2014 Central Valley Regional

[Ether]

Originally Posted by Jay O'Donnell

..teams always play their surrogate match as their 3rd match

Could you clarify what you meant by this? Are you saying that for those 3 teams who played 12 matches at CAMA, the 3rd match of those 12 matches they played was their "surrogate" match? If so, any idea what would be the rationale for that?

The way I've had it explained to me...

Can anyone confirm this from an authoritative source?

[Abhishek R]

Originally Posted by Ether

Could you clarify what you meant by this? Are you saying that for those 3 teams who played 12 matches at CAMA, the 3rd match of those 12 matches they played was their "surrogate" match? If so, any idea what would be the rationale for that?



Can anyone confirm this from an authoritative source?

Yes, the third qualification match for the team is counted as the surrogate if they have one. it says so on the bottom of the match schedule handed out at the regional. Why it's the third, I do not know.

[Ether]

Originally Posted by Abhishek R

Yes, the third qualification match for the team is counted as the surrogate if they have one. it says so on the bottom of the match schedule handed out at the regional. Why it's the third, I do not know.

So, questions remaining:

- Is this policy a local decision or an FRC-wide policy*

- Who decides which of the participating teams will play surrogate matches*

- Any particular rationale for the 3rd match being the surrogate?

- If for some reason a team cannot play their last match, does their "surrogate" match become official?

* Karthik & AllenGregoryIV answered in previous posts

[RufflesRidge]

Originally Posted by Ether

- Any particular rationale for the 3rd match being the surrogate?

I don't know for sure, but I would imagine that you want it be as early as possible to prevent using it to easily manipulate standings but late enough to minimize the likelihood that the surrogate team will have any chance of having not passed inspection or otherwise be non-functional (obviously damage can happen in any match and render the robot inoperable for the next match).

- If for some reason a team cannot play their last match, does their "surrogate" match become official?

Nope.

[Answer42]

1323's robot is looking very effective.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Ether

So, questions remaining:

- Any particular rationale for the 3rd match being the surrogate?

- If for some reason a team cannot play their last match, does their "surrogate" match become official?

Used to be that the LAST match was the surrogate one. However, there were complaints about teams sandbagging it, just to keep their robot in good shape for eliminations. (Or similar stuff like that.) Basically, enough teams weren't caring about it that their partners, who DID have something riding on it, were noticing a decrease in play quality. So, it was switched to 3rd match, when it could be reasonably expected that everyone still has something to play for (including scouting).

And for the other question, no.

If you take a look at the match schedule at the event (not online), there's a column of letters next to each team number. If that letter says "T", that team is a surrogate team. If it says "F", they are not. The list is generated by FMS, and FMS doesn't take to changes in schedule very well. Thus, there is no way to make the team's surrogate match into the one that counts.

[Ether]

Thanks guys. I'll link this thread if I ever see this question pop up again.

[Navid Shafa]

Anybody know why they are replaying Semi 1-1? It was recorded as a win for the #1 Alliance and they have said there's a replay, but haven't stated rationale....

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by Navid Shafa

Anybody know why they are replaying Semi 1-1? It was recorded as a win for the #1 Alliance and they have said there's a replay, but haven't stated rationale....

Looked like the pedestal delay for blue.

[Poseidon5817]

Team 1671 did great, winning Chairman's award and nearly becoming regional champions in tiebreaker finals! Go Bird Brains!

[MrTechCenter]

Originally Posted by Navid Shafa

Anybody know why they are replaying Semi 1-1? It was recorded as a win for the #1 Alliance and they have said there's a replay, but haven't stated rationale....

Not that it matters anymore, but our score for out precious cycle was not entered into the system and, therefore, the pedestal never lit. They never signaled for us to retrieve the ball from the pedestal for the remainder of the match.

[adlasa]

Sorry to deviate from the current conversation. But rather than create a new thread, does anyone know were the Thank You Google video teams performed is posted?

Thanks, and congratulations to all teams for a great competition!

[TKM.368]

Originally Posted by Ether

Thanks guys. I'll link this thread if I ever see this question pop up again.

This is a good one...

Originally Posted by dlavery

Good observation. This was just the sort of situation that drove the new structure for the surrogate matches. There were too many teams that were not playing their surrogate matches in the same manner and with the same intensity as their other matches. This seemed to be exacerbated by having the surrogate match as the last match of the schedule, when some teams thought they could "lighten up" their style of play without any adverse effects. Having the surrogate match last in the schedule allowed a team to have full knowledge of how they and other teams were performing, and how playing at full intensity (or not) would affect the other teams in the match.

In the very worst case, having the surrogate matches as the last match in the schedule provided the opportunity to play some pretty ugly tactics. Consider the case of team that was assigned to a surrogate match with alliance partners that were ranked higher than them in the standings. Knowing that the match would not count for (or against) them, they would look instead at how the match would affect the standings of their alliance partners and opponents. They could find themselves in the position where if they intentionally "threw" the match and lost, it would cause their alliance partners to drop in the standings, but they would not. In particular cases, this could bump them up high enough to be in the top eight slots, and suddenly become a picking team during alliance selections. The potential for that sort of disingenuous play was to be avoided.

I am not saying that there are any teams that were actually observed doing this (unfortunately, I am also not saying that there were not). But just the potential for a scenario like this to happen was enough to force reconsideration of how the surrogate matches were assigned.

-dave



.

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by Ether

Could you clarify what you meant by this? Are you saying that for those 3 teams who played 12 matches at CAMA, the 3rd match of those 12 matches they played was their "surrogate" match? If so, any idea what would be the rationale for that?



Can anyone confirm this from an authoritative source?

Yes, if a team plays a surrogate match, it's always their 3rd round. No, the match schedule is not random, but no details have been released about the algorithm that generates the schedules other than the priorities and specifications. So we can't really say if the surrogate teams are random. More info can be found here: http://www.idleloop.com/matchmaker/

Personally, I'd assume that team numbers are not taken into account in the algorithm, and since that's the only team-specific information that the match scheduler takes in, every team should have an equal chance of being a surrograte.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by Ether

Could you clarify what you meant by this? Are you saying that for those 3 teams who played 12 matches at CAMA, the 3rd match of those 12 matches they played was their "surrogate" match? If so, any idea what would be the rationale for that?



Can anyone confirm this from an authoritative source?

From the manual

5.3.2 MATCH Assignment
The Field Management System (FMS) assigns each Team two (2) ALLIANCE partners for each Qualification MATCH using a predefined algorithm. The algorithm employs the following criteria, listed in order of priority:

Maximize time between each MATCH played for all Teams
Minimize the number of times a Team plays opposite any Team
Minimize the number of times a Team is allied with any Team
Minimize the use of SURROGATES
Provide even distribution of MATCHES played on Blue and Red ALLIANCE

All Teams are assigned the same number of Qualification MATCHES, unless the number of Teams multiplied by number of MATCHES is not divisible by six. In this case, the FMS randomly selects some Teams to play an extra MATCH. For the purpose of seeding calculations, those Teams are designated as SURROGATES for the extra MATCH. If a Team plays a MATCH as a SURROGATE, it is indicated on the MATCH schedule, it is always their third Qualification MATCH, and the outcome of the MATCH has no affect on the Team’s ranking criteria.