Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Championship Event (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=12)
-   -   Newton Discussion (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46588)

Cory 03-05-2006 15:50

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by PBurrell
I think it would be interesting to change the selection process. FIRST goes to a lot of effort tracking ranking points. Why not just have the top 24 teams in the selection pool. The top 8 teams that pick have to work with the teams that have good scores and have earned their place.

In Newton, I think there was 1 7-0, 6 6-1, and lots of 5-2 teams. The ranking points decided the number 8 position and their ability to pick. Personally, ranking points do not tell much of anything in a real match because of the way the are setup. I believe the a team with a 7-0 record with 0 ranking points (depending upon the teams) is much better than a 7-0 with 50 ranking points. Many times, teams are too worried about how to add to the opponents score. Personally, I don't know which is worse, getting beat badly, or getting beat badly and then the other team scoring point for me knowing that I didn't score them. I'm pretty sure everyone doesn't feel the same way, but it is just an opinion.

The only thing I think that comes out of the ranking point is to try and keep the damage to a minimum. When it comes to the finals though, I would think all bets are off.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with the ranking process. The problem is very simple--there need to be more than 7 qualifying matches per team.

That, and the serpentine shouldn't come back.

Richard Wallace 03-05-2006 16:00

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cory
There's absolutely nothing wrong with the ranking process. The problem is very simple--there need to be more than 7 qualifying matches per team.

That's the same as saying there should be fewer teams per division, assuming that the time available for qualifying matches won't increase.

Is 86 teams too many?

Dave Flowerday 03-05-2006 16:06

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard
Is 86 teams too many?

Maybe 4 divisions is not enough? I think they could easily fit one more field in the Dome, and also Einstein could be used, giving 6 divisions. That would be something closer to 55 teams per division - much more reasonable. The tricky part would be figuring out how to have a fair playoff for the Championship winner.

Koko Ed 03-05-2006 16:08

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday
Maybe 4 divisions is not enough? I think they could easily fit one more field in the Dome, and also Einstein could be used, giving 6 divisions. That would be something closer to 55 teams per division - much more reasonable. The tricky part would be figuring out how to have a fair playoff for the Championship winner.

Round robin tourney.

Imajie 03-05-2006 16:09

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday
Maybe 4 divisions is not enough? I think they could easily fit one more field in the Dome, and also Einstein could be used, giving 6 divisions. That would be something closer to 55 teams per division - much more reasonable. The tricky part would be figuring out how to have a fair playoff for the Championship winner.

With that, where would the lego league play since they use Einstein on thursday and friday?

Richard Wallace 03-05-2006 16:10

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday
Maybe 4 divisions is not enough? I think they could easily fit one more field in the Dome, and also Einstein could be used, giving 6 divisions. That would be something closer to 55 teams per division - much more reasonable. The tricky part would be figuring out how to have a fair playoff for the Championship winner.

Yeah, it's gonna be tricky to devise a fair system if N(divisions) is not equal to 2^k for some integer k

Cory 03-05-2006 16:10

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard
That the same as saying there should be fewer teams per division, assuming that the time available for qualifying matches won't increase.

Is 86 teams too many?

I think the ideal situation would be that 6 fields are run between the 4 divisions.

That can't happen though--IFI doesn't have enough frequencies.

Richard Wallace 03-05-2006 16:13

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Koko Ed
Round robin tourney.

Single match per round instead of best two out of three?

379Robocat 03-05-2006 16:27

Re: Newton Discussion
 
In previous years at epcot, Einstein was an open field. Every team no matter what division you were on got to play a match on Einstein which was your NASA televised field. Now that FLL has taken over Einstein there is a shortage of fields. The only other solution would be add another day to competition or make the event days longer, which will never happen. The way things are now is very exhausting and adding a day makes it worse. Just face it 7 matches is all we will ever get unless someone comes up with a genius idea and it somehow works.

PBurrell 03-05-2006 17:22

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday
Maybe 4 divisions is not enough? I think they could easily fit one more field in the Dome, and also Einstein could be used, giving 6 divisions. That would be something closer to 55 teams per division - much more reasonable. The tricky part would be figuring out how to have a fair playoff for the Championship winner.

Thinking back to our regional, we only had about 50 teams. There were 8 matches instead of 7. If you do the math, if the cut the divisions in half, that would allow for one more match. It would require 8 fields and I don't think that will happen.

Craig Roys 03-05-2006 17:34

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by PBurrell
The problem is the sword cuts both ways. It is great to have the cinderella story, but how about the ninth place person (and no, we were not that team). They work just as hard and don't get picked? In fact, they actually did better because their score are 5-2. The bad thing is that there is no way to determine your fate unless you are one of the top 8. Out of 84 teams, that is hard to do. As I heard several people say at the competition, there is such a fine line that allows a team to advance or not.

