Go to Post it should not matter the gender of a person but rather their ability. - vivek16 [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Competition > FRC Game Design
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 17:18
Sgraff_SRHS06's Avatar
Sgraff_SRHS06 Sgraff_SRHS06 is offline
Kappa != 1/(4Pi-Epsilon-Naut)
AKA: Steve Graff
FRC #1111 (The Power Hawks)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Ghetto D/CP, MD
Posts: 515
Sgraff_SRHS06 is a jewel in the roughSgraff_SRHS06 is a jewel in the roughSgraff_SRHS06 is a jewel in the roughSgraff_SRHS06 is a jewel in the rough
Send a message via AIM to Sgraff_SRHS06 Send a message via Yahoo to Sgraff_SRHS06
Re: #1 seeded teams

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Delles
All I am trying to say is that as Alan as said we don't play enough matches to prove who really should be seeded number 1 or number 2, that they are just rough approxamations. Looking at FLR, some of the top seeded teams never played against each other. Also remember that the #1 seeded team may need something different than what the #2 seeded team has to offer. But yes if you want to take it as me saying the robots are placed in random order then go ahead and do so, because when thinking about ranking you don't take into account matches when you have 2 robots against 3 because someone didn't make the match (Since that is not a good judge of your robot with respect to the alliance). You don't play all the robots at a regional, and I would venture to say that you barely play half at the Championship. So the best robots could be teams that aren't seeded number 1 and number 2. But by all means if you are number 1 pick the #2 seed. Because i know that if i was the number 3 seed, i would pick a perfect partner for me, no matter thier seed.
Exactly agreed. That is why you sometimes pick oddball partners. They may work to help you or they may serve to hurt you. But it's all luck (we found out the hard way).
__________________
POWERHAWKS FORUM

2006 Chesapeake Regional Semifinalists (Thank you 614 and 339!)

UM Class of 2010!!
  #32   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 18:17
ScoutingNerd175's Avatar
ScoutingNerd175 ScoutingNerd175 is offline
Scouting Away
AKA: Caroline Marr
FRC #0175 (Buzz Robotics)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Enfield, CT
Posts: 231
ScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud ofScoutingNerd175 has much to be proud of
Send a message via AIM to ScoutingNerd175
Smile Re: #1 seeded teams

I'm going to put some numbers out there. I suppose many (not all) would consider the best team to be the team that scored the most points. So lets look at last years nationals since our selections there have already been brought up.
175 was seeded third. Seed 1 picked Seed 2 bumping us up to the second pick. We then picked 33 (possibly seed 11?). The reason we did this was because Team 33 had the best robot in curie division. (again if you consider the highest scoring robot to be the best robot) By those same numbers (objective as always and I'm sorry if it seems like I'm tooting my own horn) we were the second best robot in the division. The third, I believe was 118. Team 108 (I had no idea they were seeded so low, our scouting system doesn't take wins and losses or alliance total scores into account) was somewhere in the 5-8 range as far as scoring goes. So, at least in our division, Seeding did not have that much to do with actual scoring ability.
At Chesapeake last year, the top scoring robot (173) was seeded first. They then picked 1027, the third highest scoring robot. They did in fact win. The third seed robot was, 007, was the sixth highest scoring robot. Seeding was a bit closer than nationals, but not much.
This year a Chesapeake the highest scoring robot, 293, was third seed, the 2nd highest scoring robot, 341, was, I think 10th seed, the fifth, 175, was 4th seed, the sixth was 1389, which was actually still around for the second pick of the third alliance, the 1st seed, only undefeated team, was 1629 the 8th highest scoring robot. I am not sure of the seeds of the 56 and 399, the third and fourth highest scoring teams. The seeding this year reflected score even less than last year. However, the seeding did accurately predict winning in every single match up of the finals. This, I think, is the exception, not the rule. Again this assumes that you consider the best robot to be the highest scoring robot. Not necessarily true. Part of the first seed's success at Chesapeake was based on the fact that all three teams got up the ramp all but one time.
So there's the endless string of data that seems to come whenever I post.
I think that it really depends on the ability of the lower seeded teams to scout. If every single team had great scouting, then this would level the playing field. As it is, some teams do not have great scouting. In Chesapeake I think 6 out of 8 first picks were out of the top 8 at that time. This brought I think seed 14 into picking position. This team would be at a disadvantage because they were not expecting to be picking. Some teams end up seeded in the top 8 without ever having done great scouting, making their picks somewhat random. If you are a number one seed and the earlier seeds leave good robots (much more likely at Nationals) you will have a much better chance than if you are a first seed and no good robots have been left behind (much more likely at smaller regionals). Let me know if any of that made sense.
__________________
Buzz 175 Alumna

