|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#16
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
Quote:
It was probably given to them from NASA from the aliens so we'd quit predicting the divisions before they release it. |
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
Quote:
![]() |
|
#18
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
Quote:
See attached. And, um.... Code:
St. Catharines, ON 1114 Archimedes 67.14 Schaumburg, IL 111 Archimedes 66.34 Greenville, TX 148 Archimedes 63.88 San Jose, CA 254 Archimedes 60.39 Stoney Creek, ON 2056 Archimedes 57.29 Hopkins, MI 2054 Archimedes 53.82 Hammond, IN 71 Archimedes 49.79 League City, TX 118 Archimedes 46.72 Warren, OH 48 Archimedes 45.91 |
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
What, you don't want to be the 8th seed captain against 1114/111?
![]() |
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
Could you imagine if each of them picked their own alliances? OMG that would be the greatest quarterfinals ever
|
|
#21
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
Quote:
The divisional balance is far, far more skewed out of whack with serpentine than with the standard sort. I kinda liked the standard sort myself. But again, this is all a pointless exercise! |
|
#22
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
How about instead of doing the divisions with the 348 teams that are in, do a divisional breakdown with the top 348 OPR teams and then see how the divisions would breakdown with the same sort you did the first time.
|
|
#23
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
Quote:
I wonder if FIRST even considers sorting like this. Attachment: |
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
You didnt do it with the top 348 teams with the highest OPR
|
|
#25
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
I sorted by Average OPR for all 348 CMP teams and then assigned A-C-G-N.
I think what you are suggesting is just a bit too unrealistic, even for this thread, because teams staying home with higher OPR's than CMP participating teams are still not going to attend the CMP this year.... I leave anything else as an exercise for the reader. ![]() |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
Oh man... If somehow that was our actual division... |
|
#27
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
I prefer the first attempt with 111 and 3132 in the same division. No real reason, just a strange personal bias.
![]() |
|
#28
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
Newton and Curie both are stacked! As for Galileo...I'm surprised by the paucity of big names. It seems like most of those powerhouse teams are either on Curie or Newton, although Archimedes is also strong. I don't know, maybe it's just me, but it seems like Galileo is probably the "weakest" comparatively; however, that doesn't mean much considering it's championship and ALL of the divisions would be challenging.
|
|
#29
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
FAKE Galileo looks like the place to be.
JVN, Bill Beatty, Amir Abo-Shaeer, John Novak, ... that's a lot of awesomeness, just in a quick glance near the top of this FAKE list. Oh yeah, and in FAKE Galileo you can pick 67 or 469 .... Last edited by Richard Wallace : 14-04-2011 at 18:20. |
|
#30
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Division Predictions/Reactions
A 349th challenger appears.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|