Win/Loss Revisited!

[Jessica Boucher]

So, now with one week of regionals over with (and with FIRST having yet to post it), I'd like to hear about the top 8 teams and their win/loss records for QUALIFYING. Finals are a different story altogether

I wish I knew more about what was going on in NJ, but only being there on Sat really stunted me. All I know is that 237 went undefeated into the NJ finals.

Thanks!

[Andy Brockway]

716 was 7-1 and qualified 3rd in NJ. I believe that 237 was the only undefeated team there.

[kjohnson]

165 was 6-0 = qualified 1st
616 was 5-1 = qualified 2nd

616 was 1st all day Friday but lost our last seeding match Saturday morning and dropped to third. The team that was bumped up to 2nd lost thier last match also which put us up to 2nd.

[Jeremy Roberts]

Team 1002 was 5-1 and qualified 6th at VCU.

[Heretic121]

we were either 6-1-1 or 7-1-1 not sure how many matches we acutally had =/

[Joel Glidden]

Originally Posted by Heretic121

we were either 6-1-1 or 7-1-1 not sure how many matches we acutally had =/

What seed were you with that record?

[Heretic121]

5th =/ not as high as we wanted... teh tie should have been a win... me and our other HP both missed 1 shot which would have added 10points each (we ended up capping) where we could have had 4th (maybe)... but thats the way it goes!

[LoganB]

At VCU we were 5-1 and we qualified 3rd.

[jeremy562]

Team 562 seeded 7th with a record of 6-2-0.

Once you get to the teams with 6-2 or 5-3 records, the QP's start to make a huge difference because a lot of teams will have the same record.

[Chris Hibner]

I just want to say that I really like the new qualifying format. Having the win/loss record set the qualifying position made the elimination rounds just like the qualification rounds. No longer is there two different games.

Another benefit is that the teams that qualified well tended to be the teams that did well in the eliminations. At least that was my observation from VCU.

My hat goes off to FIRST for making this change.

[Greg Perkins]

501 went 8-0 at BAE.
69 went 7-0-1
134 was 5-3

[MikeDubreuil]

Team 125 was 1-6-1, and seeded 49th

On a good note, it appears my 80% of matches won prediction seems right on. Since it's obvious I can't make a good robot, maybe I should change my major from computer engineering to math so I can be a statistician.

EDIT: Hooray to me! My 100th post!

[robolemur1236]

1236 had a really good record for second year in operation: 4-1-1 in regular, seeded #7, then we got all the way to semis. we only got beaten by the best team in the regional, so we did awesome. we are a first alternate for nationals

if not...
we'll see yall next year!

[Matt Adams]

Originally Posted by Chris Hibner

I just want to say that I really like the new qualifying format. Having the win/loss record set the qualifying position made the elimination rounds just like the qualification rounds. No longer is there two different games.

I completely agree. A win is a win is a win!

I think that in the past they were trying too hard to mix graciousness and competitiveness ON the field, which is a really tough thing to do. When you come out on to the field, you should be ready to play fairly at your highest level.

I think that this rules made a positive switch away from teams forcing themselves to ask, "Do we want to build a robot that will win matches, or get us picked in the finals?"

Doesn't it seem obvious that a robot that competes well consistantly SHOULD get picked for the finals, and be in the top 8?

Just my two cents,

Matt

[Greg Perkins]

i really liked the new ranking system...the only downside was how the figured out the tie situations...