Chief Delphi
Page 5 of 5 < 1234 5
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Divisions posted (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76612)

Nawaid Ladak 08-04-2009 23:46
Re: Divisions posted
 
it usually is seven. and i wouldn't be surprised if it stayed the same. looing at all the field problems and the fact that fields tend to fall 10-15 minutes behind at championships.

i've usually paid attention to maybe 2 fields each year i've been to championships (07' Gali and Curie, 08' Newton and Gali)... looks like this year that's going to change, seeing that all four fields are much more balanced than in years past. Einstein will be amazing

The Lucas 08-04-2009 23:51
Re: Divisions posted
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lucas (Post 845997)
I count 347 if everyone qualified from MN registers
323 (now) + 18 (MI) + 3 (NS) + 3 (10K) = 347 teams

If we have 347, then 3 divisions would have to have 87 teams and 102 matches. If both MN teams added 6 teams then we would have had 353 teams, one division would have to have 89 teams and 104 matches.

If we have the pit space (no car show) then we might as well have 360 teams, every division have 90 teams and 105 matches. Then there would be no surrogate matches. If we have the space and teams on the wait list, then why do we let in an odd number and play surrogate (wasted) matches. On the other hand, the last thing we need is another reasons to fall behind schedule, be cutoff by NASA TV and miss half the wrap party again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu Bloom (Post 847779)
Am I making any sense??

Anyone have any other thoughts ??

Does anyone really CARE ?? :ahh:

I care Stu ... I care. ;)

I think they went with the closest even (divisible by 4) to the number of qualifiers they had. I think they will run 7 matches like usual and just deal with the surrogates. Anything makes more sense than last year where they had 340 teams (should be 85 teams/division). They put 84 teams in Curie and 86 teams in Galileo :confused: (like Galileo needed another team :rolleyes: it was already stacked). I know they saved 1 overall match (no surrogates in Curie) but matches run in parallel, and if you are going to do that why not with the other 2 divisions as well?

Barry Bonzack 09-04-2009 02:46
Re: Divisions posted
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgannon (Post 847485)
Here are my predictions for two members of each winning alliance, and one of each finalist:

Archimedes: 1114/2056 over 624
Curie: 217/254 over 79
Galileo: 67/71 over 45
Newton: 234/1625 over 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukevanoort (Post 847494)
Woo, time to make a very distant and probably completely inaccurate prediction! Einstein alliances!

Archimedes: 1114 & 2056
Curie: 217 & 68
Galileo: 71 & 67
Newton: 1625 & 121

Galileo vs. Newton determine the champ (leaning towards Galileo)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Cormier (Post 847496)
I would say 67/71 and BACOONNN!! 1902
Why only predict number one seeds? How about trying to predict the entire tournament...

Archimedes
1. 2056, 1114, 1334
2. 39, 222, 1421
3. 503, 201, 548
4. 665, 1649, 2753
5. 624, 488, 1503
6. 48, 2846, 1218
7. 61, 868, 1712
8. 180, 931, 118

Code:

1      2
 \  1  /
  1-|-2
 /    \
4      3
Curie
1. 217, 188, 27
2. 254, 245, 2834
3. 79, 68, 2815
4. 1771, 399, 70
5. 1806, 175, 247
6. 395, 375, 2826
7. 1165, 1675, 1
8. 1024, 190, 904
Code:
1      2
 \  1  /
  1-|-3
 /    \
5      3
Galileo
1. 67, 71, 1646
2. 45, 987, 1902
3. 111, 1717, 418
4. 1250, 744, 2775
5. 40, 25, 20
6. 179, 56, 1923
7. 359, 65, 1332
8. 1208, 494, 1742
Code:
1      2
 \  2  /
  1-|-2
 /    \
4      6
Newton
1. 1625, 234, 233
2. 148, 135, 1511
3. 126, 1155, 86
4. 365, 121, 1732
5. 1918, 469, 2970
6. 85, 1701, 1714
7. 1086, 88, 1726
8. 1038, 368, 832
Code:
1      2
 \  1  /
  1-|-3
 /    \
5      3

I am not sure who plays who on Einstein this year, but this is the order I think is the strongest to weakest alliance. Yep, I'm calling the championship to be won by 3 Canadian teams this year.

Archimedes
1. 2056, 1114, 1334

Newton
1. 1625, 234, 233

Curie
1. 217, 188, 27

Galileo
2. 45, 987, 1902

GaryVoshol 09-04-2009 07:04
Re: Divisions posted
 
This brings up a question that was asked about the Michigan Championship - do we need a full practice day? Couldn't 3 or 4 hours of qualification matches be played on Thursday afternoon?

Stu Bloom 09-04-2009 07:37
Re: Divisions posted
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu Bloom (Post 847779)
So I was wondering ... why 87 teams per division? Does that number seem a bit odd to anyone else?

88 seems like such a nice, even number :confused: ...

...Am I making any sense?? ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Brinza (Post 847803)
Stu, I'm sure we all care...
Thanks Dave
Quote:
Originally Posted by cziggy343 (Post 847850)
i guess it is because we generally only have 7 rounds every year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Brinza (Post 847860)
I really wish we could play 8 matches instead of 7, too...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nawaid Ladak (Post 847913)
it usually is seven. and i wouldn't be surprised if it stayed the same....
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lucas (Post 847917)
Thanks guys ... well ... DUH !!

You would think an experienced head ref would know better ... :o
Fact is that after build season I pay much less attention to the logistics of the competitions than to my responsibilities as a referee.

My team competed at two regionals this year and due to reffing obligations I was only with them for one day total. After a Finalist trophy in Cleveland (while I was in Chicago) I think they might prefer it that way :rolleyes:

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryVoshol (Post 847952)
This brings up a question that was asked about the Michigan Championship - do we need a full practice day? Couldn't 3 or 4 hours of qualification matches be played on Thursday afternoon?
That is certainly an interesting idea Gary. By the time a team reaches Atlanta it is not unreasonable to think they could get by with less practice time.

jmanela 11-04-2009 23:17
Re: Divisions posted
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry Bonzack (Post 847945)
Why only predict number one seeds? How about trying to predict the entire tournament...

Archimedes
1. 2056, 1114, 1334
2. 39, 222, 1421
3. 503, 201, 548
4. 665, 1649, 2753
5. 624, 488, 1503
6. 48, 2846, 1218
7. 61, 868, 1712
8. 180, 931, 118

Code:

1      2
 \  1  /
  1-|-2
 /    \
4      3
Curie
1. 217, 188, 27
2. 254, 245, 2834
3. 79, 68, 2815
4. 1771, 399, 70
5. 1806, 175, 247
6. 395, 375, 2826
7. 1165, 1675, 1
8. 1024, 190, 904
Code:
1      2
 \  1  /
  1-|-3
 /    \
5      3
Galileo
1. 67, 71, 1646
2. 45, 987, 1902
3. 111, 1717, 418
4. 1250, 744, 2775
5. 40, 25, 20
6. 179, 56, 1923
7. 359, 65, 1332
8. 1208, 494, 1742
Code:
1      2
 \  2  /
  1-|-2
 /    \
4      6
Newton
1. 1625, 234, 233
2. 148, 135, 1511
3. 126, 1155, 86
4. 365, 121, 1732
5. 1918, 469, 2970
6. 85, 1701, 1714
7. 1086, 88, 1726
8. 1038, 368, 832
Code:
1      2
 \  1  /
  1-|-3
 /    \
5      3

I am not sure who plays who on Einstein this year, but this is the order I think is the strongest to weakest alliance. Yep, I'm calling the championship to be won by 3 Canadian teams this year.

Archimedes
1. 2056, 1114, 1334

Newton
1. 1625, 234, 233

Curie
1. 217, 188, 27

Galileo
2. 45, 987, 1902
just out of curiosity, what did you base the predictions on? CCWM, OPR, watching matches?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 14:48.
Page 5 of 5 < 1234 5
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

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