Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds

[Starke]

I am watching the VCU Regional webcast and see the picking of teams for eliminations. I watch the teams pick teams from ranking #1-8. Then the team ranked 8th picks a second team. The picking then goes back wards from ranking #7-1.

My question is this. Does this system of picking actually give the higher ranked teams an advantage of picking better teams? Isn't that the whole concept of having rankings? I do not see how this system gives the higher ranked teams, but I could be wrong. Anyone with an explanation please post.

[Collin Fultz]

It does, in some sense, hurt the #1 seed. But, it was done to try to level the playing field. See this (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=430818&postcount=36) link, and the subsequent discussion.

[Rich Kressly]

It is different than in previous years, but there still is a distinct advantage having the top first round picks. This way there is an advantage to seeding higher, but not as large as it used to be.

[Alex Cormier]

I also have noticed that not many teams in the lower ranks have been prepared. like rank 7 and on.

[Tim Delles]

Yes a great example of the would be VCU. toward the end of the first round teams repeatedly picked teams who weren't at the competition or who were already picked. All of that would be solved if they would pay attention and cross out those that have already been picked.

[Tomasz Bania]

I also have noticed that not many teams in the lower ranks have been prepared. like rank 7 and on.
The fact that #7 or 8 had a team on their mind that didn't exist was a Little embarrassing for that team but there is alot of thought that needs to be put into alliance selection. I found out (trying to track who picked who) that it is an unbelievably confusing process and I don't wonder why their are conflicts of interest sometimes.

[Adam Richards]

The fact that #7 or 8 had a team on their mind that didn't exist was a Little embarrassing for that team but there is alot of thought that needs to be put into alliance selection. I found out (trying to track who picked who) that it is an unbelievably confusing process and I don't wonder why their are conflicts of interest sometimes.When the 8th alliance picked 1910, and then 1908, I'm not totally sure they knew who they were picking. 1910 didn't exist at that regional, and 1908 was in 50th place. Team 1907 was in 10th place and remained unpicked throughout alliance selection.

[Tomasz Bania]

When the 8th alliance picked 1910, and then 1908, I'm not totally sure they knew who they were picking. 1910 didn't exist at that regional, and 1908 was in 50th place. Team 1907 was in 10th place and remained unpicked throughout alliance selection.
Thats the brutal truth.

Tomasz Bania

[Zoheb N]

i admit there are some advantages and disadvantages to this system. the advantage is that it makes the elimination rounds more action packed but it makes it seem that being higher ranked does not have all the advantages it use to.

[Nuttyman54]

it makes it seem that being higher ranked does not have all the advantages it use to.

That was definitely apparent in the VCU Regional, with the finalists being the 4th and 6th Ranked Alliances, with the 6th being the Champions

[BrianR]

i admit there are some advantages and disadvantages to this system. the advantage is that it makes the elimination rounds more action packed but it makes it seem that being higher ranked does not have all the advantages it use to.

I agree, but still, having the first and second teams should still be better than most others. And in the case of VCU, as someone pointed out earlier, 1907, the 10th seeded team went unpicked, so I think that there may have been a few better draft choices, which would have influenced the results.

Overall, this should be a warning to top seeded teams. You have to take a hard look at those teams who are left, and don't assume that a team is gone just because they are ranked well.

[Stuart]

ok although I have only been to 2 regionals (midwest/lonestar in 2004) I can say that unless your in the top 8 your only as good as other people think you are. what I mean by this is you can be high in the seedings but if other people arnt looking at you it doesnt mater. bottem line get people to look at you and remember your number(watch LSR this year and youll see a great way to get your number out there ;P )

[Kim Masi]

At the Granite Sate regional in New Hampshire today, there were a lot of lower seeded matches upsetting the higher seeds. The number 1, 3 and 4th place alliances were eliminated in the quarterfinals, and the number 2 alliance was eliminated in the semifinals. However, I'm not sure this has to do with the new way of selecting alliances, it is still interesting to see how everything is evenly matched.

[Kim Masi]

you can be high in the seedings but if other people arnt looking at you it doesnt mater. bottem line get people to look at you and remember your number(watch LSR this year and youll see a great way to get your number out there ;P )

I agree completely. Last year in Philly, our team was seeded in the 15-20 range, and we were not picked to be on an alliance. We only had about 15 kids at the regional, so our team presence was small and it was hard to put our team number out there . (although we won the regional the year before.)

There were also some high seeded teams at the NH regional today who were not picked too...

[Nuttyman54]

I agree completely. Last year in Philly, our team was seeded in the 15-20 range, and we were not picked to be on an alliance. We only had about 15 kids at the regional, so our team presence was small and it was hard to put our team number out there . (although we won the regional the year before.)

Same thing here. We had been seated 32ish, but we had won in 2004 AND had a WORKING AUTONOMOUS MODE (we found the vision tetra and attempted to pick it up). A few teams ranked below us were picked, but we weren't. For the most part, Alliance Captains were just picking the next-highest ranked team, not necessarily one that complemented their strategy.

[FlipperGiggles]

I see where the rest of you are coming from, but I actually think that this system was more fair because the highest seeds got to pick the best robots first, and then the last seeds got to pick the other good robots. This leveled the playing field greatly because the high seeds still had much advantage because they got the best robots, but the lower seeds still had a chance.

[Joe Johnson]

It is very hard to do picking well. The pressure is very high and the timeframe is always tough and sometimes insane (we've had to pick when we didn't think we even had a chance to pick until the very last match of Sat. morning).

