Quote:
Originally Posted by smurfgirl
It's always frustrating seeing some of the alliances randomly selected- take matches 57 (178/177/228 vs. 1902/999/2785) and 58 (126/230/176 vs. 1665/2265/1403) for example- look at the disparity between the years the teams on the red alliance vs. the years the teams on the blue alliance have existed. I know that older does not always mean better, but it came as no surprise to me that the red alliance won both of those matches.
Also, what was your team getting filmed for in the morning Saturday? I didn't want to interrupt to ask, and I didn't get the chance to come visit your pits later in the day.
|
The thing with "random" matches is that every now and then you get "super alliances" about just as often as you get "rookie alliances". FIRST tried doing an algorithm to "randomly" seed a team into each alliance based upon team number in 2007, but that plan met a
lot of resistance from the FIRST community and was discontinued after that season.
FIRST matches aren't truely random. If they were, you might have to play back to back matches. Things like minimum match separation eliminate some of the randomness, and the more criteria you add into the algorithm, the less the results are actually random.
So yes, sometimes you are on the winning side of "lopsided" alliances, and sometimes you are on the losing side of "lopsided" alliances. But as more and more qualification matches are played out, the "average lopsided factor" will converge towards nearly even alliances. It's like flipping a coin a lot of times in a row. For a while, it may seem like it's landing a lot more often on heads than tails, but as you keep going it'll converge to 50/50.