Thread: Seeding Calculations
View Single Post
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 21:56
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
  
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: If you think that was complicated. try this...
Posted by P.J. Baker.

Engineer on team #177, Bobcat Robotics, from South Windsor High School and International Fuel Cells.

Posted on 9/7/99 5:50 AM MST


In Reply to: If you think that was complicated. try this... posted by Raul on 9/5/99 10:57 PM MST:



Raul,


With a 6 match schedule, I can't quite agree that won lost record should be the most important factor in seeding. I do think though, that this year it was not important enough. It probably was possible for a 2-6 team to seed ahead of a 6-0 team. That's not right.

I'm perfectly comfortable with a 5-1 team, or even maybe a 4-2 team seeding ahead of a 6-0 team. A team that should have been 4-2 is just as likely to get 2 lucky wins and go to 6-0 as a team that should have been 6-0 is to get 2 unlucky losses and slip to 4-2.

This is why I think that it is important to also look at the scoring and defensive capabilities of the team. If we played lots more matches, I'd be with you 100%. With only 6 though, I think that the seeding should be based on as many measureable factors as possible (won/loss, ave. offense, ave. defense). What do you think?

P.J.


__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.