I have argued both sides of this one:

On one hand, I have told teams over and over that as a picking team they should try to do their best to pick the best partner available. That they sort of owe it to the good teams down the ranks to find them.

On the other, I have also told teams that there is no right to be picked. I know of teams that were picked because of reasons that are too silly to relate in public. But, that is the right of the team that is doing the picking. It is even their right to be unprepared or to flip a coin. The pick is theirs to do with as they like.

Here is where I come down: When I am picking team I advocate the first hand -- the entire season of another 2 teams is in your hands. When I am a pickee, I advocate the second hand.

Life is unfair. Learn to deal with it or be unhappy.

Joe J.

[Wayne C.]

I like the new picking method. It makes the game a lot more exciting and forces the teams to really get to know their fellow competitors.

Today our scouts certainly learned how important they are. It is sometimes easy to pick the top 10 teams. But picking the top 20....? !!

Anything that gets more of the team involved and contributing is a good change.

WC
:cool:

[Lil' Lavery]

The state of preparation of the low seeds, being rather bad as it seemed at VCU, is a completely sepearate issue fromt he new ranking system.
As much as I don't like the new system, I will admit it acheived what it was set out to, at least at VCU. It was meant to bring more competitive matchplay and a greater chance for the lower seeds to advance and win. The #2 and #3 alliances fell in the QFs, and the the #6 beat the #4 seed in the finals, it did what it was meant to do.

[Joe_Widen]

I love that FIRST changed the selection system. It makes for a more dynamic and fun game, especially the elimination rounds. Who wants to see your robot get their butt handed to them? Well anyways i think that FIRST made a good call. O yeh it gives everyone a chance, not just Hammond Wildstang HOT Bot and Cheesy Poofs.

[Ian Curtis]

At BAE it was the 5th seed versus the 7th: in the finals, with the 5th coming away with the win. At BAE I was rather amused when 1276 got picked after we had already picked an alliance partner. Also, at BAE the 9th and 10th seeds picked, so be sure to have a list if you are in the top 12. Without one, you'll never amount to any sort of alliance. And put make sure you have a strategy when you make your list. We knew we wanted robots capable of certain things, and we picked robots capable of achieving those ends.

As I'm sure Grady, JVN, Karthik, Brian Beatty and other strategy greats of our FIRST world can tell you, SCOUTING IS IMPORTANT!

[mrmummert]

hello folks...at vcu it did help us i guess...which as it worked out evened out what happened to us. we were supposed to be ranked 7-1-0 and were ranked 6-2-0...a scoring mistake...but nothing we could do anything about unless we raised a lot of mess about it...so we took the mistake...
We ended up ranked 7th..then 6th after the alliance selection started.

This is where it helped us. Last year at Atlanta..we were ranked 19th in our division...so we thought we would have been picked for an alliance...but ened up being alternates and never played....no telling what might have happened if the alliance changes would have done for us if we had this last year...

[The Lucas]

One thing that stood out to me at NJ was:

No teams picked among the top 8 seeds!

This totally surprised me as this was very common last year. It seemed to me that it would have been advantageous for some of the top 8 to pick each other.

At first I thought that the new serpentine draft style prohibited it, but after rereading my rule book I knew that this wasn't the case. So why didn't they the top 8 select each other? Not that I am complaining about the results, because all the alliances were great (I don’t think there was a single bad pick). I am just curious.

As for the Serpentine Draft, there were not as many upsets as I predicted last year (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=368091#post368091) . I only counted one upset (#6: 223 522 75 over #3: 56 303 528) and that was really close (3 matches). Of course that is only one regional and no one was going to beat 25, they were just that good :) .

I am wondering how this will impact Pittsburgh, which has just 25 teams. The #1 alliance is going to have 2 robots to choose between 2nd pick. The choice may become easier if one of the robots is broken. :(

[akshar]

I am wondering how this will impact Pittsburgh, which has just 25 teams. The #1 alliance is going to have 2 robots to choose between 2nd pick. The choice may become easier if one of the robots is broken. :(

imagine if more than two robots are broken, the first alliance would get stuck with a broken robot on their alliance, and since Alliance Seed 8 is against Seed 1 in the begining of elimination the top team will be at a huge disadvantage

[Wetzel]

hello folks...at vcu it did help us i guess...which as it worked out evened out what happened to us. we were supposed to be ranked 7-1-0 and were ranked 6-2-0...a scoring mistake...but nothing we could do anything about unless we raised a lot of mess about it...so we took the mistake...
We ended up ranked 7th..then 6th after the alliance selection started.

I guess you didn't hear back. 1610 brought this to our attention later then they should have. We went back and quickly checked all their matches and found their alliances were 7-1-0, but in one of the wins they had been DQed, for a 6-2-0 record.


Wetzel

[Koko Ed]

One thing that stood out to me at NJ was:

No teams picked among the top 8 seeds!

This totally surprised me as this was very common last year. It seemed to me that it would have been advantageous for some of the top 8 to pick each other.

At first I thought that the new serpentine draft style prohibited it, but after rereading my rule book I knew that this wasn't the case. So why didn't they the top 8 select each other? Not that I am complaining about the results, because all the alliances were great (I don’t think there was a single bad pick). I am just curious.

As for the Serpentine Draft, there were not as many upsets as I predicted last year (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=368091#post368091) . I only counted one upset (#6: 223 522 75 over #3: 56 303 528) and that was really close (3 matches). Of course that is only one regional and no one was going to beat 25, they were just that good :) .

