Serpentine Draft Alliance Parings, Like/Dislike

[A_Reed]

I Like the serpentine draft system, it does make the whole field slightly more even and forces the higher seeds to pick with a little more strategy in mind. As much as I don't like seeing one sided finals, where the red score is 2x the blue score, I would imagine it would be allot worse if the #1 seeds got their second round pick first making an even tougher alliance, as a matter of fact this kind of thing did happen prior to '06 that was why the rule was made.

As for 8-1 and 1-8, I don't see that working. sure it would have it's advantages but it would completely falsify the ranking system, people would drop matches on purpose and the teams who actually tried wouldn't get what they earned, the first overall pick.

IMO(and it's something that will never happen is), if you really wanted to even the playing field and stop the formation of power alliances FIRST should drop the picking within the top 8. It would create some really even, some might say boring, elimination rounds that are now completely based on the skills of each teams scouting system not the power of a ranked team one spot lower than them, but I really don't see it happening is it would take away the right of the higher seeds to use the power they have earned and would would also falsify the ranking cause teams would again drop matches to not be in the top 8.

[mathking]

Steve Ketron hit the nail on the head. #1 seed does not mean you had the best robot or that you necessarily played better than others. Being a #1 seed depends not just on having a good robot but to at least some extent on good luck with the pairings. A serpentine draft levels the playing field against the luck of the qualification matches. And it makes for more exciting matches.

[Nawaid Ladak]

now it's time for my opinion

i believe that this system is REALLY BAD. and i believe every point about this system can be countered.

I know for a fact, it would be better to market yourself to the high ranked teams instead of being bit by the serpentine. im pretty sure teams that are ranked bewteen 17-20 would really dislike this system on this theory

more and more, the top teams are picking each other. (some teams try to stop it, never the less.)... and those 10...11...12th ranked teams don't have a clear idea of who they want, so usually they just copy down the rankings and pick from there. doing that would mean those teams get ripped off somewhat.

i wouldn't be surprised if we got some shocking results saying ... we were ranked 17th at the end of the day friday. but were 4-3 with 1 match left, and the 8th ranked team has 25 more ranking points than us and has 2 loses. what do you think this team would probally do.... drop that match and fall to 20something or would they win and risk themselves to either picking as a 8 seed or being picked by a 8 seed?

im pretty sure most of the top teams do their picking lists friday night, and make minor adjustments on saturday morning... so i wouldn't be surprised that a smart veteran team would tank their matches on Saturday for a chance to be with the #1 alliance.

You worked hard for that #1 seed. and you should be rewarded, not by just having 2 five-star robots and a average robot playing defense (semi-this year).. instead of having two five-star robots and a decent complement 3.5 star robot...

I think what needs to be done, is that the 1-8 1-8 needs to be used at REGIONAL EVENTS ONLY.... because every regional has their drop off, if you want to send the best alliance posable, you would use this technique. I think for championships, the serpentine is fine because the drop off is further down the rankings to the point where it shouldn't be a factor.

another note: a 1v8 alliance is more of a 3v6 match up in the previous system

[waialua359]

With the current draft system, one flaw I see is that the 24th pick is, often enough, a team that "rides the alliance" to victory, especially during regional competitions.. Did some of these teams truly contribute as a major factor in their alliance?
The solution is perhaps in the game design where you are forced to have all 3 teammates to be major contributors.

Some interesting changes scenario for this year's game to force 3 robots to successfully win games:

1.What if this year's game had 3 track balls?
2. What if bonus points were worth more and it had to be from a teammate that isn't allowed to hurdle? i.e. designate the 3rd role robot who can only do laps and is only allowed to place on the rack. Hurdlers aren't allowed to place at the end.
3. You cannot do hybrid if you plan on hurdling.

If the goal is to even out the playing field matchups, the suggestions would help. However, I know that it wouldnt be as fun to watch and teams would have to be able to do everything, depending on what their role will be on the alliance for a particular match.

Since regionals are much less deep than CMP, the #1 seeded team would have a tough #2 pick at 24, creating more even matchups. The key is game design.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by Nawaid Ladak

i wouldn't be surprised if we got some shocking results saying ... we were ranked 17th at the end of the day friday. but were 4-3 with 1 match left, and the 8th ranked team has 25 more ranking points than us and has 2 loses. what do you think this team would probally do.... drop that match and fall to 20something or would they win and risk themselves to either picking as a 8 seed or being picked by a 8 seed?

im pretty sure most of the top teams do their picking lists friday night, and make minor adjustments on saturday morning... so i wouldn't be surprised that a smart veteran team would tank their matches on Saturday for a chance to be with the #1 alliance.

