10142396946 | 1.91015490636 | 79.0
  73. 359: 1.96702203596 | 2.04449283028 | 79.0
  74. 1796: 1.71403536388 | 2.29243237013 | 65.0
  75. 6867: 2.46738748782 | 1.52999002668 | 48.0
  76. 3847: 2.06262286983 | 1.92010162343 | 79.0 Houston 1st Pick (Einsteins)
  77. 7426: 1.74710258776 | 2.19522505877 | 65.0
  78. 2052: 2.19600279488 | 1.73088569835 | 53.0 Detroit 3rd Pick (Einsteins)
  79. 2338: 1.73500756116 | 2.16360604956 | 26.0
  80. 245: 1.92795181687 | 1.96248510808 | 90.0
  81. 610: 1.74234853458 | 2.14644558838 | 66.0
  82. 6569: 2.04783331506 | 1.83489304917 | 62.0
  83. 930: 1.81595065653 | 2.06568528905 | 70.0 Detroit 1st Pick (Einsteins)
  84. 5407: 2.33123097399 | 1.54586546354 | 42.0
  85. 5190: 1.76423755394 | 2.11187311314 | 69.0
  86. 115: 1.53394870889 | 2.33726480237 | 32.0
  87. 207: 1.82802526851 | 2.03055082742 | 28.0
  88. 231: 1.78645995139 | 2.07206494993 | 64.0
  89. 1658: 1.85693916446 | 2.00030697373 | 33.0
  90. 125: 2.12882386797 | 1.71210874756 | 103.0
  91. 303: 1.82637309489 | 2.01089393135 | 95.0
  92. 4917: 1.98723666618 | 1.84241212836 | 65.0
  93. 694: 1.71382265941 | 2.10496773939 | 69.0
  94. 145: 1.99582807338 | 1.82288229083 | 32.0
  95. 4910: 1.9684302299 | 1.84716272734 | 69.0
  96. 2200: 1.93871637338 | 1.8704271328 | 66.0
  97. 2534: 2.10501111751 | 1.7014840134 | 59.0 Detroit 3rd Pick (Einsteins)
  98. 319: 1.86538910683 | 1.93927925398 | 89.0
  99. 103: 2.25644888715 | 1.54332548495 | 56.0
  100. 3620: 2.17607882614 | 1.62023883169 | 66.0

Key:
Rank. Team: Winningness | PointRank | Games Played

Winningness: The standard deviations away from the mean of how often you win. How often you win is calculated through a matrix similar to OPR, but the equation is similar to the one below. Later Regionals are weighted 20% more per week, and Playoff games are weighted 100% more.

R1 R2 Ect R3 Ect B1 B2 B3 = BluW
[1 1 0 1 0 -1 -1 -1] = [-1]

PointRank: The standard deviations away from the mean of how many more points you score than the other team. How many more points you score is calculated through a matrix similar to OPR, but the equation is more similar to the one below. Later Regionals are weighted 20% more per week, and Playoff games are weighted 100% more.

R1 R2 Ect R3 Ect B1 B2 B3 = RedWby18
[1 1 0 1 0 -1 -1 -1] = [18]

Rank: Calculated by adding Winningness and PointRank, then ranking the teams.

Example:
18. 1323: 2.1537199228 | 3.15429007992 | 56.0

1323 Did really well scoring points, and when looking at their record, they should be good at winning too right? They were 51-5. However, their losses came late in the season, and although they won the championship, It was the fact that they were paired with highly ranked 973 that their winningness score didn’t explode.

What I’d like: Other than comments about being more concise, I’d like everyone’s input on what I could take into consideration to improve the rankings. 2056 for example is a great team, but maybe not the #1 team in the world, and they might be number one by consistently crushing secluded Canadian teams. I’d love to hear feedback, and Happy Holidays!

2

I think your weights for weeks and elims are way to high. Especially for teams that had early regionals, almost all of their score is based off of their champs play. This creates inconsistent weighting between every single team which means that these values can’t be directly compared.

The number of games played seems to be a fairly irrelevent value to look at because teams in regionals vs districts will have much lower amounts of matches. Teams can also play in different amounts of competitions from one another and some regionals have more matches than others. So I really wouldn’t trust any conclusions based off of this number. Possibly (# of elim wins/competition)? But this would then penalize teams who are in districts and have difficult elim brackets in both districts champs and champs.

