Division by average

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by JamesCH95

I don't disagree with you, but that won't stop some teams from trying, which is counter-productive to the competition.

Ignoring the ridiculous level of luck/complexity involved that would make throwing matches to manipulate your division unrealistic (especially for anyone outside of the three events competing week 7), there's a simple "fix." You simply don't tell teams that you're sorting divisions by average score before you perform the sort.

[JamesCH95]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Ignoring the ridiculous level of luck/complexity involved that would make throwing matches to manipulate your division unrealistic (especially for anyone outside of the three events competing week 7), there's a simple "fix." You simply don't tell teams that you're sorting divisions by average score before you perform the sort.

You are correct.

Look, I'm not arguing that the logistics of making it happen are practical. I am only saying that if divisions were sorted this way, and they know about it, then it opens up a motivator for teams to not play fairly. It would seem counter to the recent openness of FRC to hide the sorting process.

[Nathan Streeter]

Sounds like a reasonable idea to me; it seems like FIRST is probably more likely to use a different method though (like the sequential-by-registration-order method).

The obvious concern of teams trying to game the system is there... but it would be essentially impossible to succeed with. The only teams that might have a chance to do so are the ones competing week 7, but enough teams compete week 7 and there's enough uncertainty about who will actually attend CMP that has qualified, that it wouldn't be realistic. That said, some teams could still try...

Regardless, FIRST won't announce how they're doing it until after it's done... and maybe not even then. Quite potentially though Frank or someone at FIRST will come across this idea (or has already thought of it) and they may weigh it... I personally don't think they'll do anything game-specific though.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by JamesCH95

You are correct.

Look, I'm not arguing that the logistics of making it happen are practical. I am only saying that if divisions were sorted this way, and they know about it, then it opens up a motivator for teams to not play fairly. It would seem counter to the recent openness of FRC to hide the sorting process.

Is that really any different than the registration-order based system they used last year? Couldn't teams attempt to game the system that way, too? Is FIRST not telling us about this algorithm until after last season running counter to their openness?

[JamesCH95]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Is that really any different than the registration-order based system they used last year? Couldn't teams attempt to game the system that way, too? Is FIRST not telling us about this algorithm until after last season running counter to their openness?

There is a big difference in principle. In one case up to 5 other teams (per match) are being directly affected by one team's actions without any choice in the matter. In the other case one team is ostensibly gambling their slot in CMP to try and game the system. So, yes, there is a big difference.

I am going to let my original point stand. I acknowledge the impracticality of materially affecting match averages to game the proposed division system, but posit that the impracticality won't stop some teams from trying. It's a bad motivation that is not needed because numerous other methods to sort divisions are available.

You are free to discuss FIRST's openness in a different thread. That is not the purpose of this thread and I would be remiss if I continued that discussion here.

[nuggetsyl]

Originally Posted by JamesCH95

There is a big difference in principle. In one case up to 5 other teams (per match) are being directly affected by one team's actions without any choice in the matter. In the other case one team is ostensibly gambling their slot in CMP to try and game the system. So, yes, there is a big difference.

I am going to let my original point stand. I acknowledge the impracticality of materially affecting match averages to game the proposed division system, but posit that the impracticality won't stop some teams from trying. It's a bad motivation that is not needed because numerous other methods to sort divisions are available.

You are free to discuss FIRST's openness in a different thread. That is not the purpose of this thread and I would be remiss if I continued that discussion here.

No team could possibly game the system with 8 divisions. Its statistically impossible.

[JamesCH95]

Originally Posted by JamesCH95

There is a big difference in principle. In one case up to 5 other teams (per match) are being directly affected by one team's actions without any choice in the matter. In the other case one team is ostensibly gambling their slot in CMP to try and game the system. So, yes, there is a big difference.

I am going to let my original point stand. I acknowledge the impracticality of materially affecting match averages to game the proposed division system, but posit that the impracticality won't stop some teams from trying. It's a bad motivation that is not needed because numerous other methods to sort divisions are available.

You are free to discuss FIRST's openness in a different thread. That is not the purpose of this thread and I would be remiss if I continued that discussion here.

Originally Posted by nuggetsyl

No team could possibly game the system with 8 divisions. Its statistically impossible.

Must I really repeat myself with a post that you quoted? What point are you trying to make that I haven't already acknowledged?

Edit: I don't mean this to come off too harsh. I would like the discussion to move forward instead of harping on the same point that all participants have acknowledged.