Thread: The Case For 'Regionalizing' teams at the Nationals.
View Single Post
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:34
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
At first I thought so too...
Posted by Splash.

Student on team #53, Team Inferno, from Eleanor Roosevelt High School and NASA GSFC.

Posted on 8/15/2000 3:09 PM MST


In Reply to: The Case Against 'Regionalizing' teams at the Nationals. posted by Nate Smith on 8/15/2000 11:53 AM MST:



When the regionalizing idea came up, I thought, the mid-west was going to have a stacked division. Then I thought, make it random. Hopefully, ever division would be equal (probably won't happen, but hope). Then I realized that with 16 alliances in each of 4 divisions, 48 teams are going to be coming out of a group of 100. Considering that teams may pick from anyone, by the time the last 8 alliances are formed, the robots that teams wanted for partners are going to be gone.

After thinking about it, that is a positive. Chances are high that ever group is probably going to go through the same thing where one alliance after another pick from the top 16. This means that every region will have strong alliances. One region may have 12 hypothetically strong alliances, another region may only have 2. By the time they begin competing against each other, the best alliances will have emerged. This is just like Nationals in its current phase. (This is about to get confusing)If the #1 seeded team picks the #15 seeded team which was the
#2 seeded team's top choice and best match, they might feel if there was another strong team they would have a better opportunity. The system is the same, if you want to pick from a deeper group, finish ranked higher.

Regardless of the few negatives, it's still better than the current system. Less teams get overlooked, more teams get to experience the finals.


__________________
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.