I am wondering how this will impact Pittsburgh, which has just 25 teams. The #1 alliance is going to have 2 robots to choose between 2nd pick. The choice may become easier if one of the robots is broken. :(
Exactly.
At smaller regionals the number 1 seed will be forced to work with a possibly "weak sister" and may be in a position to work twice as hard just to survive.
This was a huge swing and a miss on FIRST's behalf.

[Michael Corsetto]

Just a couple of things that went on during the alliance selection at the PNW Regional. The first surprising thing that happened was the Cheesy Poofs graciously declining the #2 alliances invitation to join them and instead picked there own alliance partners (which was a good choice, considering they won the regional). The other thing that was pretty cool was the #8 alliance (our alliance) made it all the way to the finals without loosing a match (there was one tie) before loosing 2 games to 1 to the Poofs.

I think the reverse picking order definetly helps even out the teams and gives everyone a shot at the championship.

Mike C.

[StephLee]

This is definitely an interesting twist to the game this year, and I can't wait to see how it plays out next weekend. Last year, we didn't think we'd get picked at all at Chesapeake; we were doing well, and then our last QF match brought us down about 20 spots to number 29. We wound up on the 7th ranked alliance; we were ecstatic. I've been thinking about how that would have been different if they had done this last year.

[Ken Streeter]

... make sure you have a strategy when you make your list. We knew we wanted robots capable of certain things, and we picked robots capable of achieving those ends.The above comment was absolutely true at yesterday's BAE GSR -- the real strength of the 1276 alliance was not that any one robot on the alliance was way above the rest of the field, but that the three allied teams (1276, 133, and 1519) had complementary abilities. From the very first quarterfinal match in which we played, it was evident that 1276 did a great job choosing the eventual winning alliance. We were thankful to be part of it, and were glad to be teamed with 1276 and 133, each of which we had been teamed with at tournaments in "Triple Play."

[soap108]

hello folks...at vcu it did help us i guess...which as it worked out evened out what happened to us. we were supposed to be ranked 7-1-0 and were ranked 6-2-0...a scoring mistake...but nothing we could do anything about unless we raised a lot of mess about it...so we took the mistake...
We ended up ranked 7th..then 6th after the alliance selection started.


I wondered about that too and reviewed the tape as it was throwing off our ranking calculation.

It seems your team received a DQ in match 75 for going into the 1pt zone, which I would deem un-fair. What I saw was your robot being pushed into the goal by the blue robot (540). See 1:55 into this video clip.
http://www.soap.circuitrunners.com/2006/movies/virginia/va_075.wmv

...unless your robot went into the score zone at some other point in the match, you have a right to be upset.

It's actually better to be ~ 5th seed anyway this year as that gold medal you have proves!

KA-108 :cool:

[Nuttyman54]

being pushed into a goal is actually fair game for DQing, according to FIRST. I would argue that the pushing team should get the DQ, but FIRSTs reasoning is this (to my knowledge):

Passing more than 3 inches into the lower goal could trigger the ball-counter, thus throwing off the scores entirely. Thus, rather than trying to determine the original score, the referees simply DQ the robot.

Wetzel, is this correct? if not, could you post the correct version?

[George A.]

I think that the serpintine draft will be good in the larger regionals that have a lot of talent, and where some of the middle of the pack teams are ranked there due to some bad breaks.

However in the smaller regionals (like NYC that only has 28 or so teams) the 1st ranked allaince will only have like 2 or 3 teams to make their final selection from. It should definately be a new twist on the elimination matches this year.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

Another interesting note about the BAE regional...

Team 319 was ranked 9th, but treated as #10 when alliances were bumped up due to 3 "inter top 8" picks.

It was kind of interesting, although I do feel bad for team 319.

[Jason Morrella]

Another interesting note about the BAE regional...

Team 319 was ranked 9th, but treated as #10 when alliances were bumped up due to 3 "inter top 8" picks.



Sounds strange, can you clarify what you think happened?
When top 8 teams picked each other, didn't the # 9 team at the time move up to the # 8 spot? Just trying to understand how they were 9th, but treated as 10th.

[sanddrag]

Sounds strange, can you clarify what you think happened?
When top 8 teams picked each other, didn't the # 9 team at the time move up to the # 8 spot? Just trying to understand how they were 9th, but treated as 10th.
Yeah, I'm not getting that either. Tom, would you like to clarify?

[Joel J]

They possibly messed up?

What I've heard is that 1073 picked before 319, even though 319 seeded higher.

[Faith]

Yes - 1073 was asked up before 319, but 319 was ranked higher then 1073. Then 1073 picked, and 319 was called up...

[Melissa Nute]

Yes - 1073 was asked up before 319, but 319 was ranked higher then 1073. Then 1073 picked, and 319 was called up...
The announcer was given an older copy of the rankings since it had changed after we ensured that all the scores had been entered correctly into the system. We noticed it at the scoring table that mistake but unfortunately 1073 had already been called up by that time.

[Ty Tremblay]

Yeah, that was pretty agrivating. It confused me so much that I had no idea who to pick when I went up. Luckily I picked a pretty good alliance and we made it to the finals. Good luck nexyear everyone! Only 10 months till kickoff!

[Marc P.]

Exactly.
At smaller regionals the number 1 seed will be forced to work with a possibly "weak sister" and may be in a position to work twice as hard just to survive.
This was a huge swing and a miss on FIRST's behalf.

