Quote:
Originally Posted by George1902
Solution: Give the losing alliance their own score in seeding points. Additionally, you may want to add a portion of the winner's score to the loser's seeding points to factor in strength of schedule. One possible formula for the loser's seeding score is S = L + 1/2*W.
Solution: Make sure the winning alliance isn't rewarded better for the loser's score than they are for their own. One possible formula for the winner's seeding score is S = W + L.
If you run an off season event, try to tweak the ranking system a bit instead of making a knee-jerk switch back to the W-L-T method. I think FIRST is on to something here, it just needs some refinement.
|
You make a good point. I think it running in the off season could show FIRST that it is a good ranking system (if it works). I liked this years system (ignoring the 6v0 problem) because it places winning as a priority but focuses scoring and competition more than W-L-T record. Getting one bad match up would completely ruin your record previously and this year helps reduce that impact. Not to mention the system is much easier to understand. before this year I didn't know what we needed to do in a match to rank up, this year its clear cut. We need to gain x# of seeding points in this match in order to move up a rank.