[rick.oliver]

Yes, I like the seeding system.

I appreciate that the seeding system encourages scoring in the qualification rounds. I understand that the seeding system discourages the use of defense throughout an entire qualification round; however, strategic defense could still be valuable in a close match. I also like that the strategy can be much different in the elimination rounds.

I remember a regional where a team that had not shown (except for their human player) for their first several matches was ranked higher than us. That was on the previous W-L-T system and when we were still going two on two. So the arguments about how this particular system distorts the rankings rings hollow to me.

I am concerned about the amount of penalties and the potential for incurring incursion penalties while crossing bumps; however, that is a separate issue from the seeding system.

Based upon what I'm reading here and in other threads, this year's version of heavy defense is to block your own goals, score for your opponents and hope that they incur penalties. At least there may be less damage to the robots during qualification rounds.

Net, I don't think that the problem is with the seeding system. It seems to me that if each alliance did their best to score as much as possible for themselves that the best teams would be rewarded and end up as the highest ranked. If an alliance wants to take the risk and score to increase their coopertition bonus, good for them.