Unusual number of teams declining
 

is it just me or are there many more teams than usual decling in alliance selection? and is this becuase of the ranking system or because of something else?

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

I think this is pretty simple....the seeding system is leaving more low-capability teams in top seeded positions than normal, and chosen teams are being forced to decline in hopes of doing better.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

Not surprising at all.
Alot of teams that are either unknown or as seen as undeserving are suddenly finding themselves in the top eight and teams don't want to work with them.
I mean when you got a team that's not showing up for matches making the top eight you know you got a bankrupt system.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

Really? Which regionals? No one declined at DC when I went...

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

No one declined in KC either.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

From what I know, there was none at Kettering.. Correct me if I'm wrong...

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

I think this is a year where a low seed is a benefit, due to the roles alliance partners need to fill. Also, being picked by a robot with the same strengths and weaknesses as you is not a good idea!

I didn't think there were more declines than normal. If anything, that means inter top 8 picking is more common and thus the top 8 is more accurate!

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

We had a decline at FLR.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

I can verify that there were no declines at Kettering.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

In my opinion the serpentine draft encourages declines. Lower seeded teams have the advantage of an earlier pick for the 3rd machine. I think we've declined a pick sitting at #7 or #8 seed from the #1 seed mostly to get a better 3rd machine. It worked too, we won that regional (Great Lakes '08).

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

yes, there was indeed a decline at FLR

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

No decline at BAE. Most of that was due to 6 captains picking outside the top 8.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

I saw two declines at NJ. Live webcast.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

I think a large reason we don't see as many declines this year is because of the seeding system.

Many rookie teams end up in the top 8, leaving a large majority of the veteran teams with more experience in the bottom, meaning they can't decline. (Well, they could, but then they can't play at all)

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

It may have something to do with the seeding system, but honestly I think it has at least as much to do with strategy. Different teams have different ideas about the best combination of robot types, and the higher seeded alliance who invites them may not fit into their game plan.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

I saw no declines at TC, as far as I can recall.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

You guys are all talking about a decline at FLR; The decline was from an alliance captain, which went on to go into the finals.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

In reference to the declines in NJ, there were a lot of unknown teams in the top 8 that seemed to have floated in. I didn't see a decline that wasn't justified, IMO.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

in the sandiego regional one team was declined 2 times, by teams in the top 8.... one of the teams was a stuck up team so noone was surprised but two in a row was like a record lol

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

Haha, the same thing happened on Curie last year, but they did it so that no one could pick the powerhouse teams.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

I don't think we're going to see as many declines this year because of teh various roles the game requires and the seeding system

hopefully we don't see a replay of the Newton 2006 Alliance Selections...

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

I wasn't around to see that. What happend?

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

i remember in my freshman year, there was a team there that hardly moved ten feet the entire regional, but ended up in the top 8. and this was before the seeding system changed.

i personally don't think there is a "right" way to do it, but if teams actually converse with one another, you'd be surprised how quickly your team is wanted on an alliance :)
it's not the bot that makes the team great, it's the team that makes the bot great.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

The number 1 seed kept selecting teams within the top 8 who then declined. Because they declined, they had to pick up teams outside of the top 8. This broke up many of the predicted powerhouse alliances (Newton that year was stacked with 25, 111, 1114, 987, 254, 71, 968, and tons of other insanely good teams).

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

That's a broad, sweeping generalization about a whole group of people, eh? Could it have been just strategy, like most declining teams have done before?

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

If you are not in the top 8, declining means that you would rather not compete than compete with the inviting alliance. That could be interpreted as an insult. If you are in the top 8, you have EARNED the right to captain your own alliance and execute your own strategy. In that case, declining an invitation is not and should not be taken as an insult.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

It's not a record, and it's a highly strategic move. I've seen the #1 seed in a Championship division ask 2 really good top 8 teams, that they knew would decline, to an alliance. 2 declines later, they picked another really good top 8 team, who accepted. I'm pretty sure that there's been a case of 3 or more declines before, too.

As for calling a team "stuck up", that's more insulting than any perceived insult delivered by a decline.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

maybe the team is ranked just outside the top eight (say tenth). and hoping to get into the top eight so that they may pick their own alliance.... for those of us who remember finger lakes last year, we all know that could backfire.

(610 was ranked 12th and declined a pick from a alliance caption. they ended up one spot out from being a alliance caption).

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

I hadn't considered that case. A mild form of Russian Roulette.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

Yes, there have more than 3 declines.

I believe the year was '07 or 08', at Eastern Michigan University. During the picking, the #1 team tried to pick nearly all the top 8, one at a time. I was walking around the concourse and heard the first decline, then the semi-gasp when the second decline happened. I stuck my head in for the 3rd.

It had actually be a strategy discussed prior to the picking to break up a number of potential super-teams that year. There was a very long discussion here about it as well (with some people, as always, suggesting that teams were not gracious, were stuck up, etc), which was definitely NOT the case.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

Which "stuck up" team are you referring to? I'm curious now.:rolleyes:

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

Since The Holy Cows were one of the two teams Austin is referring to, I too am curious.

I cannot speak for 359 (the other team to decline the #2 seed), but I will speak for my team...

Once we had effectively clinched our Top 8 seed, we began weighing our options. After looking at statistics and attributes, we determined that the #2 seed did not compliment our robot well. As rwood stated, we made it to the Top 8 - we had the right to execute our own strategy. Furthermore, I felt the field of teams had enough effective 'near zone' robots that if we declined we could pick up a decent near zone robot and have our pick of defensive robots in the second round.

With the serpentine draft (1-8, 8-1) it is possible to build a stronger alliance from a lower seed. I felt we did just that. With our first pick, we grabbed 1388 - a team which could play the middle zone or the near zone and could hang. With our second pick we grabbed 668 - who was arguably the best defensive robot there, they allowed 1 goal through the quarter-final rounds.

We declined the #2 seed, not because we're 'stuck up' - but because we felt it would give us the best chance to win.

Austin, in the future - maybe you should get your facts straight before you start making accusations. You really make yourself sound ignorant and bitter when you call people 'stuck up' for declining an invitation.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

You could have been speaking for 359. Our approach was almost identical.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

I believe we were the team who was declined twice, and i'm pretty sure we knew that would happen. In this case, it was purely a strategic move. As for what Jon said, I believe 1266 had one of the highest and better scoring robots and would've complimented them just fine in the finals:) We have absolutely no hard feelings towards the two teams who declined our invitations, our picks worked our great for us in the end. If it wasn't for one of our alliance partners being disabled for the last 2 of the 3 semi final matches we played in and some missed penalty calls, things might have been different in the finals.

As for this comment:
I don't think this is a very gracious thing to say. Austin may have said something that is rather improper, but two wrongs don't make a right Jon! We are all supposed to be friends on this forum.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

In San Diego, 1266 had the option of breaking up powerhouse alliances by just picking through their list, which was what they chose to do. It's their call on who they want to pick. It's the invited team's call if they want to accept or decline the invitation.

Any team that seeds high enough to become an alliance captain earns the right to do as they please. In this case, they did what they felt was necessary to ensure that their alliance would move as far as they can through the tournament bracket.

It's not a "stuck up" move.

Sometimes, "you gotta do what you gotta do."

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

A couple comments here, one classy teams outside the Top 8 will decline if their robot is not functioning. How many times have you seen a team team who's robot is not working or already boxed up accept an alliance? For me the answer to that question is 4 in 8 years.

Also if you're in the top 8 as other have mention you earned the perk of choose an alliance to play your game. If the team that chooses you doesn't play your way and you think your way will win the regional/division/off-season and you think you can form an alliance that plays your way that will perform better that is acceptable.

Don't take it personally after all it's just a game.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

If we are all friends on the forum (which we aren't, but I digress), then shouldn't Jon have the right to hold his friends to at least his standards? Shouldn't one push their friends to be better and improve their opinions and thoughts to be better? Friendship isn't just roses and happy faces. Jon isn't calling names or using personal insults here.

And I hope you aren't referencing GP in your "gracious" comment.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

I saw this thread and had to comment on it. First i would like to start by saying that i am a mentor for the team that had the two declines (1266). Second i would like to say that i was not with my team during that event, instead i was volunteering as the scorekeeper.

Now, i want to assure the Chief Delphi/FIRST community that there were absolutely no hard feelings from anyone on our team. Our drive team wanted to choose who they thought were the best choices first (just like most teams do), and both teams used their right as a captain to decline. They shouldn't be penalized or shamed for using their right. Both teams had their list of who they wanted based on their scouting, just like every FIRST team. A team should never expect to be on any top 8 captains list just because they are in the top 8 themselves (especially with the ranking like it is this year). Honestly I'm very happy with the outcome of the final rounds, my team did well and I'm proud of them.

We personally know and have a great relationship with the cows, and i would love to have a great relationship with all FIRST teams, regardless of whether or not we were on an alliance with them. We should all be gracious and professional, I mean i take great offense to ANY FIRST team being called "stuck up" or anything negative, and i believe there is no place for that kind of talk here or anywhere in FIRST.

And as a final note i would like to thank all the teams who came down to San Diego for a great event, and i look forward to seeing many of you in Vegas!

Respectfully,
Cameron Dennis

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

It was CERTAINLY discussed as a way to break up the 1114/2056 duo that have been dominating the Canadian regionals for 3 years. (Yes, I know, 2009 WAT was absent 1114). Seed higher, and pick one of them, then they can't be together. Had anyone seeded higher than either of them in the last 3 years, i'm sure they would have asked one or the other (seed higher in 08, pick 1114, seed higher in 09, pick 2056). Of course, this strategy only works when neither seeds 1st. The only time that one of them didn't was 2009 WAT.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

There.

That right there was what I had objections to when that serpentine draft went down at GLR a few years ago. Because what if they had WANTED to be paired together? That makes it sound as if you're trying to ruin it specifically for another team, and that's what led me to say some pretty stupid things in that thread about the GLR draft all those ages ago. If someone could dig that up, I wouldn't mind being able to quote some posts from it; my dial-up's having issues at the moment.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

Lawyers are taught in school never to ask a question in court for which they don't know what the answer will be. I suggest to alliance captains to talk to their pick before the choosing starts so they will know what the answer will be.

Sometimes an alliance captain might want to remain the captain of his (or her) alliance.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

im not saying stuck up for declining,
im just saying off the field i felt a sort of negativity/mean array of talking bout strategy and other things like that

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

Austin,

The two teams that declined selections have posted their reasoning for declining here. They are both highly respected teams with multiple Chairman's awards under their belts.

If you had a problem with one of these two teams the best place to address it would have been to their face at the event. If you wanted to address it after, a private message or email probably would have been a more appropriate venue.

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

Austin, I think you are referring to when your team came up to ours Thursday evening to talk strategy for a match on Saturday morning. Sorry, but we feel that talking strategy for a match that is over 36 hours away is a little premature. Remember, San Diego was a Week 1 event. No one knew the dynamics of the game or how robots were going to function. Furthermore, we had no scouting data on any of the teams we were playing. So - what use would strategizing on Thursday evening be?

As for our "Get out of our way so we can score" attitude (as you said in your deleted post)... In the said match where we were allied with your team, team 3021, we were still fighting for our top-8 seed. We assigned your robot to scoring in the near zone while ours fed you balls from the middle zone. I remember that that match was very close early on and after clearing every ball in the middle zone - we felt it was best for us to come over and assist in scoring in the near zone. I distinctly remember our robot lining up on three balls in front of the goal you're team was trying to push one ball into. Rather than losing the chance to score 3 points, so you could your 1 point - I told you guys to get out of the way. In this game, you cannot pass on the chance to score 3 points that fast.

During the middle of a match information must be exchanged quickly between alliance partners. Unfortunately that means that 'please' and 'thank yous' are left in the pits.

Speaking of the pits - if you did stop by our pit, what was the 'negative/mean array' you got? Our kids are not a hard bunch of kids to talk to. I know for a fact that they do not bite (anymore, they've been de-fanged). Our kids are more than happy to talk about our robots and our team. Considering that The Holy Cows visited your team in October and did a series of workshops, you should know that we do not hesitate sharing information.

Sincerely,
Jon

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

hey guys, sorry if i affended anyone...
i tend to do that without realizing how it sounds to other people over the computer. i'm a very face to face sorta guy. so sorry guys will work on that....
anyway i was watching competitions from last year about declining there was a regional last year that had a team declined 4 times. it didnt state what regional it was

Re: Unusual number of teams declining
 

Sometimes inviting a team that you know will decline (or suspect) will decline you can still be a calculated and positive move. You also force them not be picked by anyone else, and it is often used to keep "powerhouse" teams apart in the eliminations (therefor increasing your own chances of winning).