So here’s a bizarre, possbily embarrassing topic. :]
What’s the highest-seeded team NOT chosen to be on one of the eight final alliances in your tournament? We finished seeded 17th of 37 in our regional (we should have finished around 10th, but we made some mistakes in team operation that will NEVER happen again), and were not chosen. The embarrassing part is that three robots that WERE chosen didn’t score a single point in the finals. One of them was a “brave little toaster” that didn’t have an arm. Or the ability to turn. (To make it a little more poignant, we gave them materials and fixed their software for them.)
So, how many 17th seeds don’t get picked? We were the highest non-chosen team in our regional. Another embarrassing fact, now that I think of it.
Some facts: Three times (don’t laugh) we went onto the field without testing our arm only to find out that someone had failed to seat a cable in a Victor correctly. We lost all three of those. In the rounds where we didn’t do something stupid, we went 5-1, scoring an average of four tetras per round. Our only other loss was when an alliance partner racked up 40 points in penalties in a match where we would have won by 16 (and they got chosen for the finals after finishing seeded about 30th).
Hey, I’m not complaining. It was our fault. We could have picked up two more wins if we hadn’t shot ourselves in the arm. Or hand. Whatever.
Still, at least eight robots seeded lower than us were chosen. Is this unusual, or Just the Way Things Are? Thanks.
Over time, you personally will see more and more of this. Teams will get “overlooked” because they don’t have a noticeable name, they are a rookie team (although now it is not so true as rookies are not “true rookies” anymore), and teams will pick teams just because they are “friends”. The lowest I know that has been overlooked was 13th/14th and that was in 2003 at the Championship.
It would be interesting to have the data to know if a team lower has been overlooked, as usually at least 9 & 10 get bumped into Alliance Positioning.
Anyway. I went and checked the details. We were 15th out of 73 in the Archimedes Division, and weren’t picked, but I can imagine with 73 teams to scout it wouldn’t be difficult too miss something. Especially because that our the first year in blue (as opposed to yellow in previous years) and first year as the hammerheads.
This has happened to many teams out there…I can recall in 2002 my team was around 11th and didn’t get picked. I was mad and so was my team but hey we learned our lesson and since then we have been as outgoing and noticeable as possible with flyers brochures and things like that. Not getting chosen is just a part of the FIRST experience sometimes…and most fairly new teams come out better for it.
Yeah, we were in the top 7 all weekend until our last match. That can be a part of it. Another part is not selling yourself to other teams. It’s especially critical to do so when you’re in a division with 70 something other teams, where any one team can be easily overlooked.
We were 11th in our division at Epcot in 2001 but were overlooked. Turns out a few of the teams who failed to pick us could have used a reliable big ball scorer, something we had proven to be throughout the competition. 'Tis a pity. But yes, it happens, and ya just have to deal with it. There’ll be other days when you seed low, you do get picked, and you help your alliance achieve success in the elims.
Based mainly upon what happened during the 2001 season, 48 started to reach out and try to be a more helpful and well known team in 2002. We’re still working on that…
I was with a team in 2002,that was on a winning regional alliance, that was 12th seed at Epcot with an almost flawless performance and didn’t get picked. That was a huge learning experience year. We watched in amazement as robots were picked that were really low in the seedings (high numbers). It was like a bolt of lightening hitting that year.
There is so much more to this than how good your robot is. It’s about people knowing how good your robot is. Who actually saw your robot performing? It’s about whether your team is easy to work with. It’s about how you are perceived. It’s not always fair. It is like life.
just my opinion, but i personally do not put any faith in seeded position.
seeding relies almost exclusively on your partners, especially with so many penalty possibilities. if you have less than perfect partners for many matches than you may seed low, even though you are exceptional. on the opposite side many teams who seed high often get there on the backs of other good robots.
we rely solely on our scouting and knowledge of robots to choose complimentary partners, whether they are seeded first or last. if you are a good bot and end up seeded in the middle, but don’t get picked, its most likely that people don’t know you, didn’t see you perform at your best regularly, or don’t need your particular skill set.
Well here are a few things I think are common in Alliance Picking:
Lower numbered teams usually pick lower numbered teams.
Rookies usually pick rookies.
Teams that know local teams or have “family” teams usually pick their local friends or local “family”.
When I say family; I mean teams that have branched off of one certain team.
For example my team branched off of one team that had several high schools involved way back in the years of FIRST and now most of these high schools have their own team.
Family teams can also mean teams that have mentored a certain team for some time.
Remember that just because your team could have placed 8th does not mean that a team ranked lower than you could have placed 1st.
Our team has also been subject to not getting picked even though we thought we did well, however, this is not really the case for us anymore.
I was in the stands hoping that someone would have the good sense to replace an alliance partner with your robot. A handful of alliances at the event would’ve been well served to replace the weakest robot of the three after embarrassing, devastating losses.
My team was also exceptionally disappointed to have been overlooked, particularly since the robot was running very well and had been continually improving throughout the end of Friday and all through Saturday. In the end, however, it really is just the way these things go. It’s not a reflection of the ability of our robots to compete as much as it is a reflection of how poorly teams can be in evaluating a team’s performance – if that’s where their priorities lie.
I’ve noticed in the last two years of competing here in the Pacific Northwest that FIRST is still relatively unsophisticated here. Everything about the teams, robots, and competition is of lower caliber than what I was used to seeing at home. Teams don’t scout as vigorously, don’t design as elaborately, and don’t interact nearly as much. It’s disappointing, honestly.
All of that said, it was nice to meet you, Rick. Hopefully, we can do something to change the bad and improve upon the good and next year, we’ll both be doing the choosing rather than waiting to be chosen.