Hi,
Just wanted to know how skill points are calculated in the VRC games. In some brief conversations with some other teams they said they think if you win, you get the other teams points. So I wanted to make sure if this is right.
Think you are referring to Strength of Schedule Point (SP) , and not skill point.
And yes, that’s how SP is calculated.
All teams in a match get SPs. The SPs are the losing team’s score, which is why some teams will score for the opposing team if winning by a lot.
For example, if the blue alliance has 50 points and the red alliance has 10 at the end of a match, all the teams in that match receive 10 SPs, not just the winners.
SP = Stupid Points on our team.
well, they’re used to rank you so… they’re definitely not stupid to get. Stupid to use and to rank teams, yes. But i wouldn’t call them that as it makes them less important in your eyes, meaning your subliminally giving yourself a disadvantage.
Yeah it’s a joke.
Jokes aside we try to be undefeated but yes it’s important that you don’t win by too much or it could hurt you. Hence why we’ve called the that since 2010
I sometimes see teams stop scoring with a big lead to help their SPs. That makes no sense – the margin of victory means nothing for SPs, it’s only the losing alliance’s point total that counts. So, winning 80-10 gives you the same SPs as winning 11-10, there is no SP penalty for winning big.
The SP system certainly has its weaknesses, but it is based on the idea that a match than ends 50-45 means that the winning alliance played a good alliance that almost won. Winning 50-3 is a blowout, and doesn’t mean much for the winning alliance. Likewise (in SP terms) winning 10-5 is not as good as 50-45, because it means that one weak alliance beat another weak alliance.
SPs are a pretty crude measure, but in 12 years of VEX, I’ve never seen a popular proposal for an alternative that didn’t have its own weaknesses.
I’d prefer that one day we have enough teams to do a JV/Varsity split and blow outs aren’t as common.
Here in Wisconsin, we have realy pushed to have separate High School and Middle School events and fewer blended events. This came about because as the program has grown in the state, we have reached the point where the top middle school teams just cannot compete with the top high school teams. Largely, because many of the high school teams are made up of students who competed in middle school and are much farther ahead when they hit high school. Also, we were not getting many middle school teams qualifying for their state event from blended events. That has reduced the number of blowouts. Although, they still occur. Then Autonomous Points and Strength points get to be more important. We strive to have no less that 6 qualifying rounds and often have 8 in events no larger than 50. That tends to cut down on the number of ties, so Autonomous Points and Strength points become a little less crucial than in a 64 team event with 5 qualifying rounds.
Hi, I hadn’t actually realised that SP existed, I thought that teams were scored on the combined score that their alliance makes and ranked accordingly after a certain number of matches (like in IQ). Could someone please explain this to me? Thanks in advance,
Atlantis
My first response is get your hands on the rules. It is all explained in there.
At the end of each match you get awarded SP (Strength of schedule points) based on the overall amount of points scored by your opponent. The reasons for these points is to allow teams that have a bad/unlucky qualifying matches to be recognised and placed higher as better teams will score more against you. This system does not always work out as it may incentivize top teams to score less/score for the opponent.
The bit you specifically are looking for is in the Tournament section, but you very much should read through the entire thing if you plan on competing.
The problem with Melbourne is that we have one or two good teams with the rest being pretty bad. This means that we have a really good robot, but we lost in quarter finals due to not being able to pick the right team. Also team selection is pretty stupid. If a team has denied being picked, they can’t get picked again.
Be the change you seek. My advice is that you should work to elevate the level of competition. A way to do that is to reach out and mentor teams not doing as well as you are doing. Share your knowledge and experience with other teams. Hold workshop events and community outreach events. Travel to other schools or clubs if possible, but If the distances are too great for travel, hold virtual meet-ups. Early in the season, put together tutorials and videos about a starter bot. Share ideas about improving the starter bot. Your own teams will benefit greatly from doing this, and having a bigger pool of stronger competitors will improve you. Read the guidelines for “Community” and “Service” awards, and think about why REC wants to encourage that.
While I understand your point, and see that you’re speaking in shorthand, stating that the one thing causes the other is probably not true. It certainly reads like a logical fallacy. I’m not saying I know you’re wrong, because I obviously don’t.
But I am saying I’d advise any team I’m working with to control as many variables as you possibly can and to make the best decisions you can along the way and throughout and across seasons with the long view in mind.
And when you get an outcome you don’t like, own it.
If a weak competitive field caused your loss, change the competitive field. That really is something you can affect. And effect.
I used to be of that mind. I now think the rule is much deeper than it initially appears. For me, the consequences of the rule were best shown by “what if” replays of alliance picks in tournaments we had just attended. Jason Neagle, Coach and teacher at EC3, deconstructed the top rounds of alliance selection for some of the tournaments. Listening to him talk about the game at that level is very enlightening. Usually, his insights serve to clarify how things work in subtle ways. But sometimes I’ve learned that things I thought were simple and that I understood implicitly, I didn’t understand at all. The alliance selection rules were like that for me.
And it doesn’t matter if the rule is, as you say, “stupid.” It’s the rule we play under, and we’ve got to use it and understand it.
@Sporeray Thanks for answering my question - it makes more sense now
@536Mentor and @puzzler7 - Sorry I will read through the manual ASAP.
Thanks,
Atlantis
That doesn’t really make sense, unless your robot is only meant to complement a good robot somehow (in which case, you are silly for building that kind of robot, knowing the level of competition). Even if your partner is useless, shouldn’t you be able to carry them against two useless opponents? Or if you went against the only better opponent, why didn’t one of you seed high enough to pick each other? I can’t think of how being the only good team or one of a couple would make it hard to win.
@Robotic boomerangs, @Atlantis, @Sporeray, and @meng:
I used to think SP’s were based on the score of your opponent. Later, I found out I was mistaken.
According to the manual (PDF found here; emphasis mine):
Strength of Schedule Points (SP) are equal to the score of the losing alliance, even if that is you and not your opponents. If you lose a match, your SP’s are equal to your points, not your opponent’s points. SP’s are only equal to your opponent’s points when you win (or tie). Your opponents receive the same number of SP’s as you.
Edited to add:
The more points the losing team scores, the more points everyone will get. Increasing your opponent’s score helps all of you by increasing the SP’s for everyone in the match. Decreasing your own score does not help anyone (like @Rick TYler said), and if you are winning, your own score does not help or harm your ranking, while if you are losing, decreasing your own score only decreases your ranking.
In my opinion, if you have a chance of losing, you should try your best to increase your own score as much as you can, unless you have a greater chance of winning by decreasing your opponents’ score (this may be the case if you have a defensive robot).
If you are sure you will win, then at some point during the match, you can switch to scoring for your opponent to increase your SP’s. (You should still make sure, of course, that you will definitely end up with more points than your opponents.)
We built a complete robot. Could do everything. We were up agains the other best robot and both of us had planned to alliance but due to the SP and lack of working autonomous, we came 4th. Team above us picked us and the alliance we we’re going with. Both of us declined but then we couldn’t choose them because they couldn’t accept. We probably would’ve won with them.
I this years fame, can we score cones for the opponent?