View Single Post
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 30-03-2011, 08:26
Bongle's Avatar
Bongle Bongle is offline
Registered User
FRC #2702 (REBotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Waterloo
Posts: 1,069
Bongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via MSN to Bongle
Re: Who thinks fixed alliances would be interesting?

Another potential problem is that (excepting powerhouse teams) teams have enormously varying performance levels from year to year. It would be very difficult to group teams so that you had an even grouping based only on their past performance. For most teams, having an 80th percentile OPR or winning 90% of their matches last year means pretty much nothing about their performance this year. Maybe all their students graduated. Maybe they gained/lost a really good sponsor or mentor. Maybe they just didn't think of a good design this year. All those factors mean it'd be really difficult to group teams so that you had a good competition and not just a one-sided massacre.

However, that problem would be solved by running it as an off-season event. Assuming that teams didn't massively improve their robots after championships, you could probably use their best OPR or best Win% to group teams together.

Last edited by Bongle : 30-03-2011 at 08:31.
Reply With Quote