![]() |
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
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. :) |
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
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. |
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
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. |
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
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. |
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
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 |
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
[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. |
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
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? |
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
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 |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:04. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi