Quote:
Originally Posted by animenerdjohn
Sadly all of these values are still calculated as a group and not individually. Youll still get those guys with lucky schedules taking these spots.
We need a way of keeping track of individual scores and points before you can implement such a system
|
Regarding "lucky schedules":
My thought of the two regionals we attended - Pittsburgh and Wisconsin - is that the teams finishing in the Top 8 at each event were generally legit.
It would be interesting to see the Top 8 lists from all regionals, with OPR's attached. Let's see how many "lucky" teams really did make it into the Top 8.
And haven't we had the same arguments about "lucky teams" seeding high back in the old W-L-T as first sort, then ranking points as second sort model? Aren't you always going to have some anomalies like that?
I'd much rather have this system, where a team - be they awesome, average, or poor - can TRULY accomplish something of value to directly earn CP to overcome bumps in the road (communications issues, mechanical breakdown, etc.), than any of the old systems where match losers get extra, rather meaningless "ranking points" that don't give them a realistic shot at rising very far in the overall rankings due to being a slave to their W/L/T record.
Most of the best teams in FIRST have had few issues coming out on top with this CP model in place, because they've embraced the coopertition bridge and gotten the job done, in addition to their usual excellence at scoring points elsewhere.