![]() |
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
|
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
Achievement is relative. It's awesome that your team can compete on such a high level and I admire that, but belittling another regional, another set of teams, another set of stories and achievements is so far beneath you, or at least it should be. |
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
Dean frequently speaks about how 'we want to steal from the playbook of sports, but not take all the bad stuff, like unsportsmanlike behavior', and I think bribing teams is something not even the sports world wants. So why would we? Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
|
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
|
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
|
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
I certainly hope this doesn't devolve into an argument where the integrity a man who has transformed STEM in Arizona is questioned. |
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
(EDIT:: I'm not questioning anyone's integrity - truly - if the guy's on the board, he's gotta be doing something right. I'm questioning the logic behind offering this at all.) |
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
|
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
A pat on the back? Is it really that bad!? Can you point me to the negative effects of this challenge? |
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
I'm in a class so I can elaborate on your question later, but bribing teams to play matches in a different way than normal competition at any other regional has played out, just seems shady to me. |
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
When I hear of alliances agreeing to how a match will be played, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I'm a competitor through and through, a virtue I hope to share with my students/teammates. When I heard about the offers being made at the AZ regional and then read about those celebrating the results...the following definition is all that comes to mind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match_fixing ~EJ |
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Shout out to the GDC, I hear for video game dev's its really hard when an aspect of the the video game they make is blatantly ignored by the player base. I mean its time and effort people spent on making rules to account for as many situations and in the end, none of them mattered because someone had a cash incentive.
Also shout out to teams whose strategies and building choices were invalidated by this cash incentive. I vouched heavily against certain choices like mecanum (the regrets T_T) because I knew defense would be a problem this year and I valued pushing power over mobility. Any robot built around being a goalie is instantly at a disadvantage if you built around blocking shots and you suddenly have a big sponsor say "score a lot." If the challenge that was proposed included all aspects of the game and did not invalidate any strategies it would be a great addition to the game. I should also point out that "heavy defense" in a lot of events have been so brutal. My favorite team (<3) wasn't able to compete in all eliminations due to defense being played and a robot being torn in half. So a game without defense would be relaxing every now and then. |
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
Quote:
Were the other drive teams pressured into agreeing with this? Were the other teams also thinking about their future rather than the competition at hand? If the answer to any of these questions is yes than the reward was a resounding failure. Students should not be put into situations where they have to change how they compete in order receive monetary benefits. |
Re: 301 points! and could have done more
Quote:
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:41. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi