Wild Card Spot Reform?

[Tyler_Kaplan]

Originally Posted by logank013

Why don't we do this for the regional system? Say there is a regional where there are 3 wild card spots (I'm assuming this is very rare). Is it reasonable for the 2nd pick on the finalist alliance to get that 3rd wild card spot when the third alliance captain that's been shooting 5 high goals all day doesn't qualify because they were knocked out in semis?

At all three regionals we went to, Central Valley, Sacramento, and Silicon Valley, the entire Finalist alliance also qualified for world's, so it does happen, at least in CA, somewhat frequently.

I think that this is a slippery slope. When you tell the third robot of the Finalist alliance that they won't be receiving a wild card, and someone who didn't make it to finals will, you're basically telling that team that they didn't really contribute to the alliance much. Imagine being that 3rd robot, and you played amazing defense, you even cheesecaked your robot for the alliance, but FIRST says you don't qualify because you weren't as good as some other captain who lost to your alliance in semi's. I just don't think that's fair to that team.

I'm not saying that the current system is flawless, and there are amazing robots at every competition who don't qualify for world's, but I don't think taking away the wildcard from a Finalist robot is the right thing to do.

[logank013]

Originally Posted by Tyler_Kaplan

At all three regionals we went to, Central Valley, Sacramento, and Silicon Valley, the entire Finalist alliance also qualified for world's, so it does happen, at least in CA, somewhat frequently.

I think that this is a slippery slope. When you tell the third robot of the Finalist alliance that they won't be receiving a wild card, and someone who didn't make it to finals will, you're basically telling that team that they didn't really contribute to the alliance much. Imagine being that 3rd robot, and you played amazing defense, you even cheesecaked your robot for the alliance, but FIRST says you don't qualify because you weren't as good as some other captain who lost to your alliance in semi's. I just don't think that's fair to that team.

I'm not saying that the current system is flawless, and there are amazing robots at every competition who don't qualify for world's, but I don't think taking away the wildcard from a Finalist robot is the right thing to do.

With what you said, should we then change the current district system? It's very plausible for a third alliance captain who lost in semis to beat out the 2nd pick of the finalist alliance for one of the "next-in" spots based on district points. The third alliance captain that lost in semis will probably beat out that finalist 2nd pick most of the time.

5th rank: 19 points (based on 55 teams)
Third captain: 14
Semi finalist: 10
Total: 42

23 rank: 14 (based on 55 teams)
15 pick: 2
Finalist: 20
Total: 36

Assuming alliance selection goes based on rank (which never happens), the third alliance captain who lost in semis wins by 6 points over the finalist 2nd pick.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by Tyler_Kaplan

At all three regionals we went to, Central Valley, Sacramento, and Silicon Valley, the entire Finalist alliance also qualified for world's, so it does happen, at least in CA, somewhat frequently.

I think that this is a slippery slope. When you tell the third robot of the Finalist alliance that they won't be receiving a wild card, and someone who didn't make it to finals will, you're basically telling that team that they didn't really contribute to the alliance much. Imagine being that 3rd robot, and you played amazing defense, you even cheesecaked your robot for the alliance, but FIRST says you don't qualify because you weren't as good as some other captain who lost to your alliance in semi's. I just don't think that's fair to that team.

I'm not saying that the current system is flawless, and there are amazing robots at every competition who don't qualify for world's, but I don't think taking away the wildcard from a Finalist robot is the right thing to do.

To add some more on Tyler's post, the current regional system is one way for a robot drafted 24th to make Champs. Extending the wildcard through the Finalist alliance is a natural step in this logic. This gives teams in the middle a stronger incentive to be competitive. At least the districts system preserves an intermediate championship event for those teams to aim for. We shouldn't undermine that incentive.

[Whatever]

Really the open question to me is should the wildcards generated at a regional go to teams at that regional or should they be returned to the waitlist pool.

At 10K over last weekend there were 4 wildcards generated and there was not a Rookie All Star award. 3 of those wildcards went to the finalist alliance. The 4th one is going to a waitlist team. The rookie all star berth is also going to a waitlist team.

My personnel opinion is I would rather the wildcards stayed at the regional. To be honest, I really thought the 4th wildcard would go to the highest ranked team after qualifiers and was really let down when I learned it was returned to the waitlist.

[Mr V]

I highly doubt that FIRST intends to do any more changes to the wild card system and I don't really think that they should. The first year it was pretty limited and that limit was needed as the space at CMP meant that if every Regional generated a full 6 teams there would have been more than 400 teams spaces needed and no room for wait list teams. With the additional number that can be given out now and the change to Districts getting a corresponding percentage of spots there is still some room for the new lottery system.

The fact is that FIRST wanted most of the US in the District System by now. It does address the concerns that may have cited for reasons to expand the wild card and who it should go to.

The system originally created by FiM was designed to significantly help those teams caught in the "valley of doom" where that second pick of the #1 or #2 alliance that more often than not went on to win it all and get a spot at CMP was a much lower performing robot than the ones in the alliance that ended up as a finalist. Much of the robot performance side of the current unified points system is taken from that original FiM system.

So in the current system here are the points earned assuming that we have a fairly common occurrence of the #1 and #2 Alliance meeting in the finals, based on robot performance only.

Wining

Captain 68
1st pick 65-67 (assuming a robot that seeded pretty well)
2nd pick 40 ish (assuming a middle of the road seeding)

Finalist

Captain 54-55
1st pick 50 ish
2nd pick 30 ish

So it is common for the two top robots on the Finalist alliance if they are the 2nd or 3rd seed to get more points than the coat tail pick of the #1 Alliance.

If of course also addresses a proportional number of teams from a given area going to CMP. So you don't have the case where a lower percentage of teams get to go from an area just because they attend a larger event. A District just goes down the teams in order in case a team declines so that there are no unused spots.

As we move to more and more Districts and the .5CMPsl that are coming I do expect FIRST to reserve a number of spots for the lottery.

FIRST has repeatedly indicated that they want every team to make it to CMP at least occasionally. That is one of the stated reasons for the .5CMPs