University of Michigan, Class of 2012
Syracuse University, Class of 2010
Enrico Fermi High School, Class of 2006
  #33   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 20:02
Tom Bottiglieri Tom Bottiglieri is offline
Registered User
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,189
Tom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond repute
Re: #1 seeded teams

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Anderson
The Law of Large Numbers tells us that the ranking at the end of a sufficient quantity of randomly assigned qualification matches will reflect the robot goodness with high confidence. It's too bad that an actual competition doesn't have anything near the number of matches necessary to make that happen. All we get is a very rough approximation.

Besides, an effective alliance is not just the sum of its component teams. Two or three complementary robots can do better together than two or three nominally "better" robots that don't work with each other as well.
I took some time to look at that problem from a statistical point of view. If a team does well in one match because they are with complimenting robots, they have a lesser chance of repeating the same scenario. Therefore, "how good teams actually are" can be found by looking at their individual score for a match compared to the teams they are allianced with's average scores over the event.

I have started an excel spreadsheet program that will help factor luck out of the equation for rankings.

www.team195.com/scouting/aimhighstats.xls

Please take the time to look at this spreadsheet. If you have any questions, please post or PM me. The format is quite crude seeing as I made this in a short amount of time, but I plan to further the development of this tool to help aid in team selections at nationals.
  #34   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 20:16
Tim Delles's Avatar
Tim Delles Tim Delles is offline
Since 2001.
FRC #0078
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,002
Tim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: #1 seeded teams

Just a side note. I checked into, but i haven't wrote anything down. But for those that think that the #1 and #2 seeded teams are the best think of this. of the regionals i have looked through. only 1 #1 #2 alliance has gone on to win the regional this year. so what does that say about #1 and #2 seeded teams being the best?

Just something to talk about.
__________________
Timothy Delles - Clarkson University
2011 - Present: FRC Team 78 - AIR Strike
2011 - Present: VEX Team 78 - AIR Strike
2010 - 2011: FRC Team 3280 - Rhode Rebels
2001 - 2009: FRC Team 229 - Division By Zero
  #35   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 20:32
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: 2,144
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: #1 seeded teams

It all depends on what is considered the "Best" robot. Highest scoring is not necessarily the number 1 seed. The #1 seed SHOULD be the robot that can do well no matter who it plays with. If you were to continue playing until all possible alliances pairings had played, that is who would come out on top. In this case, it would be interesting if the #1 and #2 seeds would be the best alliance partners.

However, this is not the case. At the regionals, it will end up that the robots which are able to score more despite heavy defense, incompetent alliance partners, etc. end up on top. And so, the #1 and #2 seeds may not have complementary strategies. In fact, they may have the SAME strategy. In this game, that could mean that they get in eachother's way, or become easier to defend against.
__________________
  #36   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 21:28
The Lucas's Avatar
The Lucas The Lucas is offline
CaMOElot, it is a silly place
AKA: My First Name is really "The" (or Brian)
FRC #0365 (The Miracle Workerz); FRC#1495 (AGR); FRC#4342 (Demon)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Dela-Where?
Posts: 1,564
The Lucas has a reputation beyond reputeThe Lucas has a reputation beyond reputeThe Lucas has a reputation beyond reputeThe Lucas has a reputation beyond reputeThe Lucas has a reputation beyond reputeThe Lucas has a reputation beyond reputeThe Lucas has a reputation beyond reputeThe Lucas has a reputation beyond reputeThe Lucas has a reputation beyond reputeThe Lucas has a reputation beyond reputeThe Lucas has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to The Lucas
Re: #1 seeded teams

