Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds

[Nuttyman54]

being pushed into a goal is actually fair game for DQing, according to FIRST. I would argue that the pushing team should get the DQ, but FIRSTs reasoning is this (to my knowledge):

Passing more than 3 inches into the lower goal could trigger the ball-counter, thus throwing off the scores entirely. Thus, rather than trying to determine the original score, the referees simply DQ the robot.

Wetzel, is this correct? if not, could you post the correct version?

[George A.]

I think that the serpintine draft will be good in the larger regionals that have a lot of talent, and where some of the middle of the pack teams are ranked there due to some bad breaks.

However in the smaller regionals (like NYC that only has 28 or so teams) the 1st ranked allaince will only have like 2 or 3 teams to make their final selection from. It should definately be a new twist on the elimination matches this year.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

Another interesting note about the BAE regional...

Team 319 was ranked 9th, but treated as #10 when alliances were bumped up due to 3 "inter top 8" picks.

It was kind of interesting, although I do feel bad for team 319.

[Jason Morrella]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

Another interesting note about the BAE regional...

Team 319 was ranked 9th, but treated as #10 when alliances were bumped up due to 3 "inter top 8" picks.

Sounds strange, can you clarify what you think happened?
When top 8 teams picked each other, didn't the # 9 team at the time move up to the # 8 spot? Just trying to understand how they were 9th, but treated as 10th.

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by Jason Morrella

Sounds strange, can you clarify what you think happened?
When top 8 teams picked each other, didn't the # 9 team at the time move up to the # 8 spot? Just trying to understand how they were 9th, but treated as 10th.

Yeah, I'm not getting that either. Tom, would you like to clarify?

[Joel J]

They possibly messed up?

What I've heard is that 1073 picked before 319, even though 319 seeded higher.

[Faith]

Yes - 1073 was asked up before 319, but 319 was ranked higher then 1073. Then 1073 picked, and 319 was called up...

[Melissa Nute]

Originally Posted by Plooshiska

Yes - 1073 was asked up before 319, but 319 was ranked higher then 1073. Then 1073 picked, and 319 was called up...

The announcer was given an older copy of the rankings since it had changed after we ensured that all the scores had been entered correctly into the system. We noticed it at the scoring table that mistake but unfortunately 1073 had already been called up by that time.

[Ty Tremblay]

Yeah, that was pretty agrivating. It confused me so much that I had no idea who to pick when I went up. Luckily I picked a pretty good alliance and we made it to the finals. Good luck nexyear everyone! Only 10 months till kickoff!

[Marc P.]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

Exactly.
At smaller regionals the number 1 seed will be forced to work with a possibly "weak sister" and may be in a position to work twice as hard just to survive.
This was a huge swing and a miss on FIRST's behalf.

While I can certainly see the disadvantage at smaller regionals, I don't necessarily think of it as a swing and a miss. Traditionally, the first seed had the pick of the litter, and in most cases put together a very strong alliance (assuming they did proper scouting). The 8th seed was only able to pick from the leftovers from the top 7 for both rounds of the draft. The end result was typically stacked in the 1st seed's favor, when you put the theoretical best alliance against some lower ranked teams. As far as I know, there's only been a handful of 8th seed upsets when pitted against the 1st seed alliance.

Under the new system, there is the very real possibility of a tough match between the 1st and 8th seed alliances. I'd argue an alliance of two strong robots with a relatively weak partner would have approximately the same effectiveness as 3 middle of the road robots. With a balance of power like that, the elimination matches are no longer a stacked alliance vs. a weak alliance, and for all intents and purposes no longer a sure win.

It also greatly increases the burden on scouts, who now need to come up with a list of 24 potential alliance partners (for a 1st seed team), rather than 8 or 9. Strategically, it's brilliant. Statistically, it's a nightmare. In the end, it led to some of the most exciting elimination matches I've ever seen in FIRST. I had the opportunity to see team 25's scouting team in action in New Jersey this year, and all I can say is wow. They know their stuff, and know what needs to be done. This year, more than ever, if you are a top 8 team, make sure you have all the scouting data necessary to make confident alliance choices, because in the end, it will make or break your shot at the gold.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Marc P.

