Posted by Bill Beatty.
Other on team #71, Team Hammond, from Team Hammond.
Posted on 1/9/2000 6:57 PM MST
Any comments on the new alliance selection rules? I don’t think FIRST thought this one through.
The number one seed can pick anyone. Looking back at last year, can you imagine at Michigan Baxter having the pick of the field or us having the pick from the entire field in Chicago?(I imagine the same situation existed in all the regionals) You would have had a super alliance that would have been almost impossible to beat! Also, what does the number two seed do? At the rumble NYPRO could have picked us. Do we graciously accept with an almost certain chance of the championship as a pickee or do we decline and try and win as a picker? I am not sure what we would have done!
Bill B
Posted by Lora Knepper.
Student on team #69, HYPER, from Quincy Public Schools and The Gillette Company.
Posted on 1/9/2000 7:19 PM MST
In Reply to: Picker Or Pickee posted by Bill Beatty on 1/9/2000 6:57 PM MST:
That’s the one section of the rules that really worries me. In the NE Regional we were picked by Bobcat, and in the national by the X-cats. At Rumble we chose Woburn team 188, but I’m not sure how things would have turned out if teams in the top seed were allowed to choose each other. It does seem to set up a feeling that ‘Super-Alliances’ will be made, and be almost unbeatable. I’d be interested in hearing how other teams see this.
Posted by Joe Johnson. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.
Posted on 1/9/2000 7:29 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: Picker Or Pickee posted by Lora Knepper on 1/9/2000 7:19 PM MST:
There are many many things for me to worry about this year. I am afraid this is fairly low on the list.
The problem is not going to BE a problem if the seeding proceedure ends up being close to a very elaborate random number generator.
The method of calculationing QP’s provides very strong pressure toward the center. I suspect that there will be a very tight bell curve with only a very few breaking away from the center. I think that this system will require MANY MANY more seeding rounds to have the converge to the ‘true’ seeding.
Comments?
Joe J.
Posted by Sam Lindhorst.
Engineer on team #240, Mach Vee, from Jefferson High School and Visteon.
Posted on 1/9/2000 10:24 PM MST
In Reply to: down on the list of worries… posted by Joe Johnson on 1/9/2000 7:29 PM MST:
: There are many many things for me to worry about this year. I am afraid this is fairly low on the list.
True. You have to be in the situation first.
: The problem is not going to BE a problem if the seeding proceedure ends up being close to a very elaborate random number generator.
Random, except for the picks. I think strong teams will still come out on top, as usual.
: The method of calculationing QP’s provides very strong pressure toward the center. I suspect that there will be a very tight bell curve with only a very few breaking away from the center. I think that this system will require MANY MANY more seeding rounds to have the converge to the ‘true’ seeding.
: Comments?
: Joe J.
True? I think a strong team against a weak one will still get a great score, even if they spend the last 90 seconds loading up the opponent’s goal. Then taking the bar away from their opponent, if they need to.
And the possibility of super-alliances is very valid, I agree with Bill Beatty in this. We’ll see.
Posted by Bill Beatty.
Other on team #71, Team Hammond, from Team Hammond.
Posted on 1/9/2000 10:39 PM MST
In Reply to: down on the list of worries… posted by Joe Johnson on 1/9/2000 7:29 PM MST:
Car Nack predicts that, if there is no changes in the selection process, the number one seed will win no less than half of the regional competitions!
There appears to be a few foolish mortals that might dispute the wisdom of the all knowing-all seeing Car Nack. Or, possibly they are just making idle chatter. Car Nack is willing to risk his vast riches by wagering a large diet Coke against a large Mountain Dew that his prediction will come true.
Car Nack has spoken!
Posted by Raul.
Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.
Posted on 1/9/2000 10:43 PM MST
In Reply to: Car Nack Predicts posted by Bill Beatty on 1/9/2000 10:39 PM MST:
How about it Bill. Are you in yet?
Raul
Posted by Bill Beatty.
Other on team #71, Team Hammond, from Team Hammond.