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Anderson
The Law of Large Numbers tells us that the ranking at the end of a sufficient quantity of randomly assigned qualification matches will reflect the robot goodness with high confidence. It's too bad that an actual competition doesn't have anything near the number of matches necessary to make that happen. All we get is a very rough approximation.
Considering that matches are 3v3 that number would have to be HUGE. When we went to 3 teams per alliance we sacrificed a good deal of accuracy in our seeding. Your robot is nothing more than 1/3 of youR "randomly" paired alliance. You are against 3 other bots, 2 or 3 of which might be powerhouses. If you are by far the best bot on your "randomly" paired alliance, you will draw all the defense and your partners may not be able to take advantage of this. I like the new 3 bot alliances because of the complexities it add to elims, but it does make seeding more difficult. It could be worse. At least seeding is based on wins and losses instead of entirely on loser's score (like 2003).
__________________
Electrical & Programming Mentor ---Team #365 "The Miracle Workerz"
Programming Mentor ---Team #4342 "Demon Robotics"
Founding Mentor --- Team #1495 Avon Grove High School
2007 CMP Chairman's Award - Thanks to all MOE members (and others) past and present who made it a reality.
Robot Inspector
"I don't think I'm ever more ''aware'' than I am right after I burn my thumb with a soldering iron"

Last edited by The Lucas : 20-03-2006 at 23:42.
  #37   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2006, 23:39
Scott358 Scott358 is offline
Engineer/Mentor
AKA: Scott5736
FRC #5736 (Kingsmen)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Kings Park, Long Island, NY
Posts: 152
Scott358 is just really niceScott358 is just really niceScott358 is just really niceScott358 is just really niceScott358 is just really nice
Re: #1 seeded teams

I would suggest significant factors are:

1. The quality of scouting (as stated previously)

2. The depth of the field

3. How different game play is between the qualifying rounds and the playoffs(specifically defense).
__________________
Scott5736 (formerly Scott3137(formerly Scott358))
  #38   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-03-2006, 21:01
lukevanoort lukevanoort is offline
in between teams
AKA: Luke Van Oort
no team
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Waterloo, ON, Canada
Posts: 1,873
lukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to lukevanoort
Re: #1 seeded teams

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri
I took some time to look at that problem from a statistical point of view. If a team does well in one match because they are with complimenting robots, they have a lesser chance of repeating the same scenario. Therefore, "how good teams actually are" can be found by looking at their individual score for a match compared to the teams they are allianced with's average scores over the event.

I have started an excel spreadsheet program that will help factor luck out of the equation for rankings.

www.team195.com/scouting/aimhighstats.xls

Please take the time to look at this spreadsheet. If you have any questions, please post or PM me. The format is quite crude seeing as I made this in a short amount of time, but I plan to further the development of this tool to help aid in team selections at nationals.
Remember you can't really quantify what team is the best off of just a few factors. A team that doesn't have a good score can be very good, or a team with a high score can be low-quality (for example they might have unreliable electricals). The best robot isn't the best shooter, or the best defender, or the best picker upper, it's a combination of good components that work together well. In my experience, the only thing that would be able to take all the factors and spit out good, reliable, accurate rankings is an experienced human with a photographic memory.
__________________
Team 1219: 2009 - Mentor
Team 587: 2005 - Animator, 2006-2008 - Team Captain
  #39   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-03-2006, 21:24
Peter Matteson's Avatar
Peter Matteson Peter Matteson is offline
Ambitious but rubbish!
FRC #0177 (Bobcat Robotics)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: South Windsor, CT
Posts: 1,653
Peter Matteson has a reputation beyond reputePeter Matteson has a reputation beyond reputePeter Matteson has a reputation beyond reputePeter Matteson has a reputation beyond reputePeter Matteson has a reputation beyond reputePeter Matteson has a reputation beyond reputePeter Matteson has a reputation beyond reputePeter Matteson has a reputation beyond reputePeter Matteson has a reputation beyond reputePeter Matteson has a reputation beyond reputePeter Matteson has a reputation beyond repute
Re: #1 seeded teams

Quote:
Originally Posted by lukevanoort
Remember you can't really quantify what team is the best off of just a few factors. A team that doesn't have a good score can be very good, or a team with a high score can be low-quality (for example they might have unreliable electricals). The best robot isn't the best shooter, or the best defender, or the best picker upper, it's a combination of good components that work together well. In my experience, the only thing that would be able to take all the factors and spit out good, reliable, accurate rankings is an experienced human with a photographic memory.
Along those line the best elimination round robot is not necessarily the best qualifying robot. Remember the qualifiers and elims never quite play the same.
__________________
2011 Championship Finalists/Archimedes Division Championships w/ 2016 & 781
2010 Championship Winners/Newton Division Champions
Thank-you 294 & 67

2009 Newton Division Champions w/ 1507 & 121
2008 Archimedes Division Champions w/ 1124 & 1024
2007 Championship Winners/Newton Division Champions w/190, 987 & 177 The Wall of Maroon
2006 Galileo Division Champions w/ 1126 & 201
www.bobcatrobotics.org
"If you can't do it with brains, it won't be done with hours." - Clarence "Kelly" Johnson
  #40   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-03-2006, 06:35
MikeDubreuil's Avatar
MikeDubreuil MikeDubreuil is offline
Carpe diem
FRC #0125 (Nu-Trons)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 967
MikeDubreuil has a reputation beyond reputeMikeDubreuil has a reputation beyond reputeMikeDubreuil has a reputation beyond reputeMikeDubreuil has a reputation beyond reputeMikeDubreuil has a reputation beyond reputeMikeDubreuil has a reputation beyond reputeMikeDubreuil has a reputation beyond reputeMikeDubreuil has a reputation beyond reputeMikeDubreuil has a reputation beyond reputeMikeDubreuil has a reputation beyond reputeMikeDubreuil has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to MikeDubreuil
Re: #1 seeded teams

First, thank's Tom for posting that spreadsheet. It's an interesting tool.

I would agree that the seeding rounds give a rough estimate of the best robots at a competition. Suprisingly, in Tom's spreadsheet the top 8 teams in the real rankings stayed ranked within the top 8 in the scaled rankings. This means that the seeding system is working fairly well.

I would agree that top 8 teams can pick "oddball" robots and win a regional. This is because the current ranking system rewards high scoring offensive rounds. Which is unfortunate because the skills needed during the finals are a little different. Offense wins #1 seed, defense wins championships.

My original point was that next year there should be a rule that two teams from within the top 8 should not be allowed to allaince together during the finals. They are the best robots at a competition. This isn't communism. FIRST would rather have the final rounds be exciting for all teams rather that just the dominant alliance. Every alliance should have the same chance winning.
__________________
"FIRST is like bling bling for the brain." - Woodie Flowers
  #41   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-03-2006, 09:03
Tim Delles's Avatar
Tim Delles Tim Delles is offline
Since 2001.
FRC #0078
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,002
Tim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond reputeTim Delles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: #1 seeded teams

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil
My original point was that next year there should be a rule that two teams from within the top 8 should not be allowed to allaince together during the finals. They are the best robots at a competition. This isn't communism. FIRST would rather have the final rounds be exciting for all teams rather that just the dominant alliance. Every alliance should have the same chance winning.

Yes but then you would be taking away from the qualifcation matches because if you know the number one seed will pick you if your not in the top 8 then all you would have to do to make sure you are picked by them is get out of the top 8.

My opinion on making the top 8 pick outside the top 8 will just make the qualifing rounds useless because if a team wants to be with another team bad enough they will just lose. And then were is the fun and enthusiasm in that for the kids and for the people watching?
__________________
Timothy Delles - Clarkson University
2011 - Present: FRC Team 78 - AIR Strike
2011 - Present: VEX Team 78 - AIR Strike
2010 - 2011: FRC Team 3280 - Rhode Rebels
2001 - 2009: FRC Team 229 - Division By Zero
  #42   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-03-2006, 11:24
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: #1 seeded teams

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil
...

Offense wins #1 seed, defense wins championships.

...

I don't know about that. It wasn't true last year and I don't think it will be true this year. We will see I guess.
  #43   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 25-03-2006, 13:06
StephLee's Avatar
StephLee StephLee is offline
Deadlines? What are those?
AKA: Stephanie
FRC #0639 (Code Red Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Ithaca, NY
Posts: 796
StephLee has a reputation beyond reputeStephLee has a reputation beyond reputeStephLee has a reputation beyond reputeStephLee has a reputation beyond reputeStephLee has a reputation beyond reputeStephLee has a reputation beyond reputeStephLee has a reputation beyond reputeStephLee has a reputation beyond reputeStephLee has a reputation beyond reputeStephLee has a reputation beyond reputeStephLee has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to StephLee
Re: #1 seeded teams

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil
I would agree that top 8 teams can pick "oddball" robots and win a regional. This is because the current ranking system rewards high scoring offensive rounds. Which is unfortunate because the skills needed during the finals are a little different. Offense wins #1 seed, defense wins championships.
I agree with everything you said (especially the last thing), except I have an example of something contrary to high scoring offensive bots being rewarded. At Pittsburgh (granted, the smallest regional, and therefor statistically less reliable), the top three seeds could not shoot for the high goal at all. All three, however, were pretty good dumpers, but their top quality IMHO was their strong defense.

