Preferred Regional size?

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

It would have been particularly ugly at Pittsburgh if there were 25 teams and one team went unselected. Talk about a long ride home.

Heh. They went with seven alliances in the finals, so seven teams had a long ride home.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

Heh. They went with seven alliances in the finals, so seven teams had a long ride home.

How'd that work out?
If they were going to go that route they should have did what Waterloo did last year and go with 4 alliances.

[Bill Moore]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

Heh. They went with seven alliances in the finals, so seven teams had a long ride home.

24 teams were at Pittsburgh. It was decided that the tournament needed to have standby robots in case any of the alliance bots broke during playoffs.

7 alliances were chosen using the normal playoff structure, but the 1st alliance received a bye in the Quarterfinal Round. Hence 21 teams were picked during alliance selections.

One team was not able to take the field for their Quarterfinal match, so the first standby was inserted in their place. There were only 2 teams that did not make the playoffs.

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by Bill Moore

24 teams were at Pittsburgh. (...) Hence 21 teams were picked during alliance selections.

Yeah, well, if there were six teams per alliance I would have been right on.

Jeez, you make three little arithmetic errors...

[Donut]

Definetely like the middle sized regionals, AZ had 45 this year over 28 last year. As has been brought up, I didn't like the fact all but 4 teams got into the playoffs (ours wasn't one of them, but I still didn't like the problem). I'd say the number this year was the best I've seen the past 3 years, it ensures good quality robots in the playoffs (making for some exciting elimination matches) without forcing you to have an almost perfect robot to even try for the top 8. We also had many matches still (I think we had 9 this year, as opposed to 12 last year).