Weird Qualifying Rules

[dude__hi]

Originally Posted by CassCity2081

I think that the QP are flawed

My example of this was yesterday at the DC regional. Blue Alliance barely moved the whole match. Red Alliance beats the Blue alliance 8-0. The Red Alliance had 1 penalty so there unpenalized score was 9. According to the rules, Red Alliance gets 8 QPs and Blue Alliance gets 9 QPs even though they lost by 8. Just wanted to point that out.

One of the basic rules we use as a team is that you have to play the game. Regardless of personal opinions about the game, you design a robot and build strategies to play the game. The Co-Opertition bonus is very important to your own ranking. If you finish a match 8-0 you are not playing the game.

[CassCity2081]

Originally Posted by dude__hi

One of the basic rules we use as a team is that you have to play the game. Regardless of personal opinions about the game, you design a robot and build strategies to play the game. The Co-Opertition bonus is very important to your own ranking. If you finish a match 8-0 you are not playing the game.

Thats what I think all teams should do. Unfortunately, some teams are more concerned with winning then a good competition. Thats why there should be something in the rules about a mximum amount of points the losing alliance can get.

[whatabouteve]

well from many perspectives scoring on the opponents goal helps if you're up by alot and can afford that luxury, however it makes you look bad for scoring in the nopponents goal.

[Ether]

Do the venues keep "box scores" for the individual teams during qual and elim, and make this data available after the meet ?

Or is the only data available to a team that which their own scouting efforts gather ?

~

[pitzoid]

Originally Posted by Ether

Do the venues keep "box scores" for the individual teams during qual and elim, and make this data available after the meet ?

Or is the only data available to a team that which their own scouting efforts gather ?

~

The FRC FMS system provides the Twitter feeds which breaks out the score detail from a match by alliance, there's also the HTML pages on the FIRST web site, but that doesn't have as much individual match score data. Someone that truely understands the match scoring and ranking can derive everything they need for scouting from the twitter feeds.....

[Ricky Q.]

Originally Posted by pitzoid

The FRC FMS system provides the Twitter feeds which breaks out the score detail from a match by alliance, there's also the HTML pages on the FIRST web site, but that doesn't have as much individual match score data. Someone that truely understands the match scoring and ranking can derive everything they need for scouting from the twitter feeds.....

Is there an explanation of the data put out by the Twitter feed anywhere?

[s_forbes]

Originally Posted by Ricky Q.

Is there an explanation of the data put out by the Twitter feed anywhere?

There is an explanation on the FIRST site, here.

[Ether]

Originally Posted by pitzoid

The FRC FMS system provides the Twitter feeds

Can this be accessed with an internet browser? Or is special software required?

which breaks out the score detail from a match by alliance

Does this include detail at the team level? For example, how many goals, penalties, suspended, did each team get. Stuff like that.

there's also the HTML pages on the FIRST web site

I surfed but didn't see any links to match data at USFIRST.ORG Can you post a link? Thanks.


~

[Bruceb]

All I have to say is so much for them saying that this year the fans can understand the scoring. Lets see what happens when a fantastic robot wins all their matches and is last in the seeding. Explain that to the crowd.
Bruce

[Ether]

Originally Posted by Bruceb

All I have to say is so much for them saying that this year the fans can understand the scoring. Lets see what happens when a fantastic robot wins all their matches and is last in the seeding. Explain that to the crowd.
Bruce

A major part of the problem is the announcers at the venue, and the way they whoop it up when an alliance "wins" a match during the qualifiers.

Perhaps the announcers do not understand either.

FIRST should provide some training for the announcers at each venue.

During the qualifying matches, the announcers should downplay, or even ignore, "wins", and instead announce how many seed points each alliance is awarded for each match. This would educate not only the fans, but many of the unaware teams as well.


~

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Ether

Perhaps the announcers do not understand either.

FIRST should provide some training for the announcers at each venue.

This is definitely not true on the webcasts I watched. Tyler Olds at KC (awesome game announcer!) spent a lot of time explaining that you wanted a close match, how many QPs each team would get, etc.

The winner this year does have the benefit in any match where the score is not zero for the opponents. Winning is not completely secondary.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Am I the only one who thinks that too many teams didn't bother looking at the seeding rules?

No, and it would have been beneficial for teams to have had these discussions a while back rather than waiting until the competition season.

Jane

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

No, and it would have been beneficial for teams to have had these discussions a while back rather than waiting until the competition season.

Jane

Jane,

We did talk about it here on CD. With the lack of uproar about it, I assumed (yeah, I know) that teams understood the implications of the new seedeing points.

After participating at GSR, it was quite obvious that many teams did not initially understand all of the implications ... however by Saturday morning (too late) most teams had figured it out.

My hope is that most teams will have now seen how it works and won't try and shut out their opponent. It's just another thing that you need to discuss with your alliance partners before each match.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

We did talk about it here on CD. With the lack of uproar about it, I assumed (yeah, I know) that teams understood the implications of the new seedeing points.

I know it was discussed here in CD and I didn't make my statement clear, sorry. What I meant was that each team in FRC should have read, talked about, and understood all of the implications involved in scoring this year so that they can come to the event(s) that they participate in, prepared. ChiefDelphi is an excellent resource but I don't know that every team in FRC reads it. It is up to each team to make sure that they read the manual, study the rules, and understand them. Hopefully, more teams will be taking advantage of that opportunity before the upcoming competitions, and will be better prepared as teammates and as alliance partners for the rest of the season.

Aside: We can talk and natter and squabble about the best teams/top teams all day long, year after year, and it is silly. This is an example of why - they come to the competition prepared to play.

Jane

[davidfv]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

No, and it would have been beneficial for teams to have had these discussions a while back rather than waiting until the competition season.

Jane

We put together a Excel simulation for the seeding points right in the beginning of the season.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...t=83903&page=5