Should the Number One seed be Alloud to pick the Number Two seed?

[Kris Verdeyen]

Every argument here makes me think that the number 1 seed should get the first two picks in alliance selection. They earned it, right?

[String]

There's no "perfect" alliance selection system. If the goal is to maximize competitiveness, then shallower events constitute the current system's worst performance. If the goal is to incentivize high seeding and send deserving teams away with tickets to St. Louis, I personally think the system works extremely well. It rarely makes the #1 alliance far too powerful, but does gives it an earned advantage. It isn't overly punitive of lower seeded alliances either; good scouting and a well played alliance selection can combat low seeding very effectively.

[AGPapa]

Originally Posted by PVCpirate

Here are some numbers, do with them what you will:

2015 Event Wins By Seed
1   42 wins   63%
2   11 wins   16%
3    3 wins    4%
4    2 wins    3%
5    4 wins    6%
6    5 wins    7%

67 total events, no 7 or 8 seed has won an event yet.

Here's some numbers for past years (excluding the Championship divisions)

2014		
1	50.00%	49
2	21.43%	21
3	12.24%	12
4	4.08%	4
5	4.08%	4
6	3.06%	3
7	4.08%	4
8	1.02%	1
2013		
1	58.44%	45
2	11.69%	9
3	11.69%	9
4	5.19%	4
5	3.90%	3
6	5.19%	4
7	2.60%	2
8	1.30%	1
2012		
1	65.22%	45
2	13.04%	9
3	10.14%	7
4	1.45%	1
5	2.90%	2
6	1.45%	1
7	1.45%	1
8	4.35%	3
2011		
1	68.97%	40
2	20.69%	12
3	3.45%	2
4	3.45%	2
5	1.72%	1
6	0.00%	0
7	1.72%	1
8	0.00%	0

This year really just returns the #1 seed's winning % back what to what it was in previous years. Last year was an anomaly with a very low win % for the top seeds. This game doesn't approach the historic high of 1's seed dominance during Logomotion.

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Kris Verdeyen

Every argument here makes me think that the number 1 seed should get the first two picks in alliance selection. They earned it, right?

Isn't that old nag well and truly beaten to death by now?

-----------

Has someone analyzed how often 1-2 seed alliances have prevailed in 2015 finals, to date?

Anecdotal experience of my own team: we have had the opportunity to make the first pick (#1 AC) twice in our history, and it has resulted in blue banners both times. We did not pick the #2 seed either time, although they were definitely worthy competitors. Instead we picked partners that better complemented our team's capabilities (read: helped overcome our team's deficiencies). In both cases the partners we picked proved to be stronger competitors than we were, later in the season.

I think #1 seeds should continue to have the option to pick #2 seeds, but I don't think this is always the best pick to make, given the serpentine draft order.

[RonnieS]

I would never say that being rewarded for hard work isn't in the spirit of First. I take First as preparing students, like myself, for industry. If everyone received the same reward for the effort they put in...well our industry would suck. This is a competition, where people do compete. If your team did not preform well enough to claim a top seed spot, then go back and re evaluate what you have to do to place higher if that is what your program wants( there are many programs who do not value winning and that is fine too). Many of the top team will lend a ton of experience, advice, and help to you; you just have to ask. I know our team is always willing to help as many people as we can because we have been on the receiving end for awhile. Yes, it sucks to not seed first and feel like the top seeds are just dominating but as others have pointed out, its not very different from what it used to be.

You see a lot of the number #1 alliances winning this year do to the large differentiation in quality and performance. I have attended events where our OPR was almost triple that of the next best team, a huge gap that might make other teams mad at you. I see it a lot and powerhouse teams (teams like 1114) have experienced it at some point I'm sure of. We make an effort to talk and help other teams, more so this year than ever with the large amount of rookie teams we have in Michigan. This has bridged unfriendly gaps with teams there and made the atmosphere a TON better.

(This might not be a response you were looking for, just personal experience and my opinion on it.)
-Ronnie

[notmattlythgoe]

The top 4 teams at an event are not always the best. Since the rankings are based partially on who you get paired with through the qualification rounds there is a bit of luck involved.

The Virginia Regional was won by an alliance with a combined Qualification ranking of 71.

Disclaimer: The top 2 teams at VARI paired up and were a very good alliance and did not end up ranked there because of luck.

[Kris Verdeyen]

Originally Posted by Richard Wallace

Isn't that old nag well and truly beaten to death by now?

People have talked a lot about giving the #1 seed the first and ninth picks. I'm talking about the first and second.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by faust1706

This happens just about every year at many competitions. It goes away at st louis. Many teams deny higher seeds to form their own alliance, actually. The most denials I saw in a row were 3.

We were denied 4 times on Curie in 2013. We won the division with 148 as our first pick (and 862 as our second). Ironically we had gotten to Champs by turning down another team at CVR and forming our own alliance in the #6 slot.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by Ronnie314

You see a lot of the number #1 alliances winning this year do to the large differentiation in quality and performance. I have attended events where our OPR was almost triple that of the next best team, a huge gap that might make other teams mad at you.
-Ronnie

As I've pointed out elsewhere (see 1114 Statistical Outlier) this year is particularly skewed with just a few teams way ahead of the rest of the field. In fact the data shows this is the most skewed year in which we have data (since 2008). This is arising from the game design. The top teams are acting as we would expect them to do so given the situation. The solution is in making sure future games don't lead to such skewness.

The draft order has been debated every year. The important factor is to remember that other proposals can lead to teams trying to lose games to move around in the draft order. The current system rewards teams for finishing first and discourages weird disincentives.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by artdutra04

Your main point is already solved. The solution is called districts.

In districts, your team earns points based on a number of factors, but most heavily on robot performance. You get a lot of points for being high seeded alliance captains or the first picked team. The points you earn are used to both advance to District Championship, as well as for winning open slots to the World Championshp.

At each District Championship, there are a number of open merit-based slots allocated to teams based upon their points, given to teams in descending order of total points. So if you are a #3 alliance captain at one district event, a first pick by the #2 alliance in a second district, and you make decent progress into the playoff bracket at both districts and the District Championship event, you'll likely earn enough points to qualify for an open spot to the World Championship even if you never come home with a blue banner.

Agreed

[The other Gabe]

this would have solved nothing at PNW Auburn Mountainveiw and PNW Mount vernon. at both of them the combined might of 1318 and 1983 won (once over my team's alliance )... neither time was 1318 ranked second, and 1983 was first both times.

Oftentimes with a higher level of competition, it is the 4-6 seeds that have the advantage, getting 3 pretty good robots instead of 2 great ones and then whatever's left.

also, oftentimes the 1 and 2 seed will be incompatible if they both do feeder or both do landfill, or if neither have canburglars because of the limit on points

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by Lij2015

Agreed! The wild card system is allowing for 7 teams to be sent to championships from the VA regional. Team 384 generated 3 spots(winning a chairman's, the regional, and a 2014 Gallileo EI) and sent two members of the finalist alliance to Champs along with the VA EI winner (4481).

It allows for teams to dominate their regionals and not hog championship slots like has happened in the past.

Sacramento also is sending 7 teams. Fortunately 1671 which seeded 2nd and has a great robot qualified through Chairman's although they got knocked out by a small margin in the semis. There were 3 wildcards in the final, and another generated by our Rookie All Star 5458. In fact, 701 got its 2ND wildcard bid after making finals at CVR and benefiting from 254's wildcard.

[Anthony4939]

My only issue with this is the #1 alliance choosing a third robot, and that robot being told not to participate. I understand that they are giving another team a strong chance to go to St. Louis, but IMO it is not within gracious professionalism to choose a team and then tell them to not touch the driver's station.

Saw this in three regionals thus far this year where a random team was chosen, for in some cases great reasons that do not involve the actual robot, to then see that robot get parked off to the side while robots 1 and 2 win the tournament.

[orangemoore]

Originally Posted by Anthony4939

My only issue with this is the #1 alliance choosing a third robot, and that robot being told not to participate. I understand that they are giving another team a strong chance to go to St. Louis, but IMO it is not within gracious professionalism to choose a team and then tell them to not touch the driver's station.

Saw this in three regionals thus far this year where a random team was chosen, for in some cases great reasons that do not involve the actual robot, to then see that robot get parked off to the side while robots 1 and 2 win the tournament.

Don't assume that they were told to do nothing. Just because they sat there doesn't mean that decision was single sided. It is very likely the idea came up and that team agreed to it.

[silver505]

At the Arizona East Regional the second alliance actually ended up winning the regional. It was my first time seeing that.