View Single Post
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-03-2007, 21:19
Andrew Blair's Avatar
Andrew Blair Andrew Blair is offline
SAE Formula is FIRST with Gasoline.
FRC #0306 (CRT)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Corry
Posts: 1,193
Andrew Blair has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Blair has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Blair has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Blair has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Blair has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Blair has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Blair has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Blair has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Blair has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Blair has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Blair has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Andrew Blair Send a message via Yahoo to Andrew Blair
Re: "New" 2nd Week Scheduling Algorithm

I don't care what teams we get paired with, what number they are, what color their eyes are. I want, as accurately as the tournament's dynamics allow, seeding matches to represent the actual abilities of the teams who play them.

An example.

Looking through many regional standings and videos, and our own second week experience, I have seen far to many box bots in the top eight than either the game's dynamics or historical precedent allow for. There are always robots who get carried into the top eight, but they used to be relatively sparse. Teams might see one or two teams float up throughout a couple regionals.

This year is not the same. I have not analyzed the algorithm extensively, I have not interpreted the match results to find out why a disproportionate amount of non-scoring robots are making it into the top eight. I do however feel that there is a problem that needs to be fixed- and I do not necessarily fix the blame on the new algorithm. There is an issue that is allowing teams who are not leading their alliances to seed extremely high with regularity, and I'm not at all sure why. But regardless of why it's happening, in my opinion, many people of all team numbers are getting the short end of the stick.

Teams that are not especially skilled in game play or strategy, and their alliances as explained in my linked post, are at a direct disadvantage going into finals, and it's not beneficial to anyone caught up in it. Teams aren't losing because of bad planning, design, or strategy, but because of good luck. The situation just doesn't seem to sit well in my mind, but it doesn't seem impossible to remedy either.
__________________
Reading makes a full man, conference a ready man, and writing an exact man.
-Sir Francis Bacon

"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction."
-Albert Einstein