Another point I think has already been brought up: the #1 and #2 seeds may have too much in common for them to do well by picking each other. The alliance that wins will be the alliance whose members best complement each other's strengths and weaknesses, as well as work together cohesively. From Chesapeake, the only loss for our #1 alliance (1629, 175, and 1184) was due to an offsides penalty that resulted from miscommunication, from not working together. We had three very different bots, two of which could shoot, dump, and play at least some defense. One could dump and play excelent defense. The thing I love about this year's game is the number of different strategies that can win. You have to adapt your strategy for every single game, more so than last year...and that's why I carried a giant bottle of Tylenol all weekend!
__________________
Proud alum of FRC Team 1629 and mentor of FRC Team 639
Cornell Engineering class of 2012!!
  #44   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-03-2006, 00:13
TheOtherTaylor TheOtherTaylor is offline
In case you already know a Taylor
AKA: Taylor Weiss
FRC #1868 (Space Cookies)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: California <-> Georgia
Posts: 35
TheOtherTaylor is a jewel in the roughTheOtherTaylor is a jewel in the roughTheOtherTaylor is a jewel in the roughTheOtherTaylor is a jewel in the rough
Send a message via AIM to TheOtherTaylor
Re: #1 seeded teams

From Sacramento/Davis Regional today, we (1351) were the #1 seed.

Our first pick was seed #18 (it may have been #13, those who know me know my memory for that sort of thing is a little fuzzy) which a -lot- of people were surprised by, but the pick was subject to huge ammounts of discussion and a lot of scouting by our best scouters. We had a way to get our own bot onto the ramp and win the round. The only rounds they could keep us from just dumping balls into the high goal was the time we were triple-teamed, and 649 worked perfectly as a high shooter unless they had someone on them...

But not to bore with strategy. A victor fried several mins before our first match, requiring us to use our timeout and a lot of frantic people to replace it and plug it in. I'm assuming because of the general panic, a pwm didn't get plugged in all the way (just to clarify, I don't blame anyone for this, it took hours to figure out where the problem was afterwards and multiple tries just to plug the dang thing in because it was sticking) and we never could figure out the problem on the field. Not having the left hand side of our drivetrain pretty much lost us two matches we would have easily won.

All it takes for the #1 seed to lose is a stupid system failure with bad timing to render their entire bot useless for twenty minutes.


[edited as per request and to correct a couple things, I typed this late]
__________________
The Other Taylor now back in the bay area with team 1868 as a mentor.
-Team 2420 Mentor (2008-2010)
-Team 1002 Mentor (2007)
-Team 1351 Designer, Machinist, Driver (2004-2006)

Nothing travels faster than the speed of light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws. Douglas Adams

Last edited by TheOtherTaylor : 26-03-2006 at 15:18.
  #45   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-03-2006, 02:13
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is online now
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,832
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: #1 seeded teams

From LA, 2nd seed won, 1st seed was finalist.
Actually, first seed picking second seed may have the potential to go all the way. The record for the first and second seeds at LA: 9-0-0. By the end of the finals, it was 13-2-1, and they were simply outstrategized.

It's not the alliance that wins the finals, it's the strategy that is tailored to the alliance faced that wins.
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk

Closed Thread


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
YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005? Natchez You Make The Call 67 07-02-2006 21:55
The top 8 teams will be....(2004) Jessica Boucher General Forum 20 24-03-2004 22:31
Robot Collaboration Karthik General Forum 153 18-02-2004 03:40
More teams in the elimination rounds DougHogg General Forum 16 27-04-2003 16:11
Long post - this year's game was tough - here's why: archiver 2001 7 24-06-2002 03:31


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 19:26.

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