I'm confused with this part. Is this under the current system? If so, then what difference does it make if a team is in ranked 22 or 8? If they are good enough, they will be picked by the top alliance 1st. If you are assuming this team will get picked 24th (and not 1st) I don't think any team will take that gamble. I don't see any advantage to dropping a last match so you fall out of the top 8. (at GLR, if 2137 won thier last match, they would have been the 2nd seed, but they lost, fell out of the top 8 and did not get selected)

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

I'm confused with this part. Is this under the current system? If so, then what difference does it make if a team is in ranked 22 or 8? If they are good enough, they will be picked by the top alliance 1st. If you are assuming this team will get picked 24th (and not 1st) I don't think any team will take that gamble. I don't see any advantage to dropping a last match so you fall out of the top 8. (at GLR, if 2137 won thier last match, they would have been the 2nd seed, but they lost, fell out of the top 8 and did not get selected)

Its funny you say this, because in Hawaii this past weekend, team 597 was out of the top 8 and wanted to be selected in the second round by a higher seeded alliance. When they moved up to 8th, they have no choice already and have to select their own alliance.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Nawaid Ladak

I think what needs to be done, is that the 1-8 1-8 needs to be used at REGIONAL EVENTS ONLY.... because every regional has their drop off, if you want to send the best alliance posable, you would use this technique. I think for championships, the serpentine is fine because the drop off is further down the rankings to the point where it shouldn't be a factor.

While I, too, have great displeasure with the Serpentine System, I will have to completely disagree with this point. If the serpentine draft didn't have as much of an impact at Championship, how did TWO #8 alliances win last year. The #8 alliance on Galileo reached the finals on Galileo, and the #8 alliance not only reached, but won on, Einstein.
That statement deserves to be repeated, our current FIRST Champions (190, 987, and 177) were a #8 alliance. The serpentine draft has just as large, if not even larger, impact at Championship as it does in regional competition.

The data clearly shows that the serpentine system has been successful in making the lower seeded alliances more competitive. There is no arguing against that. The only arguments that exists is one of whether or not they have become too competitive and whether or not they deserve to have the 2nd round advantage over the higher seeds. These are both more philosophical arguments, and it will be very hard to make both sides agree on these.

[DDAwg3]

I don't have a problem with serpentine style, however I have always despised the top eight teams from being able to pick each other.

If they were not able to pick each other I would go 1 thru 8 each time through.

When was the last time HP, Gateway and Dell teamed up together and went against Apple, Acer and Compaq ?

the answer is never they all had to find new young un-proven talent to become or maintain winning formula.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by waialua359

Its funny you say this, because in Hawaii this past weekend, team 597 was out of the top 8 and wanted to be selected in the second round by a higher seeded alliance. When they moved up to 8th, they have no choice already and have to select their own alliance.

That is slightly different because they were already in that position. It is not like they intentally dropped thier last match (maybe they did...I don't know). If I was given the opportunity of being in the top 8 and ensured to play in the eliminations and be outside the top 8 and hope someone will pick us in the second round, I would choose to be in the top 8 every time.

I also think intentially losing matches is very wrong to your alliance partners and the integrety of the game.

EDIT: If you don't allow teams to pick team from within the top 8, then you would defently have more reason to intentially lose. At MARC last year, the alliance captians couldn't pick from within the top 4 (there were only four alliances). 1732 was the top seed. 910, who we thought was the best team there, lost thier last match and dropped out of the top four, allowing us to pick them. I don't think 910 intentially threw thier last match so they could be picked for the top alliance and eventual winners, but they would have had the motivation and reason to do so.

[Nawaid Ladak]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

While I, too, have great displeasure with the Serpentine System, I will have to completely disagree with this point. If the serpentine draft didn't have as much of an impact at Championship, how did TWO #8 alliances win last year. The #8 alliance on Galileo reached the finals on Galileo, and the #8 alliance not only reached, but won on, Einstein.
That statement deserves to be repeated, our current FIRST Champions (190, 987, and 177) were a #8 alliance. The serpentine draft has just as large, if not even larger, impact at Championship as it does in regional competition.

