Let’s not let history repeat itself.

For a year I’ve pondered how it came to be. Stronghold Champions were crowned, as we all knew would happen, but…. How they won the crown, might be another story, I’ve never been given to understand. Was the championship won in a fair manner, surely, was the championship won in a just manner, that is something different.
Last year the championship was one by alliance 7 who beat alliance 6. However 7 should face 6 in the semi-finals, not the finals. Why did teams 4 and 7 swap brackets last year??? Tournament playoff brackets are properly addressed in the game manual. This is the only way a tournament should be played.

Are you talking about on Einstein?

I’m not entirely sure what you’re referring to, but on Einstein (where seeds aren’t relevant anymore; matchups were based on divisions only), the 3 alliance from Carver beat the 1 alliance from Tesla.

There isn’t a 1-8 seed on Einstein, it’s just the winners of each division. The swap is just the way the brackets shows up. Since there is no real seeding, there was no swapping of seeds or anything weird going on. I’m not sure why the swap appears like that though (and I’ve seen it on a few other events I can’t recall off the top of my head).

The order divisions play against each other are outlined in the manual. The Einstein bracket on TBA appears to be wrong. I’ll investigate.

If you’re going to worry this much about something so trivial, would you care to find a legitimate way to rank the 8 division winners from last year? Average points? That’s less meaningful unless each plays an equal level of competition. If there isn’t a clear way to rank these that’s “fair” in itself, it’s a bit strange to suggest there’s anything not legitimate about the win.

You’re also ignoring this year is different. There will only be 6 division winners. Clearly, they’re not using the same bracket. History cannot repeat itself.

Page 107 has the bracket; Einstein matches were played as they should have been. (Carver vs Tesla

I see what you’re looking at on the blue alliance, and I believe the “swap” it shows between the Galileo and Carver alliances is just something weird in the website’s code/display, since the TBA bracket wasn’t really designed for Einstein.

Last year the Einstein matches were played in the way outlined by the manual, and if you look at that section of the manual and the subdivisions each alliance came out of they should line up.

That’s an interesting situation itself. How will the six divisions be whittled down to two for the finals?

TBA bracket that I assume was causing the confusion.

FRC Manual, 10.11.3 - TLDR; Round robin accumulating “Championship Points” per win, 2 alliances with highest “Championship Score” move on to play Finals.

Capture.JPG


Capture.JPG

I had looked at “brackets” based on TBA. “They” numbered them. Regardless of teams, once “numbered” shouldn’t the teams follow the playoff system per the manual? It appears as if that didn’t happen.

Also with only 6 this year, how will that be done? The game manual doesn’t outline this. Who plays who? Who desides.

Actually, the manual clearly outlines this. It’s a 6 team single round robin. 2 points for a win, 1 point for tie, 0 points for a loss. Ties broken by total match score. Top 2 go to Einstein Finals.

Game manual does outline this. Section 10.11.3.

The manual does outline it. It will be played round robin style where each alliance faces each of the other 5 alliances. You get 2 points for a win or 1 point for a tie. Top 2 teams based on those points advance to Einstein Finals.

I wonder why the first tie-breaker isn’t head to head record?

Does that mean each alliance will play every other alliance? That’s probably wrong, it would be way too long.

Yes, each alliance plays every other alliance. 15 matches of round robin total.

The number of questions about Einstein round robin is ridiculous, considering the game manual has been out for 3.5 months now.

Read section 10.11.3

Pfft, who needs the tournament section of the manual? Knowing how seeding works is for chumps; gotta rely on that dumb luck of hitting 1. :rolleyes:

Are you implying that somebody posting authoritatively on Chief Delphi has not read the manual? I for one am shocked.

Seriously though, while I know to the vast majority of teams it doesn’t really matter what the rules for Einstein are, I would think that even if you’re just hoping to play on Einstein you would want to familiarize yourself with how things are different at that level.