Quote:
Originally Posted by efoote868
I dislike the outliers this system generated.
During match 87, the field was comprised almost solely of elimination caliber teams. The score was 20-16.
57 of team 67's 276 qualifying points came out of that match. I think before that match they were ranked around 30th, and after that match they were ranked 1st or 2nd.
|
That match was awesome! I don't see why winning a high scoring, tight, tough, exciting match like that shouldn't count more than a match like the debut of HOT's Breakaway robot in Qualifications 1 at Kettering, where the final score was 3-2.
The scoring system does what it was designed to do: provide an incentive for teams to score big, and make sure only teams that can consistently put up high scores, and beat other good teams, make it to the top 8 and become alliance captains.
I wrote a long post very early in the season about my high opinion of the seeding system, when everyone else was vehemently opposed to it. And I haven't changed my mind since then. I am in full support of the new seeding system and even think it should be used at offseason events.