Also, I might have missed something but I don’t see how you actually ranked the teams. How much of a weight does winningness contribute to a teams ranking vs Point Rank?

I’m not quite sure how this analysis fixes your problems because fundementally, there are harder areas and teams that succeed (high winningness) in competitive events are treated the same. As well as teams who might have lost some matches in competitive events are being undervalued due to their losses to really powerful alliances.

1 Like
3

First things first nice content I see you put a lot into this.

One correction is my team (179) was at houston not detroit

I also dont see how Point rank gives you information more valuable than opr as it still is comparing teams at seperate events “scores”. For example we had a much higher OPR and average score (thus a higher point rank) at our 2nd regional over our 1st now while we did improve part of that statistical improvement is as a whole the defenders we were up against were weaker.

I am just saying you bring up factoring in things like game piece starvation and defense but i am not seeing where they are actually becoming a factor

4

Winningness has the same weight as Point Rank. I’d agree that the weekly weighting is too high, but without it, I start to see random teams start to pop up who didn’t make it to champs, but still did okay in the regionals they went to. I am trying to come up with an alternate solution to weighting that can somehow reward playing matches against more difficult teams more, and non essential games less. Also, winningness is not simply a team’s record. Winningness is put into a matrix to calculate how well a team does considering its matchups. If you have a lot of wins as 254’s teammate, you aren’t going to do as well as if you have a lot of wins against 254. Thanks for the input!

5

I apologize for the mishap, that was a last second addition :). Also, I’d like to expand upon your last point. You have many ways of giving value to your alliance in FRC. You can score points, you can defend areas of the field, and you can assist your teammates with getting game pieces (such as in 2019, if a hatch panel was misplaced and your teammate has ground intake, they could score that panel, and waste less time trying to pick one up elsewhere. Therefore, you sorta helped). I am measuring that value of the team in the Point Rank section. All of those things factor into a point difference that you can help your team gain. And again, this is not just an average of your point difference in all of your games. This is put into a matrix, so hard opponents and easy opponents will be taken into consideration. Thanks for the input!

6

Happy to see that my team made your top 100, by the skin of our teeth.

image
image1971×284 12.4 KB

7

I reformatted your list to make it a little easier on the eyes. Discourse supports tables pretty nicely.

