What would happen if the #1 alliance captain gets denied by every team

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by 346CADmen

(Think not please find/state the RULE)

This is an interesting point... It's not explicitly stated in the rules. It is, however, strongly implied in section 10.5.1.

The ALLIANCE selection process consists of two (2) rounds during which each ALLIANCE CAPTAIN invites a Team seeded below them in the standings to join their ALLIANCE. The invited Team must not already have declined an invitation.

If the Team accepts, it becomes a member of that ALLIANCE. If an invitation from a top eight ALLIANCE to another ALLIANCE Lead is accepted, all lower ALLIANCE Leads are promoted one spot. The next highest-seeded, unselected Team moves up to become the ALLIANCE Eight Lead.

The same method is used for each ALLIANCE CAPTAIN’S second choice except the selection order is reversed, with ALLIANCE Eight picking first and ALLIANCE One picking last. This process results in eight (8) ALLIANCES of three (3) Teams each.

I bet a Q&A on this would result in an update to the rules, probably in the first section I quoted above. Something like "The invited Team must not already have declined an invitation or be part of an ALLIANCE with 1 or more teams."

[Rangel]

Originally Posted by 346CADmen

So Scorched Earth proposal/possibility exists, and its history is documented.
I had a concept that might be in a similar vein, and know of no rules to cover it.
I’m calling it Universe Upside-down. In this alliance picking strategy a super alliance can be made and in the balance of the competition field is destroyed (ok that’s a bit strong, but...).
I’ll explain the scenario using team ranking as names/numbers. After elims, teams 1-8 are captains. Team 1 picks team 2 who says yes. Now teams 3-9 are the other 7 captains. For simplicity of explanation the balance of picks are sequential by rank. So team 3(2 seed captain) picks team 10, 4 takes 11 and so on. Up and down selections take place per norm meaning 2 seed takes team23 (alliance is then 3, 10, 23) Then the 1 seed invites team 3. (Pause for effect) Realize Team 3 is the 2 seed captain and they have not said no (refused an invite) to a selection so by rule are eligible to be picked. (Think not please find/state the RULE) Think of the fallout. Team 3 says yes, SEED 1 alliance now teams 1, 2, 3 but that is the simple issue. Seed 2 has to have a captain move into the position vacated by team 3, per rule this is team 4 with team 10 becoming the seed 8 captain except 10 was part of the 2 seed alliance which just gained a new captain (as did most alliances). Chaos the depth of this is crazy, question, is it preventable? Would never happen you might say, because never, would the top 3 seeded teams wish to play together.

I looked in the rules and also could not find anything preventing this. However, I'm 99% sure this will be patched up as soon as FIRST notices. Typically once a captain selects a team, they are no longer eligible to be picked. It seems like this wording is missing for this year and last year as well. That or eligible means not already part of an alliance OR hasn't already declined.

[Lil' Lavery]

Common sense. Just apply common sense. Teams whine about ridiculously dense rules that are hard to understand, but then actively seek out ways to circumvent those rules. Just apply common sense.

[RoboChair]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Common sense. Just apply common sense. Teams whine about ridiculously dense rules that are hard to understand, but then actively seek out ways to circumvent those rules. Just apply common sense.

Contrary to the term, common sense isn't all that common.

[efoote868]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Common sense. Just apply common sense. Teams whine about ridiculously dense rules that are hard to understand, but then actively seek out ways to circumvent those rules. Just apply common sense.

I'd argue that an alliance captain making a pick automagically accepts their default "pick" as the alliance captain.

On a related note, is there any history of an alliance captain declining to be an alliance captain? That seems more likely than a tournament-wide scorched earth.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by efoote868

I'd argue that an alliance captain making a pick automagically accepts their default "pick" as the alliance captain.

On a related note, is there any history of an alliance captain declining to be an alliance captain? That seems more likely than a tournament-wide scorched earth.

There almost was at North Star a few years ago. One of my inspectors caught a team attempting to load their trailer before alliance selection and called me over. I just barely convinced them to stick around and wait another 30 mins before loading up. They went from 11th seed to being the 8th seed captain (I think those are the right numbers). If they had left as they were planning to, no one would have even been in the building for alliance selection.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by efoote868

On a related note, is there any history of an alliance captain declining to be an alliance captain? That seems more likely than a tournament-wide scorched earth.

It happened at a FiM District a few years ago. I don't recall the exact circumstances, but the team was already through to the DCMP. They wanted to spend several hours working in the Pits rather than competing. They were hoping they'd be selected and they could decline, but that didn't happen and they ended up as Alliance 7 captain. I think we let them decline, perhaps with some input from NH. But there's been a lot of District events since then, and my memory is hazy.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by 346CADmen

So Scorched Earth proposal/possibility exists, and its history is documented.
I had a concept that might be in a similar vein, and know of no rules to cover it.
I’m calling it Universe Upside-down. In this alliance picking strategy a super alliance can be made and in the balance of the competition field is destroyed (ok that’s a bit strong, but...).
I’ll explain the scenario using team ranking as names/numbers. After elims, teams 1-8 are captains. Team 1 picks team 2 who says yes. Now teams 3-9 are the other 7 captains. For simplicity of explanation the balance of picks are sequential by rank. So team 3(2 seed captain) picks team 10, 4 takes 11 and so on. Up and down selections take place per norm meaning 2 seed takes team23 (alliance is then 3, 10, 23) Then the 1 seed invites team 3. (Pause for effect) Realize Team 3 is the 2 seed captain and they have not said no (refused an invite) to a selection so by rule are eligible to be picked. (Think not please find/state the RULE) Think of the fallout. Team 3 says yes, SEED 1 alliance now teams 1, 2, 3 but that is the simple issue. Seed 2 has to have a captain move into the position vacated by team 3, per rule this is team 4 with team 10 becoming the seed 8 captain except 10 was part of the 2 seed alliance which just gained a new captain (as did most alliances). Chaos the depth of this is crazy, question, is it preventable? Would never happen you might say, because never, would the top 3 seeded teams wish to play together.

Please put down the gun.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by efoote868

On a related note, is there any history of an alliance captain declining to be an alliance captain? That seems more likely than a tournament-wide scorched earth.

Provisions to allow for this (or an alliance lead not sending a student representative) are included in the 2017 manual. I believe this is the first time.

To summarize, if a team declines to be an alliance lead or doesn't send a student representative, they may not be picked and have excluded themselves from the elimination tournament.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by efoote868

I'd argue that an alliance captain making a pick automagically accepts their default "pick" as the alliance captain.

On a related note, is there any history of an alliance captain declining to be an alliance captain? That seems more likely than a tournament-wide scorched earth.

At GTR East in 2011 the 7th seeded alliance captain chose to withdraw because they had a broken axle and missed their lat three matches and were unable to get it fixed,

[Al Skierkiewicz]

This has been "what if" discussed many times in the past based on the premise that the top seed had been so ungracious during the event that no one wanted to play with them. Thankfully, no team ever achieves that unsavory status. Thanks for being in FIRST.

[cbale2000]

The only time I recall a situation like this was back in 2006 when there was a team that, due to some fluke in the match scheduler was constantly paired with high-performing teams and won most/all of their matches, but they had a robot that basically didn't do anything (scored 10 points in auto and just drove around the rest of the match).
When it came time for alliance selection they were seeded #1, but no one wanted to be their partners so they got declined by basically all of the other alliance captains.

What was sad was I believe this exact same situation happened to this team at two different events that year.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by cbale2000

The only time I recall a situation like this was back in 2006 when there was a team that, due to some fluke in the match scheduler was constantly paired with high-performing teams and won most/all of their matches, but they had a robot that basically didn't do anything (scored 10 points in auto and just drove around the rest of the match).
When it came time for alliance selection they were seeded #1, but no one wanted to be their partners so they got declined by basically all of the other alliance captains.

What was sad was I believe this exact same situation happened to this team at two different events that year.

That's not what this thread talks about - the situation you're describing isn't all that rare (a handful of events a year have more than 1 decline). This thread is describing the situation where, after all of the captains decline, all of the non-captains also remove themselves from the tournament by declining. Obviously this will never happen.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by cbale2000

The only time I recall a situation like this was back in 2006 when there was a team that, due to some fluke in the match scheduler was constantly paired with high-performing teams and won most/all of their matches, but they had a robot that basically didn't do anything (scored 10 points in auto and just drove around the rest of the match).
When it came time for alliance selection they were seeded #1, but no one wanted to be their partners so they got declined by basically all of the other alliance captains.

What was sad was I believe this exact same situation happened to this team at two different events that year.

Rather than that, it was actually a strategy by the team, often called "Scorched Earth". By inviting alliance captains they knew would decline, they helped to level the playing field. Then they invited one they knew would accept, and none of the other alliance captains could pick each other. So, not sad, strategic and pretty clever.

[cbale2000]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

Rather than that, it was actually a strategy by the team, often called "Scorched Earth". By inviting alliance captains they knew would decline, they helped to level the playing field. Then they invited one they knew would accept, and none of the other alliance captains could pick each other. So, not sad, strategic and pretty clever.

Given that their first (attempted) pick was alliance #2, I don't think that was likely the case (as there would be no benefit to preventing alliance #2 from being picked).