The data clearly shows that the serpentine system has been successful in making the lower seeded alliances more competitive. There is no arguing against that. The only arguments that exists is one of whether or not they have become too competitive and whether or not they deserve to have the 2nd round advantage over the higher seeds. These are both more philosophical arguments, and it will be very hard to make both sides agree on these.

your somewhat proving my point for me, what im trying to say is, at championship, there isn't much of a dropoff, most of the teams are petty even. but at regionals competitions, take waterloo for example: there was a huge drop off between 1114, 2056, 188, 2200, 68, and the other teams at that regional event.

the earlier post about the so called 24th seed, riding the alliance to victory, is sort of what im trying to say. Im guessing we all would like to see the best and most deserving teams to go to Atlanta. and thats what should be offered.

this will bring more competition into the A. come 11:45 on Saturday.... the teams in Atlanta are so close that strategy and scouting determine the champion.....

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by DDAwg3

I don't have a problem with serpentine style, however I have always despised the top eight teams from being able to pick each other.

If they were not able to pick each other I would go 1 thru 8 each time through.

When was the last time HP, Gateway and Dell teamed up together and went against Apple, Acer and Compaq ?

the answer is never they all had to find new young un-proven talent to become or maintain winning formula.

Get rid of that, though, and then the top couple teams have a huge incentive to throw their last couple of matches. Besides, the serpentine system evens out this factor, because each alliance captain can only pick one top 8 team.

[Dominicano0519]

Originally Posted by waialua359

With the current draft system, one flaw I see is that the 24th pick is, often enough, a team that "rides the alliance" to victory, especially during regional competitions.. Did some of these teams truly contribute as a major factor in their alliance?
The solution is perhaps in the game design where you are forced to have all 3 teammates to be major contributors.

Some interesting changes scenario for this year's game to force 3 robots to successfully win games:

1.What if this year's game had 3 track balls?
2. What if bonus points were worth more and it had to be from a teammate that isn't allowed to hurdle? i.e. designate the 3rd role robot who can only do laps and is only allowed to place on the rack. Hurdlers aren't allowed to place at the end.
3. You cannot do hybrid if you plan on hurdling.

If the goal is to even out the playing field matchups, the suggestions would help. However, I know that it wouldnt be as fun to watch and teams would have to be able to do everything, depending on what their role will be on the alliance for a particular match.

Since regionals are much less deep than CMP, the #1 seeded team would have a tough #2 pick at 24, creating more even matchups. The key is game design.

well as one example of a team who carried their own weight in the finals look at this years nj regional, everyone wanted three hurdlers except for the 1st and i think the 5th alliances who went each went with a lapbot.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

That is slightly different because they were already in that position. It is not like they intentally dropped thier last match (maybe they did...I don't know). If I was given the opportunity of being in the top 8 and ensured to play in the eliminations and be outside the top 8 and hope someone will pick us in the second round, I would choose to be in the top 8 every time.

I also think intentially losing matches is very wrong to your alliance partners and the integrety of the game.

EDIT: If you don't allow teams to pick team from within the top 8, then you would defently have more reason to intentially lose. At MARC last year, the alliance captians couldn't pick from within the top 4 (there were only four alliances). 1732 was the top seed. 910, who we thought was the best team there, lost thier last match and dropped out of the top four, allowing us to pick them. I don't think 910 intentially threw thier last match so they could be picked for the top alliance and eventual winners, but they would have had the motivation and reason to do so.

My comment wasn't about dropping matches. We had talked to 597 prior to the end of matches and liked them a lot and wanted to pick them on the go around.
They were seeded 15th. As stated in another thread, they were shocked/surprised to have made the top 8. Dropping matches to fall out of the top 8 is ungracious professionalism and should not be condoned.

[Uberbots]

Originally Posted by waialua359

With the current draft system, one flaw I see is that the 24th pick is, often enough, a team that "rides the alliance" to victory, especially during regional competitions.. Did some of these teams truly contribute as a major factor in their alliance?

Yes, every robot makes a contribution in an alliance, and without the '24th' seed it is a broken alliance. That comment is unbelievably demeaning towards the many '24th seed' teams that competed during the regionals this year. I know we wouldn't have won CT without 716's help.

[Racer26]

Originally Posted by bduddy

I like it because it gives a lower-placed team (theoretically, the 24th-best team) a chance to win a regional if they can make a contribution to their alliance, because not even two "juggernauts" can usually win against the well-balanced alliances serpentine selection usually generates. It emphasizes that robots need to work together to emphasize their strengths, not just gather the three best teams in the building (or the two best and the 9th best... whatever)

*Points to 1114/2056*

Really? They've won Waterloo AND GTR together in both 2007 and 2008. Doesn't look like anyone's about to upset them any time soon either... (They also won 2007 IRI together.)