Ranking

[beachmom561]

I understand that they want to find a better way of ranking seeding points but this just seems too full of political correctness of trying to make everyone feel good. Kind of the new scoring rules of t-ball. Everyone wins so no one feels bad.
A better way can surely be found.
Believe me, our team has had years when our bot did great but the alliances we were in just didn't do well. So, even though we did well individually we have been seeded low on the list. We ended up getting picked for alliances in the quarter finals anyway most of the time. Because of profiling, this happens quite often.

[jspatz1]

I'm afraid this was a case a fixing something that wasn't broken.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by beachmom561

I understand that they want to find a better way of ranking seeding points but this just seems too full of political correctness of trying to make everyone feel good. Kind of the new scoring rules of t-ball. Everyone wins so no one feels bad.
.

We are high school students and it is not the end of the world when we lose. "everybody wins" is a concept that I don't like. When losing matches, I usually am mad and feel as though we should win. Then I realize that the teams we faced won fair and square and we are not as good as them and I gain a respect for those teams.

I agree with something Travis Hoffman said in another thread,

Cooperate BEHIND the curtain; compete IN FRONT OF it. Merge the two to get your "coopertition". That formula has worked for years.

[Tanner]

I agree with what BrendanB and a few others have said.

On the point of the general public seeing this, yeah its not entirely evident, but it really is when the team wins a match by a few points, returns to the pit cheering, and then the cheering goes away when we find our rank moved down.

'Course I'm probably overstating something here, but we kinda got the feeling that is was "ok" to lose (as we moved up), but it kinda pushed us away from playing the game the best that we could, not that we didn't try to anyway.

-Tanner

[s_forbes]

I'm a little surprised at how much of an uproar this is causing. I'm looking at the final standings for all the week 1 regionals, and the top bots are still at the top where they belong. In the cases where a non-elite robot makes it into the top 8: that happened with the wins/losses ranking format too.

Here are some numbers from week 1 results that some people might find interesting.

Week 1	(Avg. Match pts)	(Avg. Seed pts/match)	(#1 Seed pts/match)	(#8 Seed pts/match)
SDC	2.2	5.8	10.2	8.3
DC	1.9	5.0	8.3	6.1
GA	1.7	4.3	8.2	5.0
KC	2.6	6.6	12.4	8.9
NH	2.9	7.4	12.6	9.0
ROC	2.8	7.1	11.8	9.4
OR	2.6	6.3	11.4	8.2
NJ	2.8	6.8	14.3	8.4
GT	2.2	5.7	9.1	6.3
GG	3.1	7.7	15.3	9.8