FIRST is trying to sell the competition like a sporting event. If you look at how most sporting events are run, there are not any teams in the 0-7 that make the playoff cuts. The cinderallas are the 3-4 or the 4-3 teams and that is dependant upon the bracket size.

I don't know if there is a solution that would make everyone happy, but since there was all of the discussion about the picks, I thought I would add a different perspective.

Good point, but at the same time that FIRST tries to sell themselves as a sporting event, they brag about how different it is. Most years, it seems that there are two main strategies to a game - offensive and defensive. More often than not, the defensive teams do not make the top 8, but rely on the fact that the the top 8 offensive teams will need a good defensive team to advance in the eliminations. This makes for interesting strategy decisions in early Jan. - Do you want to be an offensive team and hope your good enough to be in the top 8 or a defensive team and hope your good enough that someone in the top 8 picks you? FIRST is supposed to be about more than just wins and losses - the collaboration is a big part.

I also want to add that my argument doesn't come soley from the fact that I'm on a rookie team who spent their season in the middle to bottom of the pack (although that has some influence). I spent the previous 4 years with a team who was most often in or near the top 8 - only once in those four years did we leave a regional without playing in the eliminations. I liked the fact that we could pick whatever team (no matter where they ranked) we felt best complimented our robot and gave us the best chance to win. I also didn't mind that if we were out of the top 8, we would have to hope someone thought we could help them win. It adds to the excitment of the whole process.

Lastly, as was said in an earlier post - 7 matches is not enough to fairly determine rankings. So much importance goes to the randomness of who your alliance partners are in qualifying matches. Hence, the importance of scouting.

Debate away - just my opinion (and you know what they say about opinions).

PBurrell 03-05-2006 18:07

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig Roys
Good point, but at the same time that FIRST tries to sell themselves as a sporting event, they brag about how different it is. Most years, it seems that there are two main strategies to a game - offensive and defensive. More often than not, the defensive teams do not make the top 8, but rely on the fact that the the top 8 offensive teams will need a good defensive team to advance in the eliminations. This makes for interesting strategy decisions in early Jan. - Do you want to be an offensive team and hope your good enough to be in the top 8 or a defensive team and hope your good enough that someone in the top 8 picks you? FIRST is supposed to be about more than just wins and losses - the collaboration is a big part.

I also want to add that my argument doesn't come soley from the fact that I'm on a rookie team who spent their season in the middle to bottom of the pack (although that has some influence). I spent the previous 4 years with a team who was most often in or near the top 8 - only once in those four years did we leave a regional without playing in the eliminations. I liked the fact that we could pick whatever team (no matter where they ranked) we felt best complimented our robot and gave us the best chance to win. I also didn't mind that if we were out of the top 8, we would have to hope someone thought we could help them win. It adds to the excitment of the whole process.

Lastly, as was said in an earlier post - 7 matches is not enough to fairly determine rankings. So much importance goes to the randomness of who your alliance partners are in qualifying matches. Hence, the importance of scouting.

Debate away - just my opinion (and you know what they say about opinions).

You managed to capture the message I deleted. Anyway, after I sent it I finally remembered that the Top 8 are truly the winners of the division. At that point, scoring goes out the window. I totally agree, 7 matches is not enough, but I don't think that will ever be solved. It is already to big to handle it any other way.

BobC 03-05-2006 20:27

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig Roys
I would have to disagree with this. That leaves not hope for teams in the middle of the pack or near the bottom. We were a defensive team this year and had a tough time winning matches if we didn't have an offensive team with us. We finished 2-5 and were ranked 74th. Under your proposed system, we could've packed the robot up Friday night because we wouldn't have had a chance. Instead, we got noticed by the #2 seed and ended up playing our way to the semi's. You've got to leave the opportunity open for the "cinderella story" to happen. Maybe there could be another way to do the ranking points, but I kind of like the way that is set up. Just my $.02 for what it's worth.

Craig
You are right in Atlanta I heard at some regional there was a team that was dead last. During the picking some team pick the dead last team and ending up going to the finals.

George A. 03-05-2006 20:31

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BobC
Craig
You are right in Atlanta I heard at some regional there was a team that was dead last. During the picking some team pick the dead last team and ending up going to the finals.

I don't think that they were last but I know that 11 was seeded 8th at Palmetto, got bumped up to 6th Allaince Captain...then picked the 41st and the 44th seeded teams and wound up sweeping their way through the elimination rounds to win Palmetto.

AcesPease 03-05-2006 20:46

Re: Newton Discussion
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by M.O.R.T.
I don't think that they were last but I know that 11 was seeded 8th at Palmetto, got bumped up to 6th Allaince Captain...then picked the 41st and the 44th seeded teams and wound up sweeping their way through the elimination rounds to win Palmetto.

Sounds like you did some good scouting! Team 177 did something similar at UTC and won.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:35.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi