Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

I think that the QP are flawed

My example of this was yesterday at the DC regional. Blue Alliance barely moved the whole match. Red Alliance beats the Blue alliance 8-0. The Red Alliance had 1 penalty so there unpenalized score was 9. According to the rules, Red Alliance gets 8 QPs and Blue Alliance gets 9 QPs even though they lost by 8. Just wanted to point that out.

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

One of the basic rules we use as a team is that you have to play the game. Regardless of personal opinions about the game, you design a robot and build strategies to play the game. The Co-Opertition bonus is very important to your own ranking. If you finish a match 8-0 you are not playing the game.

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

Thats what I think all teams should do. Unfortunately, some teams are more concerned with winning then a good competition. Thats why there should be something in the rules about a mximum amount of points the losing alliance can get.

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

What I meant was that if you are ahead and are looking at a shut-out. It is in your own best interests to score for the opposing alliance rather than continue to increase your lead in that match.

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

oh ok

yep I think drivers will need to pay attention to the score and know if they need to score for the other team.

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

When I first saw the seeding system this year I thought it weird too, but GDC usually has reason for what they do and if you guys had any idea how much debating, experimentation and associated craziness goes on with the development of all this, you'd have a new appreciation for it.

GDC figures out how they want games to look as its being played, then builds the scoring and seeding around that. You can look at the point assignments and sorta figure out how to "work" the system.

IMHO, some things to look out for:

Don't "shut out" your opponent if you win, your coopertition bonus is the sum of their unpenalized points X 2, so theorectically, if they have a couple of goals, you get double that in your coop seeding.

A nasty case is the one where you get like the last match that just happened in KC, final score was 13 - 0, but the winning alliance got a penalty, so the win alliance got 12 seeding points and no Coop bonus (lose allaince was 0), but the lose allaince gets the unpenalized score of the win allaince, so they got 13 seeding points (lose team gets no coop bonus) so the lose team actually came out ahead in seeding, even though they got slammed in the match.

The point is, be smart about the system, ranking is as much a part of the game as the bots on the field, so be educated about it and know how to strategize about it. Complaining about it after the fact is a waste of time. It just shows you didn't investigate the game up front.

Its Week One, teams are still figuring out the game, remember to have fun with it, I'd like to see some good coversations on how to use the rank system system to team advantage. Well, some might not want to give away their strategies :)

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

Do the venues keep "box scores" for the individual teams during qual and elim, and make this data available after the meet ?

Or is the only data available to a team that which their own scouting efforts gather ?

~

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

The FRC FMS system provides the Twitter feeds which breaks out the score detail from a match by alliance, there's also the HTML pages on the FIRST web site, but that doesn't have as much individual match score data. Someone that truely understands the match scoring and ranking can derive everything they need for scouting from the twitter feeds.....

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

Is there an explanation of the data put out by the Twitter feed anywhere?

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

There is an explanation on the FIRST site, here.

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

Can this be accessed with an internet browser? Or is special software required?

Does this include detail at the team level? For example, how many goals, penalties, suspended, did each team get. Stuff like that.

I surfed but didn't see any links to match data at USFIRST.ORG Can you post a link? Thanks.


~

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

All I have to say is so much for them saying that this year the fans can understand the scoring. Lets see what happens when a fantastic robot wins all their matches and is last in the seeding. Explain that to the crowd.
Bruce

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

A major part of the problem is the announcers at the venue, and the way they whoop it up when an alliance "wins" a match during the qualifiers.

Perhaps the announcers do not understand either.

FIRST should provide some training for the announcers at each venue.

During the qualifying matches, the announcers should downplay, or even ignore, "wins", and instead announce how many seed points each alliance is awarded for each match. This would educate not only the fans, but many of the unaware teams as well.


~

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

This is definitely not true on the webcasts I watched. Tyler Olds at KC (awesome game announcer!) spent a lot of time explaining that you wanted a close match, how many QPs each team would get, etc.

The winner this year does have the benefit in any match where the score is not zero for the opponents. Winning is not completely secondary.

Re: Weird Qualifying Rules
 

Did he announce the QPs after each qual match instead of announcing the "winner" of the match?

That was what I was suggesting.

Take a look at the webcast of the Traverse City qual.


~