While I can certainly see the disadvantage at smaller regionals, I don't necessarily think of it as a swing and a miss. Traditionally, the first seed had the pick of the litter, and in most cases put together a very strong alliance (assuming they did proper scouting). The 8th seed was only able to pick from the leftovers from the top 7 for both rounds of the draft. The end result was typically stacked in the 1st seed's favor, when you put the theoretical best alliance against some lower ranked teams. As far as I know, there's only been a handful of 8th seed upsets when pitted against the 1st seed alliance.

Under the new system, there is the very real possibility of a tough match between the 1st and 8th seed alliances. I'd argue an alliance of two strong robots with a relatively weak partner would have approximately the same effectiveness as 3 middle of the road robots. With a balance of power like that, the elimination matches are no longer a stacked alliance vs. a weak alliance, and for all intents and purposes no longer a sure win.

It also greatly increases the burden on scouts, who now need to come up with a list of 24 potential alliance partners (for a 1st seed team), rather than 8 or 9. Strategically, it's brilliant. Statistically, it's a nightmare. In the end, it led to some of the most exciting elimination matches I've ever seen in FIRST. I had the opportunity to see team 25's scouting team in action in New Jersey this year, and all I can say is wow. They know their stuff, and know what needs to be done. This year, more than ever, if you are a top 8 team, make sure you have all the scouting data necessary to make confident alliance choices, because in the end, it will make or break your shot at the gold.

[Koko Ed]

While I can certainly see the disadvantage at smaller regionals, I don't necessarily think of it as a swing and a miss. Traditionally, the first seed had the pick of the litter, and in most cases put together a very strong alliance (assuming they did proper scouting). The 8th seed was only able to pick from the leftovers from the top 7 for both rounds of the draft. The end result was typically stacked in the 1st seed's favor, when you put the theoretical best alliance against some lower ranked teams. As far as I know, there's only been a handful of 8th seed upsets when pitted against the 1st seed alliance.

Under the new system, there is the very real possibility of a tough match between the 1st and 8th seed alliances. I'd argue an alliance of two strong robots with a relatively weak partner would have approximately the same effectiveness as 3 middle of the road robots. With a balance of power like that, the elimination matches are no longer a stacked alliance vs. a weak alliance, and for all intents and purposes no longer a sure win.

It also greatly increases the burden on scouts, who now need to come up with a list of 24 potential alliance partners (for a 1st seed team), rather than 8 or 9. Strategically, it's brilliant. Statistically, it's a nightmare. In the end, it led to some of the most exciting elimination matches I've ever seen in FIRST. I had the opportunity to see team 25's scouting team in action in New Jersey this year, and all I can say is wow. They know their stuff, and know what needs to be done. This year, more than ever, if you are a top 8 team, make sure you have all the scouting data necessary to make confident alliance choices, because in the end, it will make or break your shot at the gold.
At Pittburgh if you are the #1 seed you get the choice of two teams for your last partner. I doubt a steal will be waiting them at the bottom of the draft.
Do not be surprised if you see the #1 allaince go down in the first round at Pittsbugh

[AmyPrib]

At Pittburgh if you are the #1 seed you get the choice of two teams for your last partner. I doubt a steal will be waiting them at the bottom of the draft.
Do not be surprised if you see the #1 allaince go down in the first round at Pittsbugh

This is nearly the same for Boilermaker. We will only have 5 teams that don't make it into the Finals, which I really really hate.. (darn the regional scheduling! :)) But that also means that nobody can pack up early because they need to wait around and find out if they are needed as a 4th pick in finals.... sure hope only a few teams need a 4th pick... I wonder what Pittsburgh will do if several teams need a 4th partner? I asked this question but have not received an answer yet... my guess is they're just outta luck.

I think in the grand scheme of things, it balances alliances out a bit, but for a few small regionals it might make it slightly less ideal to be 1st seed. Depends if you want your first strong pick, or 2 moderate picks (from your own list)... It's not the fault of anyone, it's just the way it is.

It also greatly increases the burden on scouts, who now need to come up with a list of 24 potential alliance partners (for a 1st seed team), rather than 8 or 9.
I am surprised some teams limit their picking list to 8-9 as those 8-9 can easily be picked before you get a chance, at least for your 2nd pick. It also helps to have a longer list in case you need to collaborate with your alliance partners on who you both want to pick and agree upon.

[Nawaid Ladak]

if there is a small regional like Pits. with 25 teams, who are the backups, if 2 robots break down.

the first team is so called the leder, therefore all for one and one for all. it's the leders responsiblity to tend to the weak, isn't it all about gracous professionalisiom. (ingnore the bad spelling)

[Koko Ed]

if there is a small regional like Pits. with 25 teams, who are the backups, if 2 robots break down.

the first team is so called the leder, therefore all for one and one for all. it's the leders responsiblity to tend to the weak, isn't it all about gracous professionalisiom. (ingnore the bad spelling)
I f the robot can't perform (as in it has very limited abilities, it's unrelaible, it's fragile or is just plain broken) they are stuck with it. They can try and fix it but even 71 wouldn't be able to fabricate a whole new robot in an hour. So they are virtually hobbled in my opinion.
Why would anyone want to be the #1 seed?

[jgannon]

At Pittburgh if you are the #1 seed you get the choice of two teams for your last partner. I doubt a steal will be waiting them at the bottom of the draft.
Do not be surprised if you see the #1 allaince go down in the first round at Pittsbugh
This is something I've been expecting since I first read about the rule during week 1. It really does seem like the teams that do very well in order to secure the top seeds at Pittsburgh are going to get shafted. What's the point in trying to succeed if you're effectively going to be punished for your efforts?

Nonetheless, between the peculiar draft order and having only two rookie teams to share the three rookie awards, it's a good year to be a rookie at Pittsburgh.

[Tim Delles]

I f the robot can't perform (as in it has very limited abilities, it's unrelaible, it's fragile or is just plain broken) they are stuck with it. They can try and fix it but even 71 wouldn't be able to fabricate a whole new robot in an hour. So they are virtually hobbled in my opinion.
Why would anyone want to be the #1 seed?

I wouldn't put it past them to be able to Ed. You do remember Nats in '04 where we had a Divisional Finalist was is that was made during practice day.

[Lil' Lavery]

Here's my issues with the new drafting system:
A)Doesn't the #1 deserve good picks?
Yes, your ranking has a ton to do with your schedule, but I have yet to see a #1 or #2 seed that didn't deserve to be on top. From what I hear, 25 was more or less hands down the best team in NJ. 1731 had an AMAZING bot, set the high score at the regional with 99, could play offense and defense etc.
The #1 seed worked for their spot, do they not deserve the fruits of their labor?

B)The #1 was not, and never will be, a guarantee to even survive the QF round. 447 toppled 3 #1 alliances last year as the #8 seed. I have seen countless times, where even if the #1 seed survives, they have been brutally close, gone to 3 matches, etc etc etc

C)The shallow regional depth
There are 5 Regionals (Pitt, Finger Lakes, Waterloo, Boilermaker, and Israel) with 30 or less teams. That leaves a VERY narrow pool of teams, some of which may be out of comission, for the #1 and #2 alliances to make their 2nd pick from. Numerous other regionals have between 31-34 teams.

D)Championship Depth
At each regional competition, there are always a few teams that clearly are a level above the rest. There is typically enough of these teams for them to be spread amognst 3-5 alliances and have some exciting elimination matches. At Championship, each division typically has 10-20 of this level of teams. This means a few alliance each year have a full set of 3 of these teams. But now, it is quite possible for the #1 and #2 seeded alliances to only have 1 or 2 of this caliber of team, putting them at a distinct disadvantage, especially considering the defensive gameplay shown thusfar (where if you can shut down many alliance's biggest threat, and at least hamper their 2nd biggest offensive threat, you will typically win). I agree that this is a FAR lesser issue than the depth at the smaller regionals.


I speak from expieriencing the bottom half of alliances at both off-season and regional competitions. In 2004, 116 was in the #7 alliance, we beat the #2 seed in 3 matches, but would lose in the semi-finals. At "York Summer Frenzy" 116 was in the #3 (of 4) alliances, we beat the #2 seed once again, but would lose in the finals. At "Capital Clash" 116 was in the #5 alliance, we beat the #3 seed, but would lose in the semi-finals.

[Koko Ed]

I wouldn't put it past them to be able to Ed. You do remember Nats in '04 where we had a Divisional Finalist was is that was made during practice day.
That was with a whole day. Not an hour.

[Ianworld]

At pittsburgh you're going to have two options if you're the best team.

1. During the whole regional you fix every robot in the pits. With only 25 teams its feasible to make sure every robot is running. As long as they're all running you won't get a broken robot as a partner.

2. The second option is just throw the last couple matches. This is a lot easier I'd imagine than trying to fix every robot. I just can't see any team doing it or their partners going along with it.

I'd hope that the best teams in pittsburgh band together to make sure every single robot is in top working condition. With only 2 rookies there is a good chance most will already be in fine shape, not to mention the rookies seem to get better every year.

[Tim Delles]

At pittsburgh you're going to have two options if you're the best team.

1. During the whole regional you fix every robot in the pits. With only 25 teams its feasible to make sure every robot is running. As long as they're all running you won't get a broken robot as a partner.

2. The second option is just throw the last couple matches. This is a lot easier I'd imagine than trying to fix every robot. I just can't see any team doing it or their partners going along with it.

I'd hope that the best teams in pittsburgh band together to make sure every single robot is in top working condition. With only 2 rookies there is a good chance most will already be in fine shape, not to mention the rookies seem to get better every year.

The Second option is very ungracious and very unprofessional. Why go out and lose on purpose? Is that really what FIRST is about? You are showing no respect for your team or your allaince partners if you do this.

[Figment]

My whole family had a discussion on this topic today after watching some of the matches off of SOAP. We basically came to the following conclusions:

1.)This new draft system will definitely make for closer matches overall during the course of the elimination rounds and will probably be more exciting for people just spectating.

2.)It does severely cut down on the advantages of being the #1 seed, although it doesn't get rid of them entirely. I've seen matches where a really well done robot and a great partner were able to win even with a disabled 3rd robot. That being said, the #1 seed may well be able to pick a good enough 1st pick that they can put up a strong fight against a more balanced 8th seeded alliance, even if the 3rd robot is disabled (like what may happen in the low attendance regionals with only 25 or so robots).

I think that in the spirit of FIRST and gracious professionalism, this is a good choice of action. I'm sure that Dean, Woodie, Dave, and the rest of the team who decide these things would not have made this change without putting forth a lot of thought.

FIRST is about more than winning, its about a community effort. FIRST is about the relationships between the students, the teachers, the mentors, the sponsors, the parents, and everyone else involved. It is about learning and sharing that knowledge with others. It is about gracious professionalism; so if people are upset about this new draft because it means they may not win as much -- get over it -- FIRST isn't so concerned with winning(even though winning can be really really really fun), that is why the Chairman's Award isn't decided by the competition itself.

Anyway, thats my rant on why we should just go with it and do our best, if our bots are as good as we think, and our teams have it all together, then we have nothing to worry about with the new draft system; we'll still have great alliances and use all of our alliance partners to their full potential.

Good luck to all :) , I'll see you at UCF, Boston, and the Championship,
-Figment

[Koko Ed]

The Second option is very ungracious and very unprofessional. Why go out and lose on purpose? Is that really what FIRST is about? You are showing no respect for your team or your allaince partners if you do this.
To me that's like the result of 2003 when team decided to take advantage of the system and make a deal withthe other alliance to not knock over their stacks so they both get maximum QP to keep thier position in the standings (or improve it).
Alot of people found that graciously unprofessional as well.

[The Lucas]

I think I would prefer the number one pick in a small regional like Pitt or FLR with a couple conditions:

1. My bot is clearly the best bot. This is not always the case with #1 seeds. Since the serpentine draft evens out the skill of the draft picks, the only real advantage you have is your own bot. If my bot really isn't the best bot, I might be better served as alliance 8 where I can get help from 2 bots about my skill level.

2. There are only a few other "very good" bots. Too many good bots will favor the lower seeds. Good scouting will come into play here as I choose the second best bot, who will likely be among the Top 8 (this should shift the Top 8 in my favor). We will have to have the offensive power to outscore all the other 3 bot Alliances since our other partner will likely have problems scoring.

3. At least 1 of the last few bots is "mobile". A mobile bot can get thru a match without routinely dieing or flipping itself. It might be able to play some decent D or get on the ramp. As long as it doesn't die in the defensive zone and force a healthy bot as a backbot, the alliance should be ok. Only 2 bots can play D anyway so if it can't then that is ok.

Keep in mind the Alliances are not going to be a good as those in larger regional no matter what draft method is used. The 2 best bots even without a 3rd alliance member might be able to beat any other 3 bot alliance. Last year in a Pitt semifinal, our bot got stuck in a goal autonomously and our partners 869 and 808 won the match anyway.

With both Pitt (25 teams) and Finger Lakes (30 teams) coming up this weekend, it should be a very exciting and educational weekend.

[Nawaid Ladak]

I came up with a question, when i was watching the instructions for the draft at VCU

lets say the #1 seed asks the #9 seed to join them in an allince, the #9 declines. then the #1 seed picks the #2 seed.

would the #9 seed move up to form the #8 allince, or are they out of the eliminations completly.

I did not see this explained in the rules. if it is in there, where is it.

btw. losing your last matches is unprofessional UNLESS.

a- your robot needs work to prepare for the eliminations

b- your trying to be friends with anouther team. for example, your opponent is the ranked for example: #9, #12, and #16. and they want to move up while you want to move down.

do you guys think this is right. bc i KNOW it will happen with other teams

[soap108]

I came up with a question, when i was watching the instructions for the draft at VCU

lets say the #1 seed asks the #9 seed to join them in an allince, the #9 declines. then the #1 seed picks the #2 seed.

would the #9 seed move up to form the #8 allince, or are they out of the eliminations completly.

I did not see this explained in the rules. if it is in there, where is it.

btw. losing your last matches is unprofessional UNLESS.

a- your robot needs work to prepare for the eliminations

b- your trying to be friends with anouther team. for example, your opponent is the ranked for example: #9, #12, and #16. and they want to move up while you want to move down.

do you guys think this is right. bc i KNOW it will happen with other teams


The 9th seed would still get to pick as the #8 alliance.

[Lil' Lavery]

Intentionally loosing a match is NEVER a professional thing to do. If your robot is in bad shape and need repairs, you may SKIP the match, but don't throw it for your two alliance partners.
If you're doing it to help the other alliance it's even worse. You're essentially trying to bulk your stock by giving them a higher pick. And if it's truely about
"friendship", you're making one on their alliance, and losing two on yours...

I have my problems with being a #1 seed at a small regional, but I would never plan to lose a match beforehand.

[Koko Ed]

There's Car Knack predicts well here's a Koko predicts:
The 5th to 8th seed will win more of the small regionals (30 teams or less) than the 1st to 4th seeds thanks to the serpentine drafting.

[Koko Ed]

There's Car Knack predicts well here's a Koko predicts:
The 5th to 8th seed will win more of the small regionals (30 teams or less) than the 1st to 4th seeds thanks to the serpentine drafting.
Well I was dead wrong on this one! :o
I underestimated the strength of the top robots at the regional are so much better than the other robots that they can even overcome having a lesser allaince partner if they ahve an equally dominant robot on thier side.
All the same I dislike the serpentine draft and I hope FIRST does away with it. THey don't keep every new thing they try (remember the 2003 cumalitive score playoff structure?)

[Ken Streeter]

Personally, I like the serpentine draft -- I think it still has a significant advantage for the #1 seed, but it forces the teams with the top few robots to work hard in scouting, too!

In some cases this year, the #1 seeds have not done as well as one might expect, often due to a much weaker third robot on the alliance. However, in general, it seems to me that the cause of this is that the choice for a third robot was poor, not that there wasn't a decent pick remaining!

Last year, the teams that were last to pick the third robot for their alliance (the 7th or 8th seeds, or maybe even a #12 seed that suddenly found themselves as captain of the #8 alliance) were often poorly prepared for having to make a first pick, much less a second pick, as they didn't have the "scouting depth" to make a good choice. Last year, I heard a fair bit of ridicule directed to alliances #7 or #8 when they were unable to make a decent second pick.