Posted on 1/9/2000 11:05 PM MST
In Reply to: I think Car Nack should get in the game. posted by Raul on 1/9/2000 10:43 PM MST:
I guess I really shouldn’t comment about this year’s competition. We will be in the show in spirit only this year. Oh man, how we miss it already!
Bill B
Posted by Joe Johnson. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.
Posted on 1/10/2000 3:28 AM MST
In Reply to: Touche Raul posted by Bill Beatty on 1/9/2000 11:05 PM MST:
Bill,
As to comments on the forum, please continue. Your thoughts are always welcome.
Keep stirring the pot.
Joe J.
Posted by Greg Mills.
Engineer on team #16, Baxter Bomb Squad, from Mountain Home and Baxter Healthcare.
Posted on 1/10/2000 12:16 PM MST
In Reply to: Touche Raul posted by Bill Beatty on 1/9/2000 11:05 PM MST:
:
Is Brian available as a free agent coach? But then I’m not sure that we could pass him off as being from Arkansas!
Posted by Brian Beatty.
Coach on team #71, Team Hammond, from Hammond Schools.
Posted on 1/10/2000 8:50 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: Touche Raul posted by Greg Mills on 1/10/2000 12:16 PM MST:
Greg: you are correct that I would have a difficult time passing for an Arkansan Baxter Bomb Squad member-It would be tough to keep up with the energy level and enthusiasm your team brings to the competition. Besides, you and the guys(Mike C.) have a pretty good handle on the situation. As for my status, free agent is an accurate term. Maybe play-by-play commentator?
See you in Chicago.
Posted by Raul.
Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.
Posted on 1/11/2000 6:33 AM MST
In Reply to: free agent posted by Brian Beatty on 1/10/2000 8:50 PM MST:
Bill,
Since you will not be contributing to a specific team, how about sharing all your ideas of what you think a robot should do to win in this competition. How would you pick up the balls, what drive system, etc. The rookies (and some not-so-rookie) teams could benefit from your wisdom.
That way you can stay involved and keep your mind limber until you join us again next year.
This applies to any other previous team members that are already feeling hungry.
Raul
Posted by Joe Johnson. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.
Posted on 1/11/2000 6:27 PM MST
In Reply to: Let’s not waste your wisdom posted by Raul on 1/11/2000 6:33 AM MST:
Raul,
I think that Bill has already expressed some opinions as to how he sees the game going:
'It looks to me that Wildstang has the First 2000 machine pretty much in the can. ready to go. You guys will be very tough. ’ Bill Beatty on these forums several days ago…
Joe J.
Posted by Raul.
Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.
Posted on 1/12/2000 6:40 AM MST
In Reply to: Bill has already weighed in on that… posted by Joe Johnson on 1/11/2000 6:27 PM MST:
Well, I appreciate the compliment / vote of confidence. However, we have as much work to do as anyone else. We may have already used many of the necessary components (there are many other teams who have also); but there are a lot of new requirements and we have to combine technologies in unique ways.
Not allowing a robot to attach to the goal is a bummer since we were really getting good at doing that after 3 years of doing it. So, I don’t think we will try to squeeze the balls in or out as in the past - we’ll see.
Raul
Posted by Bill Beatty.
Other on team #71, Team Hammond, from Team Hammond.
Posted on 1/12/2000 8:29 AM MST
In Reply to: Thanks, but… posted by Raul on 1/12/2000 6:40 AM MST:
I feel quite certain that Car Nack will make additional, thought prevoking predictions before the competitions begins.
Posted by Jerry Eckert.
Engineer from Looking for a team in Raleigh, NC sponsored by .
Posted on 1/10/2000 1:05 AM MST
In Reply to: down on the list of worries… posted by Joe Johnson on 1/9/2000 7:29 PM MST:
: There are many many things for me to worry about this year. I am afraid this is fairly low on the list.
: The problem is not going to BE a problem if the seeding proceedure ends up being close to a very elaborate random number generator.
: The method of calculationing QP’s provides very strong pressure toward the center. I suspect that there will be a very tight bell curve with only a very few breaking away from the center. I think that this system will require MANY MANY more seeding rounds to have the converge to the ‘true’ seeding.
I don’t think it is possible to obtain a true seeding for this contest regardless of the
number of seeding rounds. Because the number of QPs earned is based on the
losing team’s score, which is not a factor at all in the elimination rounds, the
strategies used in the qualifying rounds will in most cases be entirely different
than in the elimination rounds.
It’s almost like playing two different games.
Jerry
Posted by Joe Johnson. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.
Posted on 1/10/2000 3:46 AM MST
In Reply to: Re: down on the list of worries… posted by Jerry Eckert on 1/10/2000 1:05 AM MST:
Excellent point. Seeding Matches and the Elimination Matches celebrate and reward VERY different skills.
Perhaps this year more than ever, the general concensus view of a team’s desireability as a partner and the seeding rank will have little to do with each other.
To my mind this is not a good thing.
Imagine if the rankings for the NCAA involved a similar kind of ranking method. Strange even to think about.
Joe J.
Posted by Lora Knepper.
Student on team #69, HYPER, from Quincy Public Schools and The Gillette Company.
Posted on 1/10/2000 4:38 PM MST
In Reply to: Yes, they are two different games… posted by Joe Johnson on 1/10/2000 3:46 AM MST:
You both are reading my mind on this one!
Lora Knepper
Team 69 (HYPER)
Posted by Nate Smith.
Other on team #66, GM Powertrain/Ypsilanti HS/Willow Run HS, from Eastern Michigan University and GM Powertrain.
Posted on 1/10/2000 5:32 PM MST
In Reply to: Yes, they are two different games… posted by Joe Johnson on 1/10/2000 3:46 AM MST:
: Excellent point. Seeding Matches and the Elimination Matches celebrate and reward VERY different skills.
: Perhaps this year more than ever, the general concensus view of a team’s desireability as a partner and the seeding rank will have little to do with each other.
: To my mind this is not a good thing.
This topic actually came up during our meeting today, and it was discussed as one of the things that will make scouting so important this year…there may be a team that is designed as a solely ‘offensive’ machine, and actually score in BOTH goals during the match to increase their QP ranking. It is these teams that really need to be looked for in scouting for possible allies during the elim rounds, because these are the same ones that will help to increase your score in the elim rounds by putting all those balls that they put into their opponent’s goal earlier into their own in the elim rounds.
Posted by Daniel.
Coach on team #483, BORG, from Berkeley High School and NASA Ames & UC Berkeley.
Posted on 1/10/2000 1:47 PM MST
In Reply to: down on the list of worries… posted by Joe Johnson on 1/9/2000 7:29 PM MST:
Joe, I agree.
However, I think FIRST agrees too, so they added rule SC-something (sorry don’t have the rule book with me). A robot gets to drop its lowest scoring QM. Yay! You get one free fluke!
I think it’s a good start. Considering the larger amount of matches to begin with, being able to drop one of the couple flukes you may have makes me feel better. Last year, GRT did really well at the cali regional but would have seeded even better if it could have dropped it’s zero point round. That round was before the drivers had figured out how the robot worked. ■■■■ happens, yes?
Lastly, it doesn’t MATTER what your seed is. If people know you have a good bot you WILL get picked because teams tend to research their top 10 or 15 picks. Even with that fluke of a match for GRT, we were picked by the number one seed – they looked PAST that. So you see, the majority of good teams will get a shot at the trophy.
-DL
PS - remember that teams can pick other robots in the top 16 seeds so you don’t loose your chance at being the first to pick anymore. You could get picked first! So the puzzle all fits together.
Posted by Daniel.
Coach on team #483, BORG, from Berkeley High School and NASA Ames & UC Berkeley.
Posted on 1/10/2000 2:07 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: down on the list of worries… posted by Daniel on 1/10/2000 1:47 PM MST:
SC5.
At the conclusion of the qualification matches, each team will drop the QPs earned in their lowest QP match.