Alliance Color in Eliminations

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by Karthik

Close, but you have QF3 and QF4 swapped. QF3 is always the 2 vs. 7 matchup, and QF4 is always the 3 vs. 6 matchup.

I love that you knew this presumably from memory.

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Karthik

Close, but you have QF3 and QF4 swapped. QF3 is always the 2 vs. 7 matchup, and QF4 is always the 3 vs. 6 matchup.

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

I love that you knew this presumably from memory.

I presume so also, and admire the attention to detail. Details are important. Winning strategists and engaging MCs need to know who plays who, and in what order.

Karthik is world class in both roles.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

I love that you knew this presumably from memory.

I've always been a stickler for details. Also, it comes from years of saying "Introducing Quarterfinal 3-1, with the #2 seed facing the #7 seed".

Originally Posted by Richard Wallace

I presume so also, and admire the attention to detail. Details are important. Winning strategists and engaging MCs need to know who plays who, and in what order.

Karthik is world class in both roles.

Thanks, Richard. I aim to please.

[lemiant]

Is this in the rule book. Or is it just tradition?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by lemiant

Is this in the rule book. Or is it just tradition?

Tradition, and the FMS.

The FMS knows what the pairings called for by the Manual are--there's a bracket in Section 5.4.3. The only thing dictating the color is that FMS apparently thinks that red is the top line on any given bracket pair. Therefore, it assigns red to the higher-seeded alliance, and then the winners of the odd QFs and the odd SF.



Incidentally, if you are on either Alliance #1 OR Alliance #6, you really only need to bring one set of bumpers to the arena for the finals. Alliance #1 is always red; Alliance #6 is always blue. All other alliances switch at some point if they make it that far.

[GaryVoshol]

It was not in this year's rules. FMS just does it.

In past seasons, the rules had it wrong. They stated that the lower number seed was Red. And didn't say the part about inheriting the seed if you beat a lower seed (e.g. if 6 beats 3, they inherit Red from 3 for the next round).

Head refs and lead queue positions also know how it works.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

It was not in this year's rules. FMS just does it.

In past seasons, the rules had it wrong. They stated that the lower number seed was Red. And didn't say the part about inheriting the seed if you beat a lower seed (e.g. if 6 beats 3, they inherit Red from 3 for the next round).

Head refs and lead queue positions also know how it works.

I make it a point to know this by heart.
People are always stunned when the fourth or fifth seed upset the top seed and become red instead of the second seed. It's the bracket setup.

[Steven Donow]

Originally Posted by EricH

Tradition, and the FMS.

The FMS knows what the pairings called for by the Manual are--there's a bracket in Section 5.4.3. The only thing dictating the color is that FMS apparently thinks that red is the top line on any given bracket pair. Therefore, it assigns red to the higher-seeded alliance, and then the winners of the odd QFs and the odd SF.

Could the FMS just "knowing" it be based off when test matches are being run and the teams are just numbers 1-6, is the red alliance composed of teams 1,2, and 3?