I am watching the VCU Regional webcast and see the picking of teams for eliminations. I watch the teams pick teams from ranking #1-8. Then the team ranked 8th picks a second team. The picking then goes back wards from ranking #7-1.
My question is this. Does this system of picking actually give the higher ranked teams an advantage of picking better teams? Isn’t that the whole concept of having rankings? I do not see how this system gives the higher ranked teams, but I could be wrong. Anyone with an explanation please post.
It is different than in previous years, but there still is a distinct advantage having the top first round picks. This way there is an advantage to seeding higher, but not as large as it used to be.
Yes a great example of the would be VCU. toward the end of the first round teams repeatedly picked teams who weren’t at the competition or who were already picked. All of that would be solved if they would pay attention and cross out those that have already been picked.
The fact that #7 or 8 had a team on their mind that didn’t exist was a Little embarrassing for that team but there is alot of thought that needs to be put into alliance selection. I found out (trying to track who picked who) that it is an unbelievably confusing process and I don’t wonder why their are conflicts of interest sometimes.
When the 8th alliance picked 1910, and then 1908, I’m not totally sure they knew who they were picking. 1910 didn’t exist at that regional, and 1908 was in 50th place. Team 1907 was in 10th place and remained unpicked throughout alliance selection.
i admit there are some advantages and disadvantages to this system. the advantage is that it makes the elimination rounds more action packed but it makes it seem that being higher ranked does not have all the advantages it use to.
I agree, but still, having the first and second teams should still be better than most others. And in the case of VCU, as someone pointed out earlier, 1907, the 10th seeded team went unpicked, so I think that there may have been a few better draft choices, which would have influenced the results.
Overall, this should be a warning to top seeded teams. You have to take a hard look at those teams who are left, and don’t assume that a team is gone just because they are ranked well.
ok although I have only been to 2 regionals (midwest/lonestar in 2004) I can say that unless your in the top 8 your only as good as other people think you are. what I mean by this is you can be high in the seedings but if other people arnt looking at you it doesnt mater. bottem line get people to look at you and remember your number(watch LSR this year and youll see a great way to get your number out there )
At the Granite Sate regional in New Hampshire today, there were a lot of lower seeded matches upsetting the higher seeds. The number 1, 3 and 4th place alliances were eliminated in the quarterfinals, and the number 2 alliance was eliminated in the semifinals. However, I’m not sure this has to do with the new way of selecting alliances, it is still interesting to see how everything is evenly matched.
I agree completely. Last year in Philly, our team was seeded in the 15-20 range, and we were not picked to be on an alliance. We only had about 15 kids at the regional, so our team presence was small and it was hard to put our team number out there . (although we won the regional the year before.)
There were also some high seeded teams at the NH regional today who were not picked too…
Same thing here. We had been seated 32ish, but we had won in 2004 AND had a WORKING AUTONOMOUS MODE (we found the vision tetra and attempted to pick it up). A few teams ranked below us were picked, but we weren’t. For the most part, Alliance Captains were just picking the next-highest ranked team, not necessarily one that complemented their strategy.
I see where the rest of you are coming from, but I actually think that this system was more fair because the highest seeds got to pick the best robots first, and then the last seeds got to pick the other good robots. This leveled the playing field greatly because the high seeds still had much advantage because they got the best robots, but the lower seeds still had a chance.
It is very hard to do picking well. The pressure is very high and the timeframe is always tough and sometimes insane (we’ve had to pick when we didn’t think we even had a chance to pick until the very last match of Sat. morning).
I have argued both sides of this one:
On one hand, I have told teams over and over that as a picking team they should try to do their best to pick the best partner available. That they sort of owe it to the good teams down the ranks to find them.
On the other, I have also told teams that there is no right to be picked. I know of teams that were picked because of reasons that are too silly to relate in public. But, that is the right of the team that is doing the picking. It is even their right to be unprepared or to flip a coin. The pick is theirs to do with as they like.
Here is where I come down: When I am picking team I advocate the first hand – the entire season of another 2 teams is in your hands. When I am a pickee, I advocate the second hand.
Life is unfair. Learn to deal with it or be unhappy.
The state of preparation of the low seeds, being rather bad as it seemed at VCU, is a completely sepearate issue fromt he new ranking system.
As much as I don’t like the new system, I will admit it acheived what it was set out to, at least at VCU. It was meant to bring more competitive matchplay and a greater chance for the lower seeds to advance and win. The #2 and #3 alliances fell in the QFs, and the the #6 beat the #4 seed in the finals, it did what it was meant to do.
I love that FIRST changed the selection system. It makes for a more dynamic and fun game, especially the elimination rounds. Who wants to see your robot get their butt handed to them? Well anyways i think that FIRST made a good call. O yeh it gives everyone a chance, not just Hammond Wildstang HOT Bot and Cheesy Poofs.
)