Rank Team Winningness PointRank Games Played
1 2056 3.416734618 3.845070852 71
2 5172 3.397759948 3.209166721 48
3 3538 3.164293151 3.409184105 104.0 Detroit 1st Pick (Einsteins)
4 973 3.525255657 3.023508367 57.0 Houston Captain (Einsteins)
5 254 3.141100856 3.150343308 56.0 Houston Captain (Einsteins)
6 5406 3.268850419 3.005531776 80.0 Detroit Captain (Einsteins)
7 3707 3.471134236 2.707278857 80.0 Detroit Captain (Einsteins)
8 1114 3.154103955 2.967661408 71
9 2910 2.437255237 3.468136485 85
10 179 2.80646011 2.961495342 50.0 Houston 1st Pick (Einsteins)
11 364 2.442869965 3.312918177 46
12 346 2.891210351 2.802413686 78.0 Detroit Captain (Einsteins)
13 225 2.845483406 2.829311412 66
14 3310 2.931421734 2.682312973 78.0 Houston 1st Pick (Einsteins)
15 971 2.742753537 2.836307734 57.0 Houston Captain (Einsteins)
16 1678 2.44137104 3.00943443 72.0 Houston Captain (Einsteins)
17 5460 2.693380041 2.714976832 78
18 1323 2.153719923 3.15429008 56.0 Houston 1st Pick (Einsteins)
19 2046 2.745777564 2.557712806 93.0 Houston 1st Pick (Einsteins)
20 1676 3.010237096 2.214702585 85
21 525 2.859492074 2.349235361 44
22 1690 2.382566268 2.746613007 67
23 2403 2.684220658 2.402286211 53
24 2767 2.623576868 2.457084435 72
25 148 2.46638811 2.495851886 76.0 Houston Captain (Einsteins)
26 3015 2.502076592 2.390256492 49
27 20 2.695796558 2.1781201 46
28 195 2.358063278 2.465297053 94.0 Detroit Captain (Einsteins)
29 133 2.419605143 2.392698632 97.0 Detroit 1st Pick (Einsteins)
30 1241 2.370332891 2.422971711 70
31 4488 2.446674198 2.345939476 66
32 222 2.71694787 2.06630508 67
33 987 2.360386182 2.418305367 52
34 2481 2.423065189 2.340896452 48
35 176 2.479884818 2.253660025 68
36 3683 2.223688889 2.498273977 70
37 846 2.344612796 2.251152614 47
38 118 2.435904803 2.1188348 85
39 5050 2.45211631 2.027402212 70.0 Detroit Captain (Einsteins)
40 649 2.175420725 2.302410032 45
41 3674 2.210193178 2.263318308 69
42 1310 2.638264186 1.834930442 79.0 Detroit 2nd Pick (Einsteins)
43 2851 2.018256844 2.451810384 64
44 3641 2.342150209 2.110383383 87
45 5687 2.100049299 2.345213201 84
46 2383 2.562436397 1.857129303 56
47 78 1.888375003 2.524638514 86
48 910 1.970862955 2.369579364 81
49 33 1.967785853 2.361966567 92
50 2974 1.855513558 2.434177191 67
51 230 2.153506122 2.124682428 83.0 Detroit 3rd Pick (Einsteins)
52 1025 2.13653182 2.111010894 61
53 2478 2.045388908 2.200456356 49
54 1325 1.920268546 2.306399641 70
55 4414 1.963474051 2.251126322 50
56 870 2.168388704 2.020693382 48
57 548 2.241298331 1.930550392 75.0 Detroit 1st Pick (Einsteins)
58 2075 2.197438238 1.97351124 65
59 1023 1.945472278 2.224938019 68
60 5801 2.188862519 1.970234812 49
61 1619 1.800728055 2.343938249 46
62 2576 2.338679212 1.803769081 33
63 2791 1.869202478 2.254677413 54
64 6672 2.075736494 2.03975312 62
65 2468 2.013603932 2.100007326 70
66 188 2.15213285 1.959989593 62
67 4607 2.176853712 1.923673518 46.0 Detroit 2nd Pick (Einsteins)
68 217 1.984163948 2.111640003 86.0 Detroit 1st Pick (Einsteins)
69 1507 1.797404117 2.298244769 27
70 604 1.789852394 2.28879789 46
71 4043 2.19111666 1.827296628 68
72 234 2.101423969 1.910154906 79
73 359 1.967022036 2.04449283 79
74 1796 1.714035364 2.29243237 65
75 6867 2.467387488 1.529990027 48
76 3847 2.06262287 1.920101623 79.0 Houston 1st Pick (Einsteins)
77 7426 1.747102588 2.195225059 65
78 2052 2.196002795 1.730885698 53.0 Detroit 3rd Pick (Einsteins)
79 2338 1.735007561 2.16360605 26
80 245 1.927951817 1.962485108 90
81 610 1.742348535 2.146445588 66
82 6569 2.047833315 1.834893049 62
83 930 1.815950657 2.065685289 70.0 Detroit 1st Pick (Einsteins)
84 5407 2.331230974 1.545865464 42
85 5190 1.764237554 2.111873113 69
86 115 1.533948709 2.337264802 32
87 207 1.828025269 2.030550827 28
88 231 1.786459951 2.07206495 64
89 1658 1.856939164 2.000306974 33
90 125 2.128823868 1.712108748 103
91 303 1.826373095 2.010893931 95
92 4917 1.987236666 1.842412128 65
93 694 1.713822659 2.104967739 69
94 145 1.995828073 1.822882291 32
95 4910 1.96843023 1.847162727 69
96 2200 1.938716373 1.870427133 66
97 2534 2.105011118 1.701484013 59.0 Detroit 3rd Pick (Einsteins)
98 319 1.865389107 1.939279254 89
99 103 2.256448887 1.543325485 56
100 3620 2.176078826 1.620238832 66
3 Likes
8

One way to fix this is to use a constant for “improvement” for every subsequent event that a team goes to. This allows you to assign expected values for “competitiveness” for events. This would naturally boost the weighting of champs because everyone there already competed at multiple events.

Once you create a value for the “toughness” of an event, you can compare values from event to event. This will allow you to compile team’s performances at a natural progression for the season.

9

41st place hype!!! Also, great job on this. Eve. Though it may need some adjustments, I’ve always wanted a way to rank the teams from different fields, to see how they compare without actually being able to compete against each other.

10

This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.