Quote:
Originally posted by Mike Rush
Outstanding goal teams will not generally seed well since thier best strategery involves annihilation ( by score ) of the other alliance and therefore do not get a lot of qualifying points. This leads to low seeding.
|
At least three of the top eight seeds at the Lone Star regional were strict goal robots:
118 65.25 Two Goal grabber with Mini-bot
57 63.75 Two Goal grabber with Mini-bot
357 61.13 Two Goal grabber
My theory on the whole thing? Matches with at least one ball robot in them have higher average scores. That doesn't mean that the ball robot will win every match, but the high scores are higher, and that cancels out a few more losses.
Goal robots, which are not guaranteed to have a ball robot in every match with them, have lower high scores, but score roughly the same number of points every time. They are also more likely to have the round locked up early. This makes them a target for the old zero-the-score-out maneuver, which would also tend to bring their average down.
In the long run, I'd say that the scores will line up by quality of robot, and not by genus or category, but in the short, 6 to 10 match competitions that we have, a lot can happen to skew the scores one way or another.