Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

well searched for this and surprisingly no results...

here is a simple question

Do you like the Serpentine Draft system or would you rather go back to the old draft alliance parings?... if you feel like it, explain why

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I find that I both like and dislike the serpentine draft. I definitely like the idea that it helps to even out the eliminations field a lot, in some cases. However, I find that I dislike it, because it seems a higher ranked alliance captain becomes much more likely to pick from withing the top 8, and the likelihood of a juggernaut first alliance becomes that much greater. (Although, it does tend to make for very interesting finals!:D )

I think it might be interesting to see a reverse serpentine draft, with the 8th alliance captain picking first, then going up to the first alliance and then back down. If FIRST is going with a serpentine draft with the goal of leveling the field, this might possibly be one option.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

Oh wow, could have sworn this was discussed before. I've been a heavy opponent of this style since it was first instated. It just gives the lower seeds a larger advantage over the higher seeded teams. MOST higher seeded teams earned that spot to pick first/second/third and should get all the spoils for being in that position. I'd rather see a team that earned their right to pick an amazingly dominant team than an 8 seed upset the 1 seed in the first round because they were able to make a better rounded team. Then again, sometimes my reasoning is flawed by high seeds still forming dominant alliances.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

Sorry, this is my 2nd year..what was the old selection process? I want to know before I judge. Thanks.:)

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

1-8, 1-8 instead of 1-8, 8-1.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

This years serpentine because it keeps the "juggernaut" alliances closer to the the others' level. But I like the idea above, of letting the 8th alliance pick first, although that may defeat the purpose of teams trying to win each match lol.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ght=serpentine
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ce+selectio n

It's been a few years.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

A poll conducted shortly after kick-off '06, when the rule was first released.
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=41298

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I stand corrected then

when i searched i used the word serpentine thinking someone would actually put that in one of those threads/posts, but i guess it wasn't there

maybe this is can be a "how do you like it now" type of thing, seince those threads were done 2 years ago... maybe sort of like a follow up

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I don't like the serpentine system. I'm with Jeremiah. Top seeds should get top picks. Sure the matches wouldn't be as interesting, but at least they would be fair.

Jacob

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I like it because it gives a lower-placed team (theoretically, the 24th-best team) a chance to win a regional if they can make a contribution to their alliance, because not even two "juggernauts" can usually win against the well-balanced alliances serpentine selection usually generates. It emphasizes that robots need to work together to emphasize their strengths, not just gather the three best teams in the building (or the two best and the 9th best... whatever)

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

it depends on the game also.
I think the current selection process worked to even out the alliances in '07.
You pick 7 or 8 and you could get the best ramp/bonus point bot on the go around.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I think the serpentine drafting is fair. With the qualification pairings of the last couple of years, being the number one seed doesn't actually mean you are the best robot. I think depends a lot on whole you are matched with. Perfect example is the Detroit Regional this year. My team got to compete against the top four seeds but had one of them as a partner once. We were the number nine seed after qualifications and think that if some of those teams were on our team we might have been able to go with one loss instead of 4. That would have made us a 1-3 seeded teaM (BIG DIFFERENCE)

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

This selection process isn't so good for this game this year. I would love to see it go 8-1, 1-8. That I think would make the elims so much more interesting.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

The draft seems to work pretty well at regionals with a lot of depth. This year we went to MWR, WMR, and GLR. These were all crazy tough regionals with a lot of depth. 910 was the 24th pick at GLR and that was a great machine. I understand people's reasonings for wanting even more level of a playing field. That being said I often compare FIRST to other Motorsports. There are only a few strange specialty races that put the fastest qualifier at the back of the pack. I would not be a fan of the 8-1 then 1-8 as that would lead to strategic dumping in final matches.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I Like the serpentine draft system, it does make the whole field slightly more even and forces the higher seeds to pick with a little more strategy in mind. As much as I don't like seeing one sided finals, where the red score is 2x the blue score, I would imagine it would be allot worse if the #1 seeds got their second round pick first making an even tougher alliance, as a matter of fact this kind of thing did happen prior to '06 that was why the rule was made.

As for 8-1 and 1-8, I don't see that working. sure it would have it's advantages but it would completely falsify the ranking system, people would drop matches on purpose and the teams who actually tried wouldn't get what they earned, the first overall pick.

IMO(and it's something that will never happen is), if you really wanted to even the playing field and stop the formation of power alliances FIRST should drop the picking within the top 8. It would create some really even, some might say boring, elimination rounds that are now completely based on the skills of each teams scouting system not the power of a ranked team one spot lower than them, but I really don't see it happening is it would take away the right of the higher seeds to use the power they have earned and would would also falsify the ranking cause teams would again drop matches to not be in the top 8.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

Steve Ketron hit the nail on the head. #1 seed does not mean you had the best robot or that you necessarily played better than others. Being a #1 seed depends not just on having a good robot but to at least some extent on good luck with the pairings. A serpentine draft levels the playing field against the luck of the qualification matches. And it makes for more exciting matches.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

now it's time for my opinion

i believe that this system is REALLY BAD. and i believe every point about this system can be countered.

I know for a fact, it would be better to market yourself to the high ranked teams instead of being bit by the serpentine. im pretty sure teams that are ranked bewteen 17-20 would really dislike this system on this theory

more and more, the top teams are picking each other. (some teams try to stop it, never the less.)... and those 10...11...12th ranked teams don't have a clear idea of who they want, so usually they just copy down the rankings and pick from there. doing that would mean those teams get ripped off somewhat.

i wouldn't be surprised if we got some shocking results saying ... we were ranked 17th at the end of the day friday. but were 4-3 with 1 match left, and the 8th ranked team has 25 more ranking points than us and has 2 loses. what do you think this team would probally do.... drop that match and fall to 20something or would they win and risk themselves to either picking as a 8 seed or being picked by a 8 seed?

im pretty sure most of the top teams do their picking lists friday night, and make minor adjustments on saturday morning... so i wouldn't be surprised that a smart veteran team would tank their matches on Saturday for a chance to be with the #1 alliance.

You worked hard for that #1 seed. and you should be rewarded, not by just having 2 five-star robots and a average robot playing defense (semi-this year).. instead of having two five-star robots and a decent complement 3.5 star robot...

I think what needs to be done, is that the 1-8 1-8 needs to be used at REGIONAL EVENTS ONLY.... because every regional has their drop off, if you want to send the best alliance posable, you would use this technique. I think for championships, the serpentine is fine because the drop off is further down the rankings to the point where it shouldn't be a factor.

another note: a 1v8 alliance is more of a 3v6 match up in the previous system

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

With the current draft system, one flaw I see is that the 24th pick is, often enough, a team that "rides the alliance" to victory, especially during regional competitions.. Did some of these teams truly contribute as a major factor in their alliance?
The solution is perhaps in the game design where you are forced to have all 3 teammates to be major contributors.

Some interesting changes scenario for this year's game to force 3 robots to successfully win games:

1.What if this year's game had 3 track balls?
2. What if bonus points were worth more and it had to be from a teammate that isn't allowed to hurdle? i.e. designate the 3rd role robot who can only do laps and is only allowed to place on the rack. Hurdlers aren't allowed to place at the end.
3. You cannot do hybrid if you plan on hurdling.

If the goal is to even out the playing field matchups, the suggestions would help. However, I know that it wouldnt be as fun to watch and teams would have to be able to do everything, depending on what their role will be on the alliance for a particular match.

Since regionals are much less deep than CMP, the #1 seeded team would have a tough #2 pick at 24, creating more even matchups. The key is game design.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I'm confused with this part. Is this under the current system? If so, then what difference does it make if a team is in ranked 22 or 8? If they are good enough, they will be picked by the top alliance 1st. If you are assuming this team will get picked 24th (and not 1st) I don't think any team will take that gamble. I don't see any advantage to dropping a last match so you fall out of the top 8. (at GLR, if 2137 won thier last match, they would have been the 2nd seed, but they lost, fell out of the top 8 and did not get selected)

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

Its funny you say this, because in Hawaii this past weekend, team 597 was out of the top 8 and wanted to be selected in the second round by a higher seeded alliance. When they moved up to 8th, they have no choice already and have to select their own alliance.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

While I, too, have great displeasure with the Serpentine System, I will have to completely disagree with this point. If the serpentine draft didn't have as much of an impact at Championship, how did TWO #8 alliances win last year. The #8 alliance on Galileo reached the finals on Galileo, and the #8 alliance not only reached, but won on, Einstein.
That statement deserves to be repeated, our current FIRST Champions (190, 987, and 177) were a #8 alliance. The serpentine draft has just as large, if not even larger, impact at Championship as it does in regional competition.

The data clearly shows that the serpentine system has been successful in making the lower seeded alliances more competitive. There is no arguing against that. The only arguments that exists is one of whether or not they have become too competitive and whether or not they deserve to have the 2nd round advantage over the higher seeds. These are both more philosophical arguments, and it will be very hard to make both sides agree on these.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I don't have a problem with serpentine style, however I have always despised the top eight teams from being able to pick each other.

If they were not able to pick each other I would go 1 thru 8 each time through.

When was the last time HP, Gateway and Dell teamed up together and went against Apple, Acer and Compaq ?

the answer is never they all had to find new young un-proven talent to become or maintain winning formula.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

That is slightly different because they were already in that position. It is not like they intentally dropped thier last match (maybe they did...I don't know). If I was given the opportunity of being in the top 8 and ensured to play in the eliminations and be outside the top 8 and hope someone will pick us in the second round, I would choose to be in the top 8 every time.

I also think intentially losing matches is very wrong to your alliance partners and the integrety of the game.

EDIT: If you don't allow teams to pick team from within the top 8, then you would defently have more reason to intentially lose. At MARC last year, the alliance captians couldn't pick from within the top 4 (there were only four alliances). 1732 was the top seed. 910, who we thought was the best team there, lost thier last match and dropped out of the top four, allowing us to pick them. I don't think 910 intentially threw thier last match so they could be picked for the top alliance and eventual winners, but they would have had the motivation and reason to do so.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

your somewhat proving my point for me, what im trying to say is, at championship, there isn't much of a dropoff, most of the teams are petty even. but at regionals competitions, take waterloo for example: there was a huge drop off between 1114, 2056, 188, 2200, 68, and the other teams at that regional event.

the earlier post about the so called 24th seed, riding the alliance to victory, is sort of what im trying to say. Im guessing we all would like to see the best and most deserving teams to go to Atlanta. and thats what should be offered.

this will bring more competition into the A. come 11:45 on Saturday.... the teams in Atlanta are so close that strategy and scouting determine the champion.....

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

Get rid of that, though, and then the top couple teams have a huge incentive to throw their last couple of matches. Besides, the serpentine system evens out this factor, because each alliance captain can only pick one top 8 team.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

well as one example of a team who carried their own weight in the finals look at this years nj regional, everyone wanted three hurdlers except for the 1st and i think the 5th alliances who went each went with a lapbot.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

My comment wasn't about dropping matches. We had talked to 597 prior to the end of matches and liked them a lot and wanted to pick them on the go around.
They were seeded 15th. As stated in another thread, they were shocked/surprised to have made the top 8. Dropping matches to fall out of the top 8 is ungracious professionalism and should not be condoned.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

Yes, every robot makes a contribution in an alliance, and without the '24th' seed it is a broken alliance. That comment is unbelievably demeaning towards the many '24th seed' teams that competed during the regionals this year. I know we wouldn't have won CT without 716's help.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

*Points to 1114/2056*

Really? They've won Waterloo AND GTR together in both 2007 and 2008. Doesn't look like anyone's about to upset them any time soon either... (They also won 2007 IRI together.)

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I still agree with you. We wouldnt have beaten a tough 968/25/2459 matchup in the semis without our 3rd partner 2437, most definitely. In fact, I still cant believe it. I haven't even watched vids yet, since I was focused only on our team.
My point was that there are some situations, "often enough," to have made the comment. It doesnt always happen. I was trying to allude to where each and every teammate be a major contributor evenly spread in order to be successful at winning, such as having in this year's game 3 trackballs, per alliance.:D

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I think I understand your point. Last year, the 3rd alliance partner was very helpful. They would be another scorer (ususally fairly effective because they would face little to no defense), play defense on the other alliance's top scorers and climb ramps at the end. This year, however, thier role isn't as big. Most of the time, the third alliance partner is a lap bot (due to the fact they would be the 3rd hurdler or the regional isn't as deep). The points earned by a lap bot is usually around 20 (or 6 laps and 2 lines in hybrid). Last year, however, a 3rd alliance partner could score/play defense and then climb on ramps for 30 points.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

The serpentine system definitely helps to even out the different alliances, thereby creating more interesting finals. However, the unfortunate thing is that not always the best teams end up making it to the georgia dome. For example, we were the 3rd seeded team, and then we picked team 1771, and 1999. Unfortunately our alliance only reached the semi-finals. But i feel like 1771 deserved to go to nationals with their robot this year. On the other hand its also no fun to have one alliance which just dominates the elimination rounds. Perhaps there could be a 6th team at every regional which could go to nationals every year. Like a robot picked by the judges, which they felt deserved to go to nationals in addition to the winning alliance, to the rookie all-star team, and the chairman's award winners.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I think you mean a 7th team. The EI award winner qualifies also.:D

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

It's happened before...and probably won't happen again. There were "special circumstances" involved.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

There already is a judges' award, and I think it would be a great idea to possibly let the team awarded it to go to Nationals. I'm sure there are many teams that aren't Chairman's material, aren't rookies, and don't fall into the EI Award category that deserve to go anyway. This would be optional, though: the judges would only give the award if they felt there was a team that truly deserved it. (Isn't the award already optional?)

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I think there's an optional 2nd Judges Award, if I'm not mistaken.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

And a third. Judges may give one, two, three, or even no Judges' Awards. (Or more, if they so desire and there is enough trophies to go around.)

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I think good scouting is the key to picking the best alliance. We were working on our bot after every event - improving the hybrid code, adding stronger arms, improving our launcher accuracy and timing, etc. Our won/loss record didn't show that. Also, who you're partnered with / against makes a huge difference. At "picking time" we were 4-3-1 in 25th place. When the #1 alliance talked to us and asked us how things stood, we told them that we had our hybrid working well with programmable delays and curves based on any of the 3 starting positions, our launcher was all set and we were ready to go. In the playoffs we scored 3 to 4 hurdles per match (when asked to hurdle, vs. handoff to 217), and got 3 to 4 lines in hybrid, plus knocked down the balls. I don't know about the other regionals but a 3rd pick that gives you 52 points is probably a steal isn't it?

If you only go by standings or how they did in the match you watched (where something might have broken), then you can easily draw the wrong conclusion. You need to visit them and see for yourself. Also, some teams have a way of stepping it up when it counts. When you see big-name teams lower in the rankings you often have to ignore that and go visit them. They may lose a ton of matches and have problems but get them all fixed and begin to "peak" Saturday at noon. It's like a race car that doesn't run right all during the qualifying matches, but then they find and fix the problem just before the big race. Only by visiting their pits can you find that out. The stats alone just don't cut it.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I like the Serpentine Draft a lot more than the regular way. It adds a lot of balance to the alliance selection process, preventing the top few alliances from becoming too powerful.

If you give the top teams the ability to pick 2 of the best possible teams, like the other way, you tend to end up with an alliance which can dominate all the other ones, and in some cases not even create that much of a challenge doing so.


One thing I think would be an interesting addition to the system would be to prevent the top 8 teams from picking each other. This might add a new element of strategy to the selection process and could significantly level the playing field for all of the 8 alliances. Both of the regionals I went to this year had a number one team go and pick another high seeded team (top 5), and then go on to win every single match they played in the finals.


While Serpentine (and definitely the addition I mentioned) don't give as much of a bonus to teams that have earned their way to #1, consider that in most cases such teams are in those positions because they are good. Does a team that already has an advantage really need more of one? ;)

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

The only thing I would be skeptical about in your suggestion, NOT to have the top 8 pick from each other is teams "throwing the towel" in some matches to lower themselves to pick each other.
Evening the playing field should have consideration, but ultimately, if another team is consistently good each year, I would talk story with them and ask how they do certain things, asking for advise.
I have rarely heard of any team that wasn't willing to share.
We have always admired teams such as 254, 233, 25 and especially team 368 year after year. Over the past several years, we have become pretty good friends as they have shared what they have built.
In fact, our robot base is very similar to what 254 built in '05 as we studied their website photos and took pictures of their bot last year, being next to them in the pit. They had no problems with that.
We may not have capabilities as the top teams out there, but we can certainly strive to do so, experiencing a few successes along the way.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

To me this question boils down to one very simple question: Do you want to see the best teams win?

Sure everyone can provide examples where things worked out different ways. If we assume that the seeding process actually works and puts the best teams at the top seeds, the serpentine draft works against those "best" teams actualy taking medals home.

IMHO, if FIRST wants us to achieve the recognition that sports like football, basketball, etc. have achieved they need to make it less of a science fair and more of a competition. The whole system seems to be designed so that any team can win. Wasn't it Woodie Flowers that talked about how false praise doesn't really do anything to boost your self confidence? Every year we have a "champion" who is... maybe the 65th best robot in the nation? (4 divisions, 8 top seeds and 8 first picks per division) It'd be almost impossible to have the best 3 teams in the country win the championship.

When "co-operatition" was introduced, it was sold as a model of the business world, where companies have to work together to succeeed. When introduced it worked quite well. You'd often have the top two teams at the event win. The serpentine draft system works against that mental model of trying to replicate the business world.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I'm not sure that the draft is as much an issue as the seeding methods. I have seen teams that were not even top 25 in performance get ranked in the top 8 because of lucky alliance pairing, while some top two or three teams (like metal in motion) were not ranked.

I was always told not to complain unless you had a solution, but in this case, I don't see an easy one. I know First doesn't want to go back to one-on-one, but maybe a combination? do the current three on three, AND some one on one, and combine the two scores to rank? I would like to see the best teams advance, not the ones that got several lucky alliance pairings.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

Serpentine draft adds an aspect to FIRST that the regular draft doesn't. Teamwork. The reason that the 8th seed won at Atlanta was that they used tremendous teamwork and each robot performed as well as it should have.

As far as this year's game, the first two robots in an alliance are providing a majority, if not almost all offensive points for its matches. This game however does require a lot of teamwork to get the balls in the hands of the top robots and keeping traffic jams to a minimum.

I like the serpentine system as it also adds a bit of suspense for spectators. I think spectators getting interested is a good thing.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

The 8th seed didn't win at Atlanta, they were eliminated in the quarterfinals. The number one seeded alliance won. The main reason they won is that they had a good bot to start with, and were able to pick first. They picked an unseeded team that arguably had one of the best bots at the competition. This is my problem with the seeding. Why were some of the best teams not in the 8?

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

Has anyone ever toyed with the idea of doing a 8-1 1-8 pick?

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

The only way I see of changing the rankings to truly make it the best of the best and not based on the luck(and Un-Luck) of the Alliance pairings is to redo the entire ranking system and based it on a different criteria. like your match scores, take the average of your full match scores and add the average of your individual team's match scores as a ranking or some form of your contribution to the score as a statistic.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

You my good friend are mistaken. There are four divisions in Atlanta. In Newton, the #8 alliance (190, 987, 177) beat the #1 alliance, then the #4 alliance, then the #3 alliance to win the division. In Arhci, the #8 fell to the #1. In Gallileo, the #8 beat the #1 and then the #5 (I believe) before falling in the division finals. In Curie, the #8 also fell to the #1.

So far, we have #8's going to the finals and winning their division. However, remember that #8 alliance who won Newton? They are also the reigning FIRST Robotics Competition world champions. So not only the #8 seed win at Atlanta, they won Atlanta :P

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I believe martin417 is referring to the Peachtree Regional this year, and not the Atlanta Championships last year.

EDIT: On the topic of serpentine drafting, I think very highly of it. At most regional level competitions, the first seed still has a large advantage, as there are not enough high-scoring teams to make it all the way around. At Championships, there is not much of a drop-off, so the #1 alliance can still get quite a good team, and the #8 alliance doesn't have the disadvantage of not being able to pick anyone they want.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

Indeed I was. Sorry I misunderstood the post. At the Peachtree regional, some very good teams ended up in the finals. Some very good teams were also eliminated. Some that I think deserved to go to the championships.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

I was toying around with the idea of a reverse serpentine with DannyMcc the other day and we though that it would level the field out even more. Thats assuming that your #1 seed is the best team though.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

For those wanting an 8-1 first round (no matter the second round), IT PROBABLY WON'T HAPPEN.

Think about it.

You know that if you are first seed, you pick last in the first round. The best teams will be gone by then. That's also assuming you aren't picked by someone lower than you! So you want to pick earlier. The logical thing to do is to drop a match or two to pick earlier...but your partners now hate you for doing that...and you can't predict how matches go.

This aside from the fact that the #9 team called up would be higher than #8, unless you also barred picking within the top 8, which probably won't go over well either.

It just doesn't make sense.

Re: Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike
 

Realistically, I think 1-8 1-8 is the way to go. Other than the rare occasion (190 - 987 - 177 Archi last year) 1-8 8-1 seems to hurt any team in the #5 - #24 position depending on the regional, while simultaneously hurting the #1 seed depending on the regional. I understand the reasoning, which is leveling the playing field, but I think hurting the teams that did the hard work to get into #1 isn't the way to go.