![]() |
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
This year though, I root for my team to score well, and I root against every other team in the playoffs. Until my team gets knocked out of the playoffs, I will be rooting for teams to accidentally knock over their stacks, and I hate that. There are many good reasons for the 1v8, 2v7, etc... bracket in a WL game:
In a WL tournament structure, there is no reasonable alternative to the 1v8, 2v7, etc ... system. Also, nobody is forcing the 8 seed to get humiliated by the 1 seed. 8 seeds beat 1 seeds about 1 in 12 times in 2014*, I would hardly call that forced humiliation. *http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/3046 |
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
1. With the 1-8, 2-7. etc. System, the two best teams will not necessarily compete in the finals since the 1 seed alliance and 2 seed alliance are not always the best teams. If, for example, #1 seed is the best and #5 seed is the second best, they will face off in the semi-finals and only one will compete in the finals. A great example is the 2014 Curie Division, where the #1 seed Cheesy Poofs went undefeated throughout the division finals, except for one match - Semifinals 1-1 against 118, 359, and 4334. 118 captained the #5 seed alliance, yet I believe they were the second best alliance in the finals. In my opinion, it would have been more exciting had the 254 alliance played the 118 alliance in the finals, which would have happened had the advancement system been like this year. 2. Yes, usually the #1 seed destroys the #8 seed (at least at regionals and districts), but the #8 seed is often better than some of the other alliances. Why should a good #8 seed be knocked out by #1 in the quarterfinals if they are better than 1/2 of the other alliances? With the new system this year, this problem is remedied. At the Indianapolis district event last weekend, the #8 alliance held the highest quarterfinals average (until the last match when #1 got above them), and could have even advanced to the finals if not for a yellow card. Using last year's structure, they would have lost the quarterfinals and been finished simply for having to face the #1 seed first. |
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
at NE pioneer valley, showed an example of what extensive scouting can do. on Friday 2168 wasn't highly impressive, they struggled alot. many team clearly ended up cutting them from there scouting that night, we always give teams at-least one shot on Saturday for improvement. there first match out on Saturday was impressive and was 100% better then Friday so we continued scouting them and by the end of Qualifying they were 3 on our list of teams.
come alliance selections we were a number 8 alliance and 2168 was still available for our third pick, we told our alliance captain that this was an absolute steal to grab as a partner but they had no info on them, and as the alliance captain they made the decision to pick someone else. 2168 ended up being picked as the 3rd member of the 6 alliance. 2168 ended up being the only team at the event to get a 3 tote stack autonomous which they showed off for the first time in eliminations, a well as being able to cap up too 5 high which wasn't previously shown. 2168 ended up being THE CRUCIAL piece of this alliance and propelled them to a blue banner. for sure on of the best robots at the event. for a team with this capability to fall to a late 3rd round pick goes to show teams shouldn't stop scouting Friday night. GREAT job to 2168 well deserved blue-banner for a very very very long weekend for you guys! looking forward to competing at Rhode island with you in a couple weeks. |
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
I'd say the SF at Mt. Olive are pretty close right now.
![]() |
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
Anyway Sean, I like your example -- playoffs are exciting this year, especially semis. Average scoring really improves this, IMO. |
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
NO ONE WILL EVER NEED THE TIEBREAKERS, THEY SAID They actually didn't need them at the end of semifinals all 4 averages were unique with the 3 and 6 alliances moving to finals... |
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
We're thinking of adding this to ours. |
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
What about 1:5, 2:6, 3:7 and 4:8 matchups. This way at least they wouldn't be quite so biased... But since this isn't likely to happen, I'm ecstatic to see the non win-loss system given a try. This numerical ranking system works for a ton of sports, so why not FIRST. BTW, FTC does not use the serpentine selection model. They go 1,2,3,4, 1,2,3,4 |
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Coopertition is why I have trust issues.
|
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Week 2 is over. So the question I have is --- Have the platform RC wars begun? Were there any districts or regional where in eliminations or qualifications Battles for the platform Rc's happened. We had the beginning skirmishes at Hatboro-Horsham week 1.
|
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:03. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi