Chief Delphi - Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Page 3 of 4

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)

- - Is alliance selection usually this bad? (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94239)

Koko Ed

03-04-2011 11:12

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by IKE (Post 1048651)

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/2370
Here is a thread I started a year or so ago about scouting methods. One thing it does not cover in great details is "The Pick List". I will post up a template that we use. Every team Friday should make a list of at the very minimum 1-23 (24 if you include yourself). Teams that you would be interested in having as a partner. With detailed scouting, this usually still requires an hour of debate mostly trying to flesh out the slots for 12-24. This is the most difficult area as this area typically has the smallest differentiators between teams.
On our team, we also include a bubble section of around 4 teams, and a DNP section (Do Not Pick). DNPs usually result from gathering an abundance of general penalties, DQ potential penalties, and/or often not functioning or broken. Here in Michigan, this list is usually quite long at the first event, and much smaller at the second as teams get their controls sorted out, and most teams learn the rule better.
Saturday morning, we do a walk through on the bubble teams to see how they are doing, and discuss any issues we may have noticed on Friday. If there are specific behaviours we would like to see from a team (tube herding or defense), we will talk to them about their schedule and ask them to exhibit this behaviour in a match of their choosing. Some will agree to this, some will turn us down. We then refine the list right up until the end. Make a duplicate, and send it out. The duplicate is then used to discuss selections with you partner. Typically off to the side.

********************
Even knowing all this things, we are still often caught of guard for the alliance selection process.

Part of the selection issue is that with the WLT system, ranking tend to fluctuate a lot right up until the very end. This makes it very difficult to discuss strategies with potential alliance partners. Also, because team captains are called to the field immediately after the last match, there is very little time to adjust lists relative to rankings.
I would love for teams to be given a 10-15 minute break after the first round to discuss next round picks with their scouting teams and new partners. Yes this would add some time into the alliance selection process, but it would be so beneficial to the overall competition. As the captains out of the field are frequently members of the competition team, they haven't seen enough matches to make informed arguments with their other partner.
********************
As a thought of discussion:
What if there was the "Wheel of Fortune" picking rule where you loose your turn if you pick a team that is already in an alliance? Would this reduce the ill-prepared, or would it just be adding injury to embarrassment?
********************
Another thought. If you notice that a young team is doing well enough that they could be in the position to be an alliance captain, go up and remind them of the importance of making a pick list. If you are "mentoring" another team, make sure they do this.

Well the worst I heard was someone told me a team was picking down the list on the screen and was turn down by every team and eventually ended up picking themselves. Right then and there someone probably should have stepped in to help them.

Grim Tuesday

03-04-2011 12:56

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Howard (Post 1048653)

That's because there is no real single way to scout. Many teams do it different ways. Some teams go strictly off the Scoreboard and ranking. Others take other things into account. Some do both. Some teams run a server with a dedicated scouting team in the stands. We've done this with great success since 2008.

There isn't a right or wrong way to scout. It really comes down to what factors are important to your team.

There is a wrong way: Not scouting at all, like the team who just picked down the rankings.

Koko Ed

03-04-2011 13:03

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday (Post 1048697)

There is a wrong way: Not scouting at all, like the team who just picked down the rankings.

Worst form of scouting ever:

"Anyone want to get picked make some noise!"
This actually happened at Buckeye in 2008.

The Lucas

03-04-2011 13:07

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koko Ed (Post 1048702)

Worst form of scouting ever:

"Anyone want to get picked make some noise!"
This actually happened at Buckeye in 2008.

That actually just happened at SVR, leading to this discussion. We have had some misplaced teams and head-scratching picks at Philly but noting that bad. Most of the questionable picks are made with quickly, so there must have been some thought process behind them.

CallieJ

03-04-2011 13:12

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by lineskier (Post 1048392)

After watching SVR and watching the alliance selection, I can't believe how bad some of the alliance selection has been. The fact that 691 wasn't picked at all is mind boggling to me. Maybe its just me, but alliance selection seems horribly unorganized and is costing some teams banners.

I was the team representative for team 1868 for alliance selection, and we pushed very strongly to select 691 since we had worked well with them in our qualification matches. We had covered this choice with 1323 beforehand and agreed they were the best choice.

However, when I was on the field the representative from 1323 bypased our list (which had 691 on the top) and instead went with what one of their mentors was shouting at her from the first row of seats-604.

However, I think this was a minor concern compared to the number of declines in selection. The rankings at SVR were so strange and jumped around so much that there were teams who did not expect to be anywhere near picking position shoved in, and I think this was directly related to the amount of confusion.

Nuttyman54

03-04-2011 14:53

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

One thing that makes alliance selections particularly difficult this year is the need to assemble an alliance which can effectively play every aspect of the game. Most teams, even if they're unprepared, understand that they're looking for robots which "do it all". Typically those teams will either decline a pick from the types of teams who are unprepared to make the selection, or there aren't any left by the time they get to make their pick.

I believe this is also the reason for the large number of declines. Teams who "shouldn't" be in the top 8, or should but are unprepared, are picking teams who they perceive as "Good" without giving full consideration to whether the teams complement each other. A team with great tube scoring but no minibot and no ubertube that ends up top 8 will probably be declined by a team who also doesn't have a minibot, because they know it will put them at a disadvantage.

Laaba 80

03-04-2011 15:15

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koko Ed (Post 1048702)

Worst form of scouting ever:

"Anyone want to get picked make some noise!"
This actually happened at Buckeye in 2008.

They picked us

Akash Rastogi

03-04-2011 15:35

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by CallieJ (Post 1048708)

However, when I was on the field the representative from 1323 bypased our list (which had 691 on the top) and instead went with what one of their mentors was shouting at her from the first row of seats-604..

Callie, talking things over with 1323, they told me that they were concerned about the reliability of their own minibot, so they wanted to choose someone with a fast, reliable minibot. 604 fit this bill, 691 did not.

Koko Ed

03-04-2011 15:52

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laaba 80 (Post 1048759)

They picked us

my sympathies.

Starmast3r

03-04-2011 16:05

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

I have to admit, being on that field saying "Team 2159 graciously declines the position of alliance captain" was probably one of the most hilarious moments of my life. Firstly, I'm not even the team captain of the RoboPirates-- I'm simply the driver that was called to be the representative of our team at the last second simply because our own captain was not feeling too well about the whole moment.

As a small, 6 member team in the finals, we were simply overwhelmed by what the judges said. Did we scout before we were called up to be an alliance captain? Yes, and no. We were solely a strong, defensive team, and we looked for teams that would balance our alliance. We had not been able to finish the other features of our robot, so we were forced to lean on our strongest feature: our two speed transmission. Team 691 and team 3256 would have been my top choices IF I would have remembered their team names. However, our mentor told us to simply decline being an alliance captain so that we would not have to worry about picking teams.

Why did plan on declining the position of alliance captain? Well, a couple of years ago, our team was an alliance captain at the Davis regional. We declined the position then, BUT the judges still allowed us to be picked. In fact, we were picked by the Fembots, team 692. I was stunned when they told us that we would not be able to compete if we declined, so I was forced to turn to my handy-dandy SVR Flier that I picked up at the last second before running on the field.

You'd be surprised at all of the people that came up to me after the alliance decisions and asked what was up. After telling them this whole story, they understood completely. Do I regret picking team 100 and team 766 for our alliance? Nope. They're all great people who I had a lot of fun with. In fact, I want to thank our good friends at team 100 for getting me out of that mess. Sure, winning is awesome, but to us, FRC is about having fun, making new friends, and spreading the values that FIRST teaches us all-- most importantly gracious professionalism. Let's keep it that way.

KevinGoneNuts

03-04-2011 16:10

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

I was out for alliance selections for team 675 and were picked by team 2456 as the 2nd team for alliance 8.

