[PhilBot]

Originally Posted by Caleb Sykes

I think you misunderstand what I was saying. The section you quoted is my defense of the 1v8, 2v7, etc... system in a WL game. This section was in response to PhilBot's point 7.

I was merely saying that there is no reasonable alternative to this system if each match has a winner and a loser. If you do know of a better system for these types of games, I would be curious to know what it is, so please share.

I appreciate what you are saying. It's what's standard for a WL system. As a totally non-sports person (and I mean NO sports at all), the first time I went to an FRC competition, I expected #1 to play #2, #3 to play #4 and down the line. I understand now that this method makes the top 2 teams mad, because one of them will be eliminated, ahead of a lower team.

What about 1:5, 2:6, 3:7 and 4:8 matchups. This way at least they wouldn't be quite so biased...

But since this isn't likely to happen, I'm ecstatic to see the non win-loss system given a try. This numerical ranking system works for a ton of sports, so why not FIRST.

BTW, FTC does not use the serpentine selection model.
They go 1,2,3,4, 1,2,3,4