Quote:
Originally Posted by JackS
IMHO, the 2010 ranking system, post week 1, was the best at getting the top teams to seed the highest.
If FIRST wants to be a sport, should that not be the ultimate goal of the ranking system?
|
The rankings system can have purposes outside of getting the best teams into the top spots. The 2010 system strongly encourages offensive strategies over defensive ones in qualifiers. This has two important effects: 1) Robots are more likely to get a chance to do what they're designed to do, and 2) the spectators get to watch more scoring.
I would argue that the 2012 system is similarly good at pushing the best teams to the top while also making the matches more exciting for teams and spectators. The coopertition bridge is exciting precisely because it is so important, and also because it often comes down to the last second.