Now they could have picked any number of amazing teams, but 2456 picked us along with 2035 because they knew we were going against 254, 1538, and 751. They also picked us because our teams are friends and to go out playing alongside your friends sounds like a blast. Now correct me, but that is what I think FIRST is about. HAVING FUN!. I feel like I speak for all three teams when I say, we played the game having fun.

synth3tk

03-04-2011 16:16

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Heaven forbid an unprepared alliance captain picks any old team then proceeds to have fun in the elims. :rolleyes:

Winning is great. After all, it is a competition at its core. But let's try not to put too much of an emphasis on it to the point where we're bad-mouthing a team's picking methods (or lack thereof). Next year, hopefully with the help of this community, they'll know of the different ways to scout, and its importance.

Some teams may never care. I think we'd probably just pull the old "eeny meeny miney mo" trick, or the really fun "shout if you want us to pick you!" tactic if we were ever captains. Sometimes, the lack of students (or lack of those interested in scouting) can be the reason they don't scout, either. When you've got 3 students working on the 'bot and two who drive, they're probably not going to put aside much time (if any at all) to go gather data.

Just keep in mind that no two teams are the same.

EDIT: Didn't see you post, Kevin, but it's ironic that you mentioned having fun. Took me some time to type this out. :p

XaulZan11

03-04-2011 16:18

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinGoneNuts (Post 1048789)

Now they could have picked any number of amazing teams, but 2456 picked us along with 2035 because they knew we were going against 254, 1538, and 751. They also picked us because our teams are friends and to go out playing alongside your friends sounds like a blast. Now correct me, but that is what I think FIRST is about. HAVING FUN!. I feel like I speak for all three teams when I say, we played the game having fun.

I've seen and heard of teams doing this and it rubs me the wrong way. I would be pretty upset to work 6 weeks and give it my all during the competition only to be passed up by a team because they wanted to pick their friends. I just don't think it is fair to the other teams if you choose not to play competitively and to the best of your ability. If this was a Michigan event where you gets points for getting selected, I would be extremely upset. But, at the end of the day, its the teams right to play however they want.

CallieJ

03-04-2011 17:12

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi (Post 1048769)

That makes sense. I remember that they had trouble deploying their minibot in one of their matches on Saturday morning. I do wish they had conveyed that to me in our meeting so that we could have incorporated it more heavily into our pick list.

Honestly I don't think it would have made that much of a difference either way, which is why I didn't push the issue at the time. 604 and 691 are both experienced, well-developed teams who have done well this year. I for one was extremely happy with how finals turned out, given how 254 performed in finals at San Diego and in the semis and quarters at SVR.

I mostly wanted to reassure the OP that we and 1323 were aware of 691's capabilities and that they were not overlooked. The specifics of our selection are a much smaller issue than those faced by some of the teams who were present for selection. I felt unprepared to be there given the uncertainty of the rankings and the strength of the #1 alliance, and I had spent the last two days running a full-scale online scouting program as well as working with the scouts from 254. I can't imagine what it might have been like to go into that selection if you hadn't been expecting and trying to prepare for it all weekend.

mwtidd

03-04-2011 17:57

Re: Is alliance selection usually this bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by XaulZan11 (Post 1048793)

I've seen and heard of teams doing this and it rubs me the wrong way. I would be pretty upset to work 6 weeks and give it my all during the competition only to be passed up by a team because they wanted to pick their friends. I just don't think it is fair to the other teams if you choose not to play competitively and to the best of your ability. If this was a Michigan event where you gets points for getting selected, I would be extremely upset. But, at the end of the day, its the teams right to play however they want.

I will just say the friends picking thing is a very real experience. Imagine going to college, applying for a job, and finding out you didn't get it because the person you were competing with for the job had an in at the company. Then its not 6 weeks but often 6 years.

In the real world perceived value and connections are almost as valuable as real value in a business deal. In a strange (and unfortunate corollary) the similar thing happens in FIRST, especially for second picks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CallieJ (Post 1048816)

I will say after running the numbers 604 and 691, look to be equivalent. As most people know I usually go by the #s and only the #s, and this is a perfect example where emotionally I was connected to a robot and would have preferred them. In one match I saw 691 put on quite a show, and really liked it. However after your reflections I think that you made an appropriate call.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:47.

Page 3 of 4

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page