Thread: #1 seeded teams
View Single Post
  #32   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 18:17
ScoutingNerd175's Avatar
ScoutingNerd175 ScoutingNerd175 is offline
Scouting Away
AKA: Caroline Marr
FRC #0175 (Buzz Robotics)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Enfield, CT
Posts: 231
ScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud of
Send a message via AIM to ScoutingNerd175
Smile Re: #1 seeded teams

I'm going to put some numbers out there. I suppose many (not all) would consider the best team to be the team that scored the most points. So lets look at last years nationals since our selections there have already been brought up.
175 was seeded third. Seed 1 picked Seed 2 bumping us up to the second pick. We then picked 33 (possibly seed 11?). The reason we did this was because Team 33 had the best robot in curie division. (again if you consider the highest scoring robot to be the best robot) By those same numbers (objective as always and I'm sorry if it seems like I'm tooting my own horn) we were the second best robot in the division. The third, I believe was 118. Team 108 (I had no idea they were seeded so low, our scouting system doesn't take wins and losses or alliance total scores into account) was somewhere in the 5-8 range as far as scoring goes. So, at least in our division, Seeding did not have that much to do with actual scoring ability.
At Chesapeake last year, the top scoring robot (173) was seeded first. They then picked 1027, the third highest scoring robot. They did in fact win. The third seed robot was, 007, was the sixth highest scoring robot. Seeding was a bit closer than nationals, but not much.
This year a Chesapeake the highest scoring robot, 293, was third seed, the 2nd highest scoring robot, 341, was, I think 10th seed, the fifth, 175, was 4th seed, the sixth was 1389, which was actually still around for the second pick of the third alliance, the 1st seed, only undefeated team, was 1629 the 8th highest scoring robot. I am not sure of the seeds of the 56 and 399, the third and fourth highest scoring teams. The seeding this year reflected score even less than last year. However, the seeding did accurately predict winning in every single match up of the finals. This, I think, is the exception, not the rule. Again this assumes that you consider the best robot to be the highest scoring robot. Not necessarily true. Part of the first seed's success at Chesapeake was based on the fact that all three teams got up the ramp all but one time.
So there's the endless string of data that seems to come whenever I post.
I think that it really depends on the ability of the lower seeded teams to scout. If every single team had great scouting, then this would level the playing field. As it is, some teams do not have great scouting. In Chesapeake I think 6 out of 8 first picks were out of the top 8 at that time. This brought I think seed 14 into picking position. This team would be at a disadvantage because they were not expecting to be picking. Some teams end up seeded in the top 8 without ever having done great scouting, making their picks somewhat random. If you are a number one seed and the earlier seeds leave good robots (much more likely at Nationals) you will have a much better chance than if you are a first seed and no good robots have been left behind (much more likely at smaller regionals). Let me know if any of that made sense.
__________________
Buzz 175 Alumna

University of Michigan, Class of 2012
Syracuse University, Class of 2010
Enrico Fermi High School, Class of 2006