Quote:
Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery
Because the controversial scheduling system is in place, all this shows that the desired effect of the system was achieved. Every match a low number team won, a low number team lost.
This data is meaningless.
Also, I am in no way supporting the existing scheduling algorithm.
|
You raise a good point about the match scheduling system at the first weekend regionals ensuring that every match a low numbered team won, a low numbered team also lost, however that doesn't make the data meaningless. It may mean precisely what you suggest when you say "the desired effect of the system was achieved".... which is a meaningful conclusion.
If we run a similar analysis after the second weekend regionals and see a correlation between team number and qualifying success it will demonstrate that at first weekend regionals there was an artificial barrier to the win/loss record of some teams, and will have some more solid evidence to back up the "common sense" idea that veteran teams do have an advantage -- in general -- over newer teams. Something that -- frankly -- I'm okay with. There should be some benefit to years of hard work... not an insurmountable or overwhelming benefit, but some benefit at least.
Thanks to everyone who has joined in with ideas, thoughts and suggestions -- particularly the statistics and observations from previous years. I'm looking forward to seeing what this weekend brings as it looks like FIRST is moving quickly to resolve this particular issue.
Jason