View Single Post
  #21   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-04-2012, 23:31
DampRobot's Avatar
DampRobot DampRobot is offline
Physics Major
AKA: Roger Romani
FRC #0100 (The Wildhats) and FRC#971 (Spartan Robotics)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Stanford University
Posts: 1,277
DampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance Selection System

Quote:
Originally Posted by kstl99 View Post
I always hated the fact that #1 can pick #2. At Boston this year, Miss Daisy and The Pink Team were clearly a few notches above the rest so when they ended up on the same alliance the regional was virtually over. Then I realized that if they could not have picked eachother (and if they hadn't qualified elsewhere) one of those teams would not have qualified for champs.
This. I feel that #1 picking #2 almost always essentially eliminates all competition in eliminations. I know that ever alliance "has a chance," but against the two best teams at the regional, the chances are slim. This is one of the reasons I am in favor of disallowing the top 8 to pick each other.

Here's the pickle about most alliance selection proposals: either the top two teams chose each other, and there is essentially no chance of anyone else winning, or the top two teams can't chose each other, and one strong team doesn't qualify for championships. The "compromise" option is to split up top teams, but allow top seeded teams to automatically qualify for championships.
__________________
The mind is not a vessel to be filled, but a fire to be lighted.

-Plutarch