While I can certainly see the disadvantage at smaller regionals, I don't necessarily think of it as a swing and a miss. Traditionally, the first seed had the pick of the litter, and in most cases put together a very strong alliance (assuming they did proper scouting). The 8th seed was only able to pick from the leftovers from the top 7 for both rounds of the draft. The end result was typically stacked in the 1st seed's favor, when you put the theoretical best alliance against some lower ranked teams. As far as I know, there's only been a handful of 8th seed upsets when pitted against the 1st seed alliance.

Under the new system, there is the very real possibility of a tough match between the 1st and 8th seed alliances. I'd argue an alliance of two strong robots with a relatively weak partner would have approximately the same effectiveness as 3 middle of the road robots. With a balance of power like that, the elimination matches are no longer a stacked alliance vs. a weak alliance, and for all intents and purposes no longer a sure win.

It also greatly increases the burden on scouts, who now need to come up with a list of 24 potential alliance partners (for a 1st seed team), rather than 8 or 9. Strategically, it's brilliant. Statistically, it's a nightmare. In the end, it led to some of the most exciting elimination matches I've ever seen in FIRST. I had the opportunity to see team 25's scouting team in action in New Jersey this year, and all I can say is wow. They know their stuff, and know what needs to be done. This year, more than ever, if you are a top 8 team, make sure you have all the scouting data necessary to make confident alliance choices, because in the end, it will make or break your shot at the gold.

At Pittburgh if you are the #1 seed you get the choice of two teams for your last partner. I doubt a steal will be waiting them at the bottom of the draft.
Do not be surprised if you see the #1 allaince go down in the first round at Pittsbugh

[AmyPrib]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

At Pittburgh if you are the #1 seed you get the choice of two teams for your last partner. I doubt a steal will be waiting them at the bottom of the draft.
Do not be surprised if you see the #1 allaince go down in the first round at Pittsbugh

This is nearly the same for Boilermaker. We will only have 5 teams that don't make it into the Finals, which I really really hate.. (darn the regional scheduling! ) But that also means that nobody can pack up early because they need to wait around and find out if they are needed as a 4th pick in finals.... sure hope only a few teams need a 4th pick... I wonder what Pittsburgh will do if several teams need a 4th partner? I asked this question but have not received an answer yet... my guess is they're just outta luck.

I think in the grand scheme of things, it balances alliances out a bit, but for a few small regionals it might make it slightly less ideal to be 1st seed. Depends if you want your first strong pick, or 2 moderate picks (from your own list)... It's not the fault of anyone, it's just the way it is.

It also greatly increases the burden on scouts, who now need to come up with a list of 24 potential alliance partners (for a 1st seed team), rather than 8 or 9.

I am surprised some teams limit their picking list to 8-9 as those 8-9 can easily be picked before you get a chance, at least for your 2nd pick. It also helps to have a longer list in case you need to collaborate with your alliance partners on who you both want to pick and agree upon.

[Nawaid Ladak]

if there is a small regional like Pits. with 25 teams, who are the backups, if 2 robots break down.

the first team is so called the leder, therefore all for one and one for all. it's the leders responsiblity to tend to the weak, isn't it all about gracous professionalisiom. (ingnore the bad spelling)

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by FreedomForce

if there is a small regional like Pits. with 25 teams, who are the backups, if 2 robots break down.

the first team is so called the leder, therefore all for one and one for all. it's the leders responsiblity to tend to the weak, isn't it all about gracous professionalisiom. (ingnore the bad spelling)

I f the robot can't perform (as in it has very limited abilities, it's unrelaible, it's fragile or is just plain broken) they are stuck with it. They can try and fix it but even 71 wouldn't be able to fabricate a whole new robot in an hour. So they are virtually hobbled in my opinion.
Why would anyone want to be the #1 seed?

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

At Pittburgh if you are the #1 seed you get the choice of two teams for your last partner. I doubt a steal will be waiting them at the bottom of the draft.
Do not be surprised if you see the #1 allaince go down in the first round at Pittsbugh

This is something I've been expecting since I first read about the rule during week 1. It really does seem like the teams that do very well in order to secure the top seeds at Pittsburgh are going to get shafted. What's the point in trying to succeed if you're effectively going to be punished for your efforts?

Nonetheless, between the peculiar draft order and having only two rookie teams to share the three rookie awards, it's a good year to be a rookie at Pittsburgh.