1-41-43

[Hallry]

Very, VERY good scouting. Someone give a cookie to each member on 254's scouting team. Not many other 1st seeded teams would pick the 43rd ranked team as their first pick.

And also, remember who won the 2011 FRC World Championship together.

[joelg236]

Just like 2056 in 2012, picking 1114 (IIRC, 73rd place?). It's your reputation. (being good friends helps too!)


But that second pick meshed really well, really good job on that pick.

[Caleb Sykes]

If you have good scouts, that number that everyone else calls "rank" is irrelevant (unless that number is <16).

[joelg236]

Originally Posted by inkling16

If you have good scouts, that number that everyone else calls "rank" is irrelevant (unless that number is <16).

I wouldn't call it irrelevant. As a matter of fact, it roughly correlates with winning potential and assist potential. But if you have the real numbers, it probably doesn't matter too much.

[Owen Makin]

I would go as far as to say that rank is completely irrelevant. At this years san diego regional the alliance captain that ended up choosing the sixth seeded team had a robot that could barely move, but were exceedingly lucky with their match schedule. Note that my team also too had the same thing occur to it in 2009 where we were ranked 4th. Yet for the last four years i can not remember playing more than once with a power house team more than once per year. There is no easy way to fix the problem other than completely changing the ranking structure. Teams that do not scout due to the fact they know they wont be top eight, but end up being lucky leads them to choose solely on rank, and teams that dont have exceptional scouts also pick teams baded solely on rank, or maybe a good match with them. Scouting is extremely difficult due to the amount of time it takes to go through each and every single one of the matches ar least six times to view each robot, there almost isnt enough time to do that. The ranking might never change, but that only rncourages teams to be better scouts.

[ErvinI]

Originally Posted by joelg236

Just like 2056 in 2012, picking 1114 (IIRC, 73rd place?). It's your reputation. (being good friends helps too!)


But that second pick meshed really well, really good job on that pick.

That same year, 254 was in the very same position on Curie, where they were in the 53rd place, yet 341 (the 1st seed) took a chance on them as their first pick. I don't think 254 forgot that one.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by ErvinI

That same year, 254 was in the very same position on Curie, where they were in the 53rd place, yet 341 (the 1st seed) took a chance on them as their first pick. I don't think 254 forgot that one.

Objectively speaking we were at worst the third best performing/highest scoring robot in Curie in 2012...we just couldn't get anyone to co-op with us. The situation with 987 picking us in SD last year was much more apt.

[orangemoore]

I think this year you will see many low "ranked" teams win a competition. The ranking system is based off a game that has to do with co-operation, if your alliances partners do not co-operate then it is likely that you will lose, it is up to those people scouting to find the best teams to pick and this year it may be at the bottom of the standings.

The ranking system this year can be a blessing and a curse.

[Josh Greene]

I can attest to good scouting. At CIR this year, my team ranked 34th our of 40 was selected by the #1 alliance. There were many good teams remaining that 525 passed on to select us due to our defense and assisting.

Synergy is extremely important. Also, having the #1 and #3 seeded teams on our alliance did not hurt.

[Dave Scheck]

All this talk of picking based on performance rather than actual rank reminds me of 2009 in Galileo when we picked up 971 as the last pick in the draft as an absolute steal. They were seeded 66 out of 86, but their record definitely didn't reflect their capabilities. Good scouting should never be taken for granted.