Serpentine Draft

[Christopher149]

Originally Posted by MisterJ

I'd also be interested in seeing the winning percentage of each seed in each round this year. I bet this year's percentages are very much different from the past two, with lower seeds winning much more often.

My immediate, poorly-scientific, non-comprehensive view is it isn't that much different than the past.

This year
#1 seed wins: Central Illinois, Palmetto, Alamo, Escanaba, Southfield, Granite State, Northern Lights, Arizona, Buckeye, Montreal, Greater DC, Hawaii
#2 seed wins: Lake Superior, Crossroads, 10k lakes
#3 seed wins: Traverse City, San Diego, Los Angeles, Livonia
#4 seed wins: Boilermaker
#5 seed wins: Greater Toronto East
#8 seed wins: Center Line
blue wins every elim series: Peachtree (this is so weird)

Devil's advocate: but isn't it a bit exciting to not always have #1 seed win?

[dodar]

Originally Posted by Christopher149

My immediate, poorly-scientific, non-comprehensive view is it isn't that much different than the past.

This year
#1 seed wins: Central Illinois, Palmetto, Alamo, Escanaba, Southfield, Granite State, Northern Lights, Arizona, Buckeye, Montreal, Greater DC, Hawaii, FLR, North Bay
#2 seed wins: Lake Superior, Crossroads, 10k lakes, Orlando
#3 seed wins: Traverse City, San Diego, Los Angeles, Livonia
#4 seed wins: Boilermaker
#5 seed wins: Greater Toronto East
#8 seed wins: Center Line
blue wins every elim series: Peachtree (this is so weird)

Devil's advocate: but isn't it a bit exciting to not always have #1 seed win?

Added a few more.

[nuggetsyl]

1st seed Hatboro-Horsham,
2nd seed Clifton
3rd seed Mt. Olive, Bridgewater-Raritan
5th seed Springside Chestnut Hill
7th seed Lenape-Seneca

5th seed was in the finals 3 times won it once.

[MisterJ]

Quick calculation for all 2014 events, weeks 1-3

1-seed: 23
2-seed: 10
3-seed: 3
4-seed: 1
5-seed: 2
6-seed: 1
7-seed: 1
8-seed: 1

[Chief Hedgehog]

Outcome of Minnesnowta Regionals

2014
#2 Alliance wins at 10,000 Lakes
#5 Alliance wins at North Star
#2 Alliance Wins at Lake Superior
#1 Alliance wins at Northern Lights

2013
#1 Alliance wins at 10,000 Lakes
#2 Alliance wins at North Star
#7 Alliance Wins at Lake Superior
#3 Alliance wins at Northern Lights

2012
#2 Alliance wins at 10,000 Lakes
#2 Alliance wins at North Star
#1 Alliance Wins at Lake Superior
#3 Alliance wins at Northern Lights

So a little bit of a mix up in Minnesnowta the last few years... However this may be to such a large influx of teams in the last 4-5 years in MN. Last count we are around 190(?).

[Peter Matteson]

Originally Posted by MisterJ

Quick calculation for all 2014 events, weeks 1-3

1-seed: 23
2-seed: 10
3-seed: 3
4-seed: 1
5-seed: 2
6-seed: 1
7-seed: 1
8-seed: 1

1st seed wins - 54.7%
1st & 2nd seeds win - 78.6%
1st, 2nd, 3rd seed win - 85.7%

Seems about right to me.
The advantage for seeding top 3 is there as they still win a disproportionate amount.

FWIW at Hartford District there was only one upset and it was 3 over 2 in the semi which was close battle.

Have there been any "chalk bracket", aka "All Red", regionals/districts this year?

[Lil' Lavery]

There are too many issues with this system for it to be workable, and the actual changes would likely be relatively minor.

What happens when one captain accepts an invitation from another captain? Does the 9th seed automatically inherit the 8th draft position, as they do now? Wouldn't that defeat much of the purpose of changing positions? Do they inherit the vacated draft position, regardless of where they would want to select? Do all the remaining captains choose draft positions again?

More importantly, how is the bracket layout decided? Is the "#1 alliance" still the #1 seed even if the #1 seed picks in another location? What happens when the #6 captain picks the 4th ranked team, and they accept? Is it the #6 alliance or the #4 alliance? Or is the "#1 alliance" the team with the 1st selection, regardless of what rank they were? That would introduce a whole new mechanic of "gaming the system," where lower ranked captains could intentionally select draft positions to match up against other captains they feel they would fare well against. For instance, if I know the #3 captain is "weak" and they've selected to pick 5th, I'll select to pick 4th so I can play against them. This scenario would create a disadvantage for the 1st ranked team, as they would be able to chose who they're playing against.

How does this impact district ranking points for alliance selection and alliance captaincy? Does the #1 seed still receive the 16 points for being the #1 captain, or would they get the lesser points for being a lower captain? It would create further disincentive for, say, the #3 captain (14 points) to accept the, say, 5th invitation (12 points).

Few teams possess the scouting sophistication to fully take advantage of this system anyway. And given the very short time span between when rankings are finalized and alliance selection occurs, no team has enough time to truly interpret the data and alliance permutations to determine their ideal draft position.

[c.shu]

Originally Posted by Christopher149

but isn't it a bit exciting to not always have #1 seed win?

Not if you are the #1 seed.

[MisterJ]

Winning percentages for each seed are below. The number outside the percentages is how often the given seed wins in that round (overall). The number inside the parentheses is how often the given seed wins in that round out of how many times they advance to that round (essentially winning percentage in that round).

