Go to Post a robot is never finished... It can always be redone and improved. - EricVicenti [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 16:24
Lil' Lavery Lil' Lavery is offline
TSIMFD
AKA: Sean Lavery
FRC #1712 (DAWGMA)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,636
Lil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Lil' Lavery
Re: New Aliance Selection?

NASA/VCU Regional:
#1 seeded 1731 picks #2 seeded 414, and loses in the semi-finals.

Arizona Regional:
#1 seeded 987 picks #6 seeded 1241 and loses in the finals.

Great Lakes Regional:
#1 seeded 469 picks #6 seeded 451 and loses in the finals.

3 more instances of when #1 seeds picked top 8 seeds and lost. The top alliances already have huge penelizations by the serpentine selection system, they deserve no more.
__________________
Being correct doesn't mean you don't have to explain yourself.
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 17:17
MattB703 MattB703 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Matt
None #0703 (Team Pheonix)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Saginaw, MI
Posts: 233
MattB703 has much to be proud ofMattB703 has much to be proud ofMattB703 has much to be proud ofMattB703 has much to be proud ofMattB703 has much to be proud ofMattB703 has much to be proud ofMattB703 has much to be proud ofMattB703 has much to be proud ofMattB703 has much to be proud ofMattB703 has much to be proud of
Re: New Aliance Selection?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery
NASA/VCU Regional:
#1 seeded 1731 picks #2 seeded 414, and loses in the semi-finals.

Arizona Regional:
#1 seeded 987 picks #6 seeded 1241 and loses in the finals.

Great Lakes Regional:
#1 seeded 469 picks #6 seeded 451 and loses in the finals.

3 more instances of when #1 seeds picked top 8 seeds and lost. The top alliances already have huge penelizations by the serpentine selection system, they deserve no more.
Buckeye Regional:
#1 seeded 963 picks #2 seeded 123 and loses in the semi-finals.
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 17:18
Alex Golec Alex Golec is offline
FRC Advocate
no team (FiM Volunteer)
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: MI
Posts: 248
Alex Golec has a reputation beyond reputeAlex Golec has a reputation beyond reputeAlex Golec has a reputation beyond reputeAlex Golec has a reputation beyond reputeAlex Golec has a reputation beyond reputeAlex Golec has a reputation beyond reputeAlex Golec has a reputation beyond reputeAlex Golec has a reputation beyond reputeAlex Golec has a reputation beyond reputeAlex Golec has a reputation beyond reputeAlex Golec has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New Aliance Selection?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery
Great Lakes Regional:
#1 seeded 469 picks #6 seeded 451 and loses in the finals.
Just as a clarification, the standings on FIRST's website for the Great Lakes regional are incorrect. Jack Jones has listed the correct (to the best of my knowledge) standings here: http://www.grovesrobotics.org/GLR/
(We were the second seed)

On topic, I prefer the previous system used before this year. To me, I feel that if a team has worked their butts off to be the highest seed in the regional, they deserve their picks of alliance partners. This year's, while it does make the playing field more level in the eliminations, does handicap the higher seeds in a way, especially at the smaller regionals. Don't get me wrong, our third seeds were great defensive robots at both GLR and DET, but at Atlanta, I wouldn't be surprised if the lower seeded teams had three shooters whereas the higher seeds might not be able to get a third.
Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 18:11
PBurrell PBurrell is offline
Registered User
FRC #1261 (Error Code Xero)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Duluth, GA
Posts: 5
PBurrell is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: New Aliance Selection?

During the Peachtree regional, our decision to pick #2 was not solely that they were #2. The offered a complete complement to our strengths. We were good shooter with good movement. Team 1414 was a lower goal bot with great autonomous capability. Their size and power helped out quite a bit too. Our third pick (1057) was another shooter with strong power and great defense. All around, the complement was good. The one thing that I see was lacking was a robot that could shoot with a vision turret.
Reply With Quote
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 18:15
Nuttyman54's Avatar
Nuttyman54 Nuttyman54 is offline
Mentor, Tactician
AKA: Evan "Numbers" Morrison
FRC #5803 (Apex Robotics) and FRC #0971 (Spartan Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Seattle, WA/Mountain View, CA
Posts: 2,138
Nuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond reputeNuttyman54 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Nuttyman54
Re: New Aliance Selection?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex469
at Atlanta, I wouldn't be surprised if the lower seeded teams had three shooters whereas the higher seeds might not be able to get a third.
I don't know if they'd want a third. I've noticed a lot of the best alliances had 2 shooters and 1 low goal/defensive robot. It keeps things from getting too crowded by the center goal, and also makes them much harder to defend against.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 20:32
AcesPease AcesPease is offline
Teacher Mentor
AKA: Bill Pease
FRC #2836 (Team Beta)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Suffield CT
Posts: 266
AcesPease has much to be proud ofAcesPease has much to be proud ofAcesPease has much to be proud ofAcesPease has much to be proud ofAcesPease has much to be proud ofAcesPease has much to be proud ofAcesPease has much to be proud ofAcesPease has much to be proud ofAcesPease has much to be proud of
Re: New Aliance Selection?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuttyman54
I don't know if they'd want a third. I've noticed a lot of the best alliances had 2 shooters and 1 low goal/defensive robot. It keeps things from getting too crowded by the center goal, and also makes them much harder to defend against.
I think having three scoring robots is the way to go (although I agree with you that it is better if at least one of them can do it without being in front of the center goal). I also think all eight alliances have a chance.

Some bots that were unlucky in qualifications can shoot, score in the lower goal and play some decent defense (ours for example ). The 3 on 3 qualification rounds have really randomized the top seeding, we reportedly had the 4th highest scoring average at the NE Regional, but were only 22 seed.

We were picked by the 8 seed (177) after they had moved up three spots to 5th alliance. Then 177 picked 1124 the 34th seed (out of 40), based on scouting reports. All three robots could score. Maybe none of us could score as well as 20 or 126, but three robots are a lot harder to defend than 2. We defeated the #1 alliance that included 1 and 3 seeds 126 and 20 and #15 seed 571, and then went on to win the regional.

Scouting is very important in this format. In Atlanta, with over 80 teams in each division, I see some good but less capable robots getting high seeds because of the luck of the draw, while some good robots will not be highly ranked. Combine this with the reverse picking for the third robot and any alliance that is in the divisional quarter finals could make a run at the championship.
__________________
Bill Pease FIRST Team 2836 Team Beta
Formerly FIRST Team 176 Aces High
WFF 2010
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New alliance selection method Bharat Nain Rules/Strategy 5 08-01-2006 22:16
[OCCRA]: CMP Alliance Selection Alex Golec OCCRA Q&A 1 14-11-2005 18:20
Alliance Selection 2005- Like it? OneAngryDaisy Rules/Strategy 42 14-03-2005 14:59
Team Selection Process??? tribotec_ca88 Team Organization 18 14-10-2004 15:55
need help double checking motor selection lecture notes Ken Leung Technical Discussion 5 16-12-2002 00:05


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:26.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi