For the Gull Lake regional, the link was not working when I ran the stats so no data is up there from that regional. I will work on getting that information soon. In addition, I only ran the data for Qualifications, not Eliminations.
Do you have an aggregate average for all matches? (a histogram showing the distribution would be really cool as well) It would be interesting to compare against the predictions from this thread.
Also, I agree very much with the point about balancing. Despite the fact that most teams could not score enough points to make up for a balance, balancing seemed to be a complete afterthought in most of the matches that I watched (the matches involving 148 in the elims being a spectacular exception).
To exemplify how much teams are struggling, notice that every regional, with the exception of San Diego, has an average alliance score under 20.
If you aren’t sinking in any balls, JUST GO FOR THE BRIDGES. PLEASE.
Interesting this year is the huge gap between the ‘deep’ regionals, and the ‘shallow’ ones. Last year there was a gap… but IIRC the shallow ones were not as far off the deep ones.
While I agree that an average match score of around 15 points is not great, I don’t think it is a sign of teams doing worse than is typical. My rule of thumb from the last 9 years of FIRST has been the mean robot can score it’s starting load in the middle task. Otherwise, it can do the main scoring task once give of take a half. For example, this year that would be 2 balls in the middle goal. times 3 and you’ve got 12 points. Last year, 1.5 tubes scored per robot (although the Minibot kind of messed that one up). In 2010, 1.5 soccer balls per robot per match.
I just threw this together for my own interests. Simply alliance score averages for each event, separated by Qualification, QF, SF, F, and all Eliminations.
As you see, scores essentially doubled between Qualifications and QF.
The averages you have listed in the last column seem to be based on the averages per event rather than for all matches at once. The difference probably wouldn’t be too much, but it probably will be noticeable.
Attached are two histograms of winning (and tying) and losing (and tying) alliance scores in qualifying rounds at the Granite State Regional in 2012. Interesting distribution shapes… winning scores are essentially normal, but losing scores are very positive skewed. 84 matches were played, the mean winning score was 25.4 points, mean losing score was 11.8 points. Standard deviation of winning scores was 11.2, standard deviation of losing scores was 8. Max winning score was 52, max losing score was 30.
Thats correct, it was just easier to do. I’ll throw an accurate average together and post it here.
EDIT:
Here are the total averages for Week 1, not just each regional averaged together. The difference is negligible.
All Qualification: 15.36
Quarter-Finals: 32.09
Semi-Finals: 39.01
Finals: 46.18
All Eliminations: 36.00