Accurate for 2014 weeks 1-5.

Quarterfinal Winners
1-seed 91%
2-seed 79%
3-seed 71%
4-seed 45%
5-seed 55%
6-seed 29%
7-seed 21%
8-seed 9%

Semifinal Winners
1-seed 65% (72%)
2-seed 50% (63%)
3-seed 27% (38%)
4-seed 13% (29%)
5-seed 19% (35%)
6-seed 14% (48%)
7-seed 9% (44%)
8-seed 3% (29%)

Winners
1-seed 49% (75%)
2-seed 21% (41%)
3-seed 12% (43%)
4-seed 5% (40%)
5-seed 5% (27%)
6-seed 4% (27%)
7-seed 4% (43%)
8-seed 1% (50%)

[cmrnpizzo14]

Using the most advanced pen and post-it note technology I have lazily gathered some data from week 5 this year and last year. Usual data caveats apply that this is a small sample size and whatnot.

Out of the 20 week 5 events in 2014:

1st Seed - 8
2nd Seed - 3
3rd Seed - 4
4th Seed - 2
5th Seed - 1
6th Seed - 2

Out of the 14 week 5 events of 2013:

1st Seed - 8
2nd Seed - 3
3rd Seed - 1
4th Seed - 1
5th Seed - 1

Any alliance not mentioned did not earn a victory at a regional or district event. As far as "official" statistics go this data is probably considered useless but it is fun speculation and if anyone would like to add data from another week that would be appreciated.

Notably, being the #1 seed (and pick) seems to show a clear correlation to success. The 2nd seed doesn't do bad either but past that it seems pretty even. I would need more data to really do anything.

[Paul Copioli]

Originally Posted by MisterJ

I'd also be interested in seeing the winning percentage of each seed in each round this year. I bet this year's percentages are very much different from the past two, with lower seeds winning much more often.

Here is the problem with that statistic and the way the ranking is done: a top 3 team at a regional or division may be sitting at 7 or 8. I argue in deep fields like championship divisions you may be better served, if you are a top 3 robot in your division, to pick from 7 or 8. In many cases, you may be considered the favorite even though you are at 7.

[waialua359]

The #1 seed in Dallas won this year. I didnt see it on the list.

Also, no offense to any of the teams we played, but IMO, I found the #8 alliance much tougher to play against in all 3 regionals we played then the semifinals matchup. We were #1 seed 3 times last year and #1 seed 2 times the year before that. The 1 vs 8 matchups the previous 2 years were not as difficult vs. the next round.
What would be interesting to see instead of who just won an event, is to see the record of each of the seeds in eliminations. I'd bet a lot of the lower seeds have won more matches vs. the previous 2 years, based on the nature of the game.

[BBray_T1296]

Originally Posted by waialua359

Also, no offense to any of the teams we played, but IMO, I found the #8 alliance much tougher to play against in all 3 regionals we played then the semifinals matchup.

Yay! I'm a statistic!

But seriously, The #1v#8 matches have been the most intense I have seen on most webcasts, and have been the most exciting (determined by audience decibel level) of both regionals we were in the #8 alliance for. Lots of teams root for the underdog and they are not being disappointed. Even though most often the #1 seed wins, it is always a win by just a last second truss toss or the like.

[Anupam Goli]

Death by Serpentine doesn't just occur in small events. In some of the weakest events, death by serpentine is a common occurrence. In each of the last three peachtree regionals, the #1 seed has lost in quarters or semis, and twice now the #6 seeded alliance has won the finals.

Finding an inbounder at our regional this year was like trying to mine for gold. It's so hard to find someone who can hold onto the ball, release it, and play good defense. There were teams that were great at possessing the ball, but were way too top heavy and could fall over on their own. having these teams play defense would've spelled disaster. There were teams that could play defense very effectively, but couldn't manipulate the ball. Those that could do both seemed to be in the very small minority. In fact, if I erased all of the teams that could truss and were on our first pick list as well, I had a grand total of 4 teams that I would like as our 2nd pick. i had to pull some of those non-ideal partners onto our list because the depth of the event was not good at all, despite 64 teams being in attendance.

This was likely one of the reasons why some of the #1-#4 alliances lost in quarters at peachtree. (Other reasons include ref's discretion, which has been beaten to the ground already, and mechanical problems popping up). Even with a mediocre trusser and shot, if that third robot can inbound and play defense more effectively than the other alliance can, cycle times are shortened and the other alliance has to face heavier defense.

[nickpaterni]

Originally Posted by BBray_T1296

Yay! I'm a statistic!

But seriously, The #1v#8 matches have been the most intense I have seen on most webcasts, and have been the most exciting (determined by audience decibel level) of both regionals we were in the #8 alliance for. Lots of teams root for the underdog and they are not being disappointed. Even though most often the #1 seed wins, it is always a win by just a last second truss toss or the like.

Us too - we were an 8th seed alliance that did beat the 1st seed (MI-Centerline) and went on to win the event. After our first match, we had other teams coming up to us to cheer us on and our alliance's outlook was that win or lose, we felt so good about having won even one match vs 1st seed and having so many other teams rooting for the underdog. That's why balanced alliances are so good for FIRST - when everyone feels like they have a chance and the matches are close, elims are epic. Nobody really talks about the elims where #1 stomps everyone because they had the best robots and nobody else stood a chance.