high scored matches
 

Some of these high scored matches seem hard to believe now. Is anyone seeing what I'm seeing?

Yeah but I'm convinced that some of them were fixed.. I mean the last match got 363 points or something because both sides had a human player stack of 8 that stayed untouched throughout the entire match..

I'm thinking the same thing. Matches like those are making a joke out of this years' game. I just watched 4 matches in a row where alll robots got on top nicely and no one went after the other alliances' stack.

Exactly, I was getting so disgusted watching the florida regional. What happend to it being a competition? It makes it really unfair to rookie teams tring to make it to the top. This year is suppose to be 2 vs. 2. Not 4 vs. 0

I hope FIRST hurries their statement about fixing matches.

Ya I was watching the Florida Regoinal and in the first match all the stacks were standing even when another robot was near by that could have easily knocked it over, thats just down right cheating, rigging matches like that just ruins the game for people who actually try to play it.

Not Likely
 

Replic, don't hold your breath. I believe FRC has provided information that will not be utilized. Last year it was the rulings around tethers, this year it's the ruling about collusion. The game will not be changed at this point; even the human player portion where there is significant risk of injury will remain through the championship.

One of these years someone is going to put drive motors on a cement block and run that as their bot. Maybe that will be the wake-up call for FIRST to abide by their own rulings. The game may not be fair as Dean said, but they have established rules of play, and right now the rules are being ignored.

Unfortunately, sponsors attend these regionals and see the collusion, see the "bash bots", and see that well engineered bots are disadvantaged due to the lack of FIRST following their own rules. Why would you pony up $5000 if this continued? The students that build these robots, from many teams that I have watched over the past three years deserve better than to have their seeding lowered by continued collusion. (DISCLAIMER: These are my personal opinions and in no way reflect the opinions of anyone else.)

As much as I hope you are wrong, Bill Moore, I fear that you are right... FIRST won't make the announcment. But my team has already unanimously voted not abide in any way to fixing matches.

And yes, the tether rule was blown out of all proportion last year, as we specifically asked if we could use a tape measure. After first said no, we wasted precious weight on the mini-me tether I'm sure you know well Bill.

I certainly am completely against collusion, as can be seen by my posts in those related threads.

However, I have been watching the Florida regional, and what has been taking place does NOT appear to me to be collusion. These 8 stacks have been built, and have often come down. In the matches where they stay up, it is usually because it is heavily defended from the other team.

Teams realize, strategically, that it is not in their best interest to always destroy what the other teams create. This does not mean collusion is occuring, it is simply strategy, which I believe is fair in the game. If you already know you are going to win, you want to maximize the other team's points. This does not have to be discussed with the other team before the match.

Again, though, I would like to reemphasize I am completely against the practice of collusion.

Edit: Of course, I was not there, and did not see everything that was going on. This is simply an observation, and I want to make sure people are not just jumping to conclusions. At AZ, I witnessed the collusion first hand. I have not seen any first hand observations about this occurring in FL yet.

An unfortunate downside of all this, of course, is the fact that it is extremely difficult to tell the difference between on the fly strategics and collusion. Do not let this fear of fixing matches become a fest of finger pointing and witch hunts.

well i was at this game we where actually on deck and they where totally fixed cause they where trying to get ahead of everyone so much. And everyone knew it. It was kinda sad.i wont name the teams but they where trying to stay first and second and they dropped and then the 4 on top of the ramp was fixed two which i mean was cool but i wish that was real

I think the forum should adopt these rules for the sure-to-come surge of additional fixing matches posts-

a) No teams are to be named! Pointing fingers leads to no good.

b) Do not assume that all highscoring matches are neccessarily fixed. My team has competed in only one match with all 4 robots ending on the top of the ramp, but it was in no way fixed- in fact, I was surprised the last one pushed his way on in the last second.

I dont think seeing 4 robots on top of the ramp is fixed, when I see stacks of 8 on each side of the playing field, not touched, thats seems a little too hard to believe.