One would expect that the top seeds would be able to scout sufficiently effectively in order to make a good choice for a third robot to round out their alliance. However, in general, I haven't found this to be the case. By the time the last pick comes back around to the #1 seed, it is necessary for them to possibly be looking all the way down to the 23rd team on their "pick list"! If they didn't have 24 teams on their list, they're in trouble when they need to choose a third robot.

I found this to be exactly the case at yesterday's Boston Regional. (I was there to watch; our team wasn't competing.) Even though the #1 seeded alliance won, most of the top few seeds had real trouble making the choice of a third team to round out their alliance. With one exception, the top few seeds didn't have sufficiently deep scouting to make a 2nd pick -- they invited teams that were already on (or captaining!) another alliance, invited teams that weren't even at the regional, and eventually resorted to inviting teams that shouted out to them from the crowd. When a #1 seed doesn't have the scouting info to make a good 2nd pick for their team, is it any surprise that they end up with a third robot that doesn't contribute much to the alliance?

I agree that a fair number of lower-seeded alliances are upsetting higher-seeded alliances due to a weak third robot on the higher-seeded alliance. However, I think the cause of this isn't inherent in the serpentine draft, but is due to the higher-seeded alliances having made *poor choices* due to insufficient scouting depth. At yesterday's Boston Regional, the top seeds overlooked a few decent robots that were still available to be chosen.

I think it's only fair that the #1 seed should have to work not just on their robot, but on scouting, too, in order to come up with a winning alliance. If a lower seed has the scouting depth to make a much better choice for a third robot on their alliance, I think they've earned the possibility of upsetting the #1 alliance! Even if the #1 alliance has the two best robots in the tournament, another alliance with three decent bots stands a fighting chance of pulling off an upset. If the #1 alliance "did their homework" so that they could make a good 2nd pick, they're going to be extremely hard to beat.

Just my two cents...

[BobC]

If I had a say on this subject I would say keep the serpentine draft. After being in many fantasy sports leagues which most use the serpentine draft usually the middle of the pack teams ends up winning the championship. :cool:

[ScoutingNerd175]

I don't think that any change first makes to the alliance selection process can possibly even out the alliances. The new draft system would work if each team had great scouting. At Chesapeake I saw people pick much weaker robots than we did for their last pick. Our 3rd robot was a really great machine, and it was the last robot chosen. I suppose that Chesapeake is not a good example of the serpentine drafts supposed effectiveness since there were no upsets.

I think that in all years it depends on the quality of your robot and the quality of your scouting. Last year at BAE we were a 7th seed which moved up to sixth seed. We ended up making it to finals, even without the serpentine draft. Why? We had a good robot and we made good picks. But we still lost to the team of 121 and 126 whose final alliance partner was mostly (if not entirely, during actual game play) defensive.

Someone last year made the prediction that the winner of each devision would be the highest seeded good robot with good scouting. This sound obvious but it is true. I think that, in this game especially, the winning combination is of two teams that do all things well, rather than one thing exceptionally.

So, my feeling on the serpentine draft? I think that it is really good for the lower seed alliances, especially if they have great scouting. However, I have seen many 8th seeds pick their first robot and then have no time to confer before making a second pick. I think that we will be able to see it's effectiveness more when we get to nationals. If a system works well for 25 teams and well for 85 teams, then it works. I would rather see interesting matches, rather than looking at the 1 vs. 8 match and thinking that 8 is just going to get owned.
:)

[pakrat]

Seems to me that Serpentine picking doesnt matter if there are a good enough beginning pool of teams. For example, if 1114 and 1503 are in the same competition and on of them is seeded number 1, i have a very hard time believing that they wont
a) form an alliance
b) win the regional

If these two teams are in the same division at nats, i bet they'd do the same thing there too. I mean, these robots are strong to the point that they have a special device on their robot mainly for scoring points for their opponents to boost RP (which is a valid strategy, but i guess since they were the only undefeated team at Waterloo, they didnt need it.)another congreats to those two teams, 67, and 1281. They worked together on both sides of the field to really show how to play the game.
So, if there are strong enouch teams at the beginning, the third pick matters less than if the first round picks are more meiocre.

[sanddrag]

I haven't read the whole thread but I will say this. I believe the new system in theory levels the playing field more and makes for more exciting and fair matches. However, it was the first time in 6 years we did not get picked for finals (at two events too). We could make shots high and low, climb the ramp, and human load. Our elevation and turret control making use of the camera and pots was so good we got the Innovation in Control award for it. We seeded 24th due to 3 partners' robots not showing up for matches in the qualifying rounds. We did not tip, miss a match, or die on the field once. We had the most visible and recognizable pit space.

I'm lead to believe there is something flawed with the system. I just can't pinpoint what it is.

[ScoutingNerd175]

I haven't read the whole thread but I will say this. I believe the new system in theory levels the playing field more and makes for more exciting and fair matches. However, it was the first time in 6 years we did not get picked for finals (at two events too). We could make shots high and low, climb the ramp, and human load. Our elevation and turret control making use of the camera and pots was so good we got the Innovation in Control award for it. We seeded 24th due to 3 partners' robots not showing up for matches in the qualifying rounds. We did not tip, miss a match, or die on the field once. We had the most visible and recognizable pit space.

I'm lead to believe there is something flawed with the system. I just can't pinpoint what it is.

