View Single Post
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-02-2008, 12:03
Jack Jones Jack Jones is offline
Retired
no team
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Waterford, MI
Posts: 964
Jack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond repute
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/FRC Pilot Rookie Competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryVoshol View Post
That's what happened at ARC as well - 7 alliances with the first alliance getting a bye (or winning 2 games against non-existant alliance 8, if you want to think of it that way).

The amusing part was though everyone knew the concept, the scoring software couldn't be convinced that Alliance 8 consisted of Teams 0, 0 and 0. We were all ready to go, but couldn't cue up a match on the field software.
I, for one, do not like that idea because it means that two teams won't get into the eliminations unless they're called up as substitutes.

I'd rather see them have placebo robot(s) for the entire competition. Many veteran teams in the area have practice robots that could fiil the schedule. All 23 teams would get into the elims, and if a few veterains come and fill in, they could substitute for any rookies that fall by the wayside.

Another option I've seen done at RahChaCha, was to have the first seed select only one partner, and then sit out until the other side of the bracket produced a losing alliance. The #1 seed then adopted the lowest seed from that first eliminated alliance. So, every team got to play; the #1 seed didn't get a bye (but did have three robots); and one lucky team got second chance - with the #1 alliance to boot!!!

Last edited by Jack Jones : 29-02-2008 at 12:05.
Reply With Quote