My team was at the Great Lakes Regional, and I only saw one match that looked like it had any collusion. It was really obvious - the final score was 102 to 101, and the winning team got 304 qualifying points. That was the only match like that, and I'm glad that most of the teams were noble enough not to stoop to that level.

(I edited this post because I originally pointed out which teams I thought had been involved in the collusion; I took the advice of another poster and decided to edit my message. I apologize to anyone who saw my original post.)

I don't see a stack of 8 on both sides being that hard to believe. If I was driver, I wouldn't knock a stack over if I still had a stack the same size in my zone (and I was winning). I would wait for the last 20 seconds if we were losing to knock it over. Not knocking over others stacks at the beginning will normally assure you a high score if you win.

Human Player Period
 

Am I crazy or not?

I watched some of the last qual matches over the web and in listening to the commentators and looking at the clock it seem that the human player period was 15 seconds and not the 10 that we had at UTC and BAE. I know at the UTC scrimmage that FIRST was thinking about 15 for safety reasons but is this official now or just implemented locally in FL.

Seeing matches with stacks > 4 means that a human player had time to (and did in some of my viewing) cross the field to put 4 on 4, etc. Even with 15 seconds this is a tall task, but with 10 seconds, almost impossible.

Whether allowing 8-stacks to be created & standing on both sides is "decided" by opposing forces before the match, I do not know. Is it Graciously Professional to have both sides work together to get the highest scores?

Working together and getting 15 H.P. seconds, however, would allow for the extremely high QP scores in FL.

Just my 2 cents worth.


P.S. BUZZ likes to and will knock down any size stack!

Stop it! I care not what you mean by this, but no finger pointing! As I said earlier, no good can come of it. All it will do is insult the integrity of teams already established and start a witch hunt that will turn the FIRST community against itself.

These forums have witnessed the change of the FIRST spirit, examplified by few teams anymore. The "fixing matches" scandal is horrible, but no reason to EVER point someone out. Otherwise you're using good intentions to stab the spirit of FIRST.

That was us...
 

How what that match FIXED??? Someone PLEASE TELL ME THAT!

I don't see it.

It was the only good match that we had, and it was only due to good luck... our drivers, and our coach dug us into that irremovable slump after that.

Hey, they should have an award for the highest scores... that way, we would have won SOMETHING.

However, I congratulate the winning teams, they truly deserved it.

you guys are L-O-S-E-R-S!
 

I KNOW THAT PEOPLE FIX MATCHES. AFTER BEING A MEMBER OF FIRST FOR TWO YEARS, I HAVE NOTED MANY OF THEM. IN FACT, IN THE CURIE DIVISION IN FLORIDA LAST YEAR, OUR ALLIANCE TURNED AGAINST US SO THAT THEY COULD BE SELECTED FOR THE FINALS.

I AM A MEMBER OF TEAM #519. WE HAD THE MATCH AT THE GREAT LAKES REGIONAL THAT HAD THE 304 QP POINTS.

I AM ASHAMED THAT ANYONE WOULD ACCUSE US, OR OUR ALLIANCE, OF CHEATING.

BEING AN MINORITY-BASED INNER CITY TEAM, I FIND THIS REALLY APPALLING BECAUSE WE WORK HARD, AND WE PLAY HARD. THIS IS SOME ABSOLUTE BULL.

AND AS FOR TEAM 818 COMMENTING LIKE THAT. THAT WAS TOTALLY UNCALLED FOR.

HEY PEOPLE, TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT WHAT F.I.R.S.T STANDS FOR. THEN, ASK YOURSELF, AM I TRULY EXPRESSING THE F.I.R.S.T SPIRIT, OR AM I A "WANNABE?"

something else...
 

oh yeah, and by the way. for all you 'haters' out there: we have the second highest QP score in the nation.

ok, I created this thread to see what others oppinions on this matter are. I DID NOT WANT ANY FINGER POINTING!! Sorry team 519 