Thread: Week 2 Live Discussion
View Single Post
  #46   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 08-03-2015, 12:57
Caleb Sykes's Avatar
Caleb Sykes Caleb Sykes is offline
Registered User
FRC #4536 (MinuteBots)
Team Role: Mentor
  
Join Date: Feb 2011
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 1,051
Caleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Week 2 Live Discussion
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBot View Post
7) Running the Quarter-Finals and Semi-Finals using the same point-average system was brilliant. No longer was the 8th seed forced to be humiliated by the 1st seed. I never understood that system designed to maintain the original seed order. Now all 8 alliances get to start from scratch and show their capabilities and endurance, just like Olympic events.
This is by far my least favorite aspect of this game. In previous years, I could root for my team to win, and still enjoy the other playoff matches. I could cheer for rookie teams or teams that I have talked with in the pits.

This year though, I root for my team to score well, and I root against every other team in the playoffs. Until my team gets knocked out of the playoffs, I will be rooting for teams to accidentally knock over their stacks, and I hate that.

There are many good reasons for the 1v8, 2v7, etc... bracket in a WL game:
  • Seeding higher, in theory, will always gives you an easier schedule. With any other system, it would become more advantageous to try to "game" your seed to end up in the slot that has the easiest (or easier) schedule. With the 1v8,2v7, etc... structure, 1 seed will generally have the easiest bracket, so teams only have to try to win. If a ranking system ever encourages teams to throw matches, whether or not any teams actually do this, I would say that it has a flaw.
  • The matches get continuously more intense due to higher quality of teams advancing. Would you prefer that the 1 alliance "humiliates" the 8 alliance in the quarterfinals or in the finals? There is usually a buildup of excitement right up to the finals. The two best alliances at the event, going head to head for victory, has to happen in the finals.
  • With wildcard slots and the district point system, the best teams need to have a chance to advance high in the competition. It would not be fair to either the 2 seed or the 1 seed if they went head to head right away, since both teams will, on average, not go as far in the competition, and thus have a worse chance of getting district qualifying points or wildcard slots.
  • It is standard in most other sports. I can't even name a WL sport that doesn't use this structure. Thus, it is easy to explain to spectators, friends, and family. I have had some family members come to FRC competitions for the past 3 years, and I bet some of them still don't understand our crazy serpentine draft, but they all understand this tournament structure.

In a WL tournament structure, there is no reasonable alternative to the 1v8, 2v7, etc ... system. Also, nobody is forcing the 8 seed to get humiliated by the 1 seed. 8 seeds beat 1 seeds about 1 in 12 times in 2014*, I would hardly call that forced humiliation.

*http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/3046
Reply With Quote