|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#31
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
being pushed into a goal is actually fair game for DQing, according to FIRST. I would argue that the pushing team should get the DQ, but FIRSTs reasoning is this (to my knowledge):
Passing more than 3 inches into the lower goal could trigger the ball-counter, thus throwing off the scores entirely. Thus, rather than trying to determine the original score, the referees simply DQ the robot. Wetzel, is this correct? if not, could you post the correct version? |
|
#32
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
I think that the serpintine draft will be good in the larger regionals that have a lot of talent, and where some of the middle of the pack teams are ranked there due to some bad breaks.
However in the smaller regionals (like NYC that only has 28 or so teams) the 1st ranked allaince will only have like 2 or 3 teams to make their final selection from. It should definately be a new twist on the elimination matches this year. |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Another interesting note about the BAE regional...
Team 319 was ranked 9th, but treated as #10 when alliances were bumped up due to 3 "inter top 8" picks. It was kind of interesting, although I do feel bad for team 319. |
|
#34
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
When top 8 teams picked each other, didn't the # 9 team at the time move up to the # 8 spot? Just trying to understand how they were 9th, but treated as 10th. |
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
|
|
#36
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
They possibly messed up?
What I've heard is that 1073 picked before 319, even though 319 seeded higher. |
|
#37
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Yes - 1073 was asked up before 319, but 319 was ranked higher then 1073. Then 1073 picked, and 319 was called up...
|
|
#38
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
|
|
#39
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Yeah, that was pretty agrivating. It confused me so much that I had no idea who to pick when I went up. Luckily I picked a pretty good alliance and we made it to the finals. Good luck nexyear everyone! Only 10 months till kickoff!
|
|
#40
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
Under the new system, there is the very real possibility of a tough match between the 1st and 8th seed alliances. I'd argue an alliance of two strong robots with a relatively weak partner would have approximately the same effectiveness as 3 middle of the road robots. With a balance of power like that, the elimination matches are no longer a stacked alliance vs. a weak alliance, and for all intents and purposes no longer a sure win. It also greatly increases the burden on scouts, who now need to come up with a list of 24 potential alliance partners (for a 1st seed team), rather than 8 or 9. Strategically, it's brilliant. Statistically, it's a nightmare. In the end, it led to some of the most exciting elimination matches I've ever seen in FIRST. I had the opportunity to see team 25's scouting team in action in New Jersey this year, and all I can say is wow. They know their stuff, and know what needs to be done. This year, more than ever, if you are a top 8 team, make sure you have all the scouting data necessary to make confident alliance choices, because in the end, it will make or break your shot at the gold. Last edited by Marc P. : 06-03-2006 at 15:22. |
|
#41
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
Do not be surprised if you see the #1 allaince go down in the first round at Pittsbugh |
|
#42
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
) But that also means that nobody can pack up early because they need to wait around and find out if they are needed as a 4th pick in finals.... sure hope only a few teams need a 4th pick... I wonder what Pittsburgh will do if several teams need a 4th partner? I asked this question but have not received an answer yet... my guess is they're just outta luck.I think in the grand scheme of things, it balances alliances out a bit, but for a few small regionals it might make it slightly less ideal to be 1st seed. Depends if you want your first strong pick, or 2 moderate picks (from your own list)... It's not the fault of anyone, it's just the way it is. Quote:
Last edited by AmyPrib : 06-03-2006 at 16:17. |
|
#43
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
if there is a small regional like Pits. with 25 teams, who are the backups, if 2 robots break down.
the first team is so called the leder, therefore all for one and one for all. it's the leders responsiblity to tend to the weak, isn't it all about gracous professionalisiom. (ingnore the bad spelling) |
|
#44
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
Why would anyone want to be the #1 seed? |
|
#45
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Picking Teams in Elimination Rounds
Quote:
Nonetheless, between the peculiar draft order and having only two rookie teams to share the three rookie awards, it's a good year to be a rookie at Pittsburgh. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| The top 8 teams will be....(2004) | Jessica Boucher | General Forum | 20 | 24-03-2004 22:31 |
| Changing the Elim. Format... | Joe Johnson | General Forum | 46 | 08-04-2003 12:27 |
| "Fixing" matches | Shawn60 | General Forum | 158 | 18-03-2003 18:41 |
| Hits, Misses, & Suggestions -- long message | archiver | 2000 | 17 | 23-06-2002 23:36 |
| The Society for More Qualifying Rounds | archiver | 1999 | 47 | 23-06-2002 22:05 |