27-03-2004, 22:27
|
|
-
no team
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: -
Posts: 3,478
|
|
|
Re: Worst Scoring System in Years
Leon Machado did this spreadsheet attached of the BAE regional. A few things I noticed off the bat:
- RPs are still necessary for a higher seed. The catch is, this year you actually have to win rounds.
- On the topic of RPs, the ninth seed had the highest, 17th had second, 32nd was third, and the 2 seed was fourth. So again, you need high QPs. Imagine the shakeup that would've happened had we used a scoring system based on the RPs.
- Most of the higher seeds pulled lower RP scores. In fact, seeds 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8 in RPs placed 5, 4, 21, 9, 16, 25, 30, & 44, respectively.
- This is the first year in the Alliance Era QPs were based on Win/Loss. If they had been based on previous formulas, we'd be seeing teams shooting for the opposing goals, and maybe less fighting (for lack of a better word) on the platform. Take that any way you want. We'd also see the #9 seed placed first. Again, take that as you will.
|