Originally Posted by falconmaster (Post 1363487)

I can say that they contributed 10 points every cycle.

Originally Posted by MrForbes (Post 1363484)

Watch finals match 1, played with defense.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNwCVSuy1vw

We were totally outgunned. Defense didn't do a dang thing for us.

Seriously...what did either side have to lose?

If you watch the quarterfinals, you'll see what alliances should expect in elimination matches.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCn8...uery=qf+4+2014

I learned from Fredi years ago about paradigm change....and I think I'm not the only one who respects his ideas about it.

Originally Posted by falconmaster (Post 1363487)

Maybe 2403 will answer themselves. I can say that they contributed 10 points every cycle. The human player through the ball to 2403 and they popped the ball up and over to us and we then took it to the truss which we through over to the other human player and then they dumped it into 2486 which then made the goal. By the way they also did that all through the finals matches and just added defense when they could. But you can ask them....

Originally Posted by falconmaster (Post 1363435)

In defense of Mr. Steve Sanghi no one was required to do this.... its was put out there and teams took it. Take it for what it was worth, a motivating incentive. I am also interested in why everybody keeps saying why AZ is not a hot bed. I have heard this several times already. Based on population density, I think we are a hot bed. AZ has had teams on Einstein several times and AZ has threats every year. Also team 842 is a hall of fame team and 2486 is a major threat for championships chairmans this year. I guess I should not take this view of us too critically, its gives us an advantage at the championships if people are not paying attention to us. Too many times people on CD neglect Arizona and we struggle to get any attention. We are used to it, we have learned to be "mavericky". We aren't Michigan....

Originally Posted by safiq10 (Post 1363494)

I congratulate you guys for winning and making $500.

Do I agree with what you did? Not really. Would we have done the same thing? I dont know.

But as a defensive team that would have really sucked! Our team thrives on playing defense and some of the most exciting matches were matches in which someone was playing defense. Take Dallas 2014 when 3847 played defense or any of the elimination matches! They were fun and exciting (not to mention extremely difficult!)

but that is just my 2 cents congrats on the $500 and the win!

Originally Posted by MrForbes (Post 1363491)

You mean 20 points per cycle. In a second or two. That's the best point/time performance of any of the teams on your alliance. Steven and I were discussing that this morning.

Originally Posted by dodar (Post 1363496)

Saying "they just added defense when they could" vastly undercuts their efforts on your alliance. In the QF alone they stopped that blue alliance from scoring at least 50% more.

Originally Posted by falconmaster (Post 1363521)

You keep looking for negatives among a whole group of people who are obviously happy about their decision. Are you a lawyer? Just kidding. Think what you want, we all stand by our decision.

Originally Posted by seg9585 (Post 1363527)

Morality and consensual agreements between opponents aside, this was by far the most boring Finals match I've ever seen in any FIRST regional ever, considering how many points were actually scored. You really wanted to end a competition like this?

Originally Posted by seg9585 (Post 1363527)

Morality and consensual agreements between opponents aside, this was by far the most boring Finals match I've ever seen in any FIRST regional ever, considering how many points were actually scored. You really wanted to end a competition like this?

Originally Posted by falconmaster (Post 1363533)

Well its very fortunate then that there are many regionals. Our regional is what it was. Gracious professionalism and coopertition.

Originally Posted by Nathan Rossi (Post 1363534)

Our alliance (1492, 4183, & 2647) was also offered to put down defense (for just one match) to try and maximize both of the alliance's scores. The reason I was so skeptical about doing this was we had just spent all of our time during lunch beefing up 2647 for defense (adding 2 CIMs, extra weight, and ect.). Though, the offer was very tempting (and looking back I wish we had taken it).

We did end up losing due to 60's excellent defensive play (and 4183 unfortunately losing power in the last 40 seconds of QF4-3).

I would like to personally apologize for not taking the offer, as I was 1492's primary strategist and had a weighted opinion as to if we should've done it or not. I think both alliances could've easily gotten over 200 points.

After watching week one, I wondered if any alliances would try such a strategy (dropping defense for high scoring) I'm actually surprised we didn't see this strategy sooner.



As someone who was watching in person, I can tell you it was far from boring (it was in fact very exciting!).