As much as I feel sympathy for your situation, I don't necessarily think that this has anything to do with the serpentine draft. There were teams at UTC that I thought should have been picked, although I didn't have complete data (1071 comes to mind) over some robots that were picked. There were also robots that I thought should have been picked over some teams the lower ranking teams picked for their second bot. This can't really have to do with the order people pick in. If the first seed was going to pick you, they would have done it whether they picked first or last. This is really a scouting issue and an issue of what other teams wanted. It is possible that all teams got shooter that they felt were better than you in the first round of picks and wanted a defensive/dumper robot for the second. Maybe your autonomous didn't work with yours. Or maybe they had insufficient scouting and didn't notice you. I don't know, I'm not them and I wasn't there. But if you see a flaw in the system, it is in the whole process of alliance selection, not the serpentine draft.

[Bill Moore]

I haven't read the whole thread but I will say this. I believe the new system in theory levels the playing field more and makes for more exciting and fair matches.
The serpentine draft does not significantly "level the field" so long as the top eight seeds are allowed to select each other.

In an average sized regional, you can expect to find about 2 or 3 "spectacular" robots, another 10 or so will be very good, and then you will have a larger collection of good robots. By allowing the top eight seeds to select each other, FIRST lets the best robots pair up forming alliances that are significantly better than their opponents. Allowing the top eight teams to pair up is the basis of the "Red" advantage in the playoffs.

Imagine having to go against 2 team 25's this year. It almost doesn't matter who the "good" robot is that represents the third part of the alliance, the combination of the 2 spectacular teams should win 80 - 90% of the time.

If FIRST really wanted to "level the field" they need to be separating the higher performing robots from forming alliances. Separating the 17th to 24th best robots by reverse selection does almost nothing to "level" it.

DISCLAIMER: This post is not intended to belittle the contributions of any alliance members, or to overevaluate the capabilities of team 25 (if that is possible this year ;) ). It is meant to illustrate that FIRST missed the mark if they truly intend to make alliances level.

[sciencenerd]

FIRST missed the mark if they truly intend to make alliances level.

In my opinion, this year the selection process was much more sucessful at leveling the playing field. You can go through all the theory you want about how possible it is that the first seeded alliance will still destroy all the others, but numbers don't lie. Although I don't have the exact statistics, at both of the regionals our team attended the first seeded alliance did not win the regional. In fact, in both of the regionals, the 8th seeded alliance was able to defeat them, something I had never seen before! Now, there is the argument that this process has made it too easy for the lower seeded alliances, but that isn't the issue being discussed. From what I have seen, this has done a great job of making the matches more fair and exciting than in previous years.

[Wetzel]

FIRST has always said that things will never be fair. I think this was just another twist that some kook :rolleyes: on the GDC wanted to try and convinced the rest would be interesting.

Wetzel

[mrmummert]

[QUOTE=Wetzel]I guess you didn't hear back. 1610 brought this to our attention later then they should have. We went back and quickly checked all their matches and found their alliances were 7-1-0, but in one of the wins they had been DQed, for a 6-2-0 record.

Hi...You must be talking about match 75...At least thats the match we were told it was called on. I watched the video from this match and you can clearly
see where 540 was pushing us...(in fact the front of our robot was pointed
away from the corner goal) Their pushing caused our bumper to go under the goal and the refs DQed us. Why they did'nt notice what 540 did and allow for
that is beyond me. Oh Well...we're going to Atlanta anyway.

[ScoutingNerd175]

Their pushing caused our bumper to go under the goal and the refs DQed us. Why they did'nt notice what 540 did Oh Well...we're going to Atlanta anyway.

This question and answer link explains why (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=774)

Any robot that extends more than three inches into the goal (three inches past the plexiglas barrier) will be disqualified. If your robot has been designed such that it can extend into the goal, even if pushed, then you would be wise to operate the robot cautiously when in the vicinity of the goal.

[Rick TYler]

However, it was the first time in 6 years we did not get picked for finals (at two events too).

I didn't get to see you in action, so I couldn't comment on that, but I wasn't impressed with the alliance selections at SoCal. You need to hand out scouting software next year...

At PNW, we would have benefited from 492's amazing scouting software if we had been good enough to be picking. As usual, Titan Robotics was willing to share their scouting results along with everything else they do. Yes, they did win the PNW Regional Chairman's Award, why do you ask?

[Guy Davidson]

I don't think that any change first makes to the alliance selection process can possibly even out the alliances. The new draft system would work if each team had great scouting. At Chesapeake I saw people pick much weaker robots than we did for their last pick. Our 3rd robot was a really great machine, and it was the last robot chosen. I suppose that Chesapeake is not a good example of the serpentine drafts supposed effectiveness since there were no upsets.

I feel that the exact same thing happened at LVR, though I was at the opposite side of the fence. Our team was ranked 13th after the end of the qualifying matches. We didn't paly as good as we thought we would, but we were fairly confident that we would be selected. We were picked as the last pick in the selections, and went on as the 3rd member in the winning alliance.

My point? This taught me, and I believe at least a few other men and women the value of scouting. In the snake system, everyone are forced to know much more about the field than before. I had a chance to experience team 25's amazing scouting first hand, sitting with them at their desk for a while during the elimination rounds. It was truly awesome, seeing how they worked, and who they wanted to pick and why.

I hope that FIRST keeps the same system for next year. As the head of the inteligence team in my team, I would love to have the challenge of knowing the field as well as needed to pick well. It would make my work all the more rewarding, when the rest of the team realizes how important scouting is. Because until this year, it wasn't needed that much. Now that people see what an impact it can have (and the numerous cases of captains trying to pick nonexistent teams...), we will hopefuly get more respect.

If you guys thinking about next year's game are reading this, keep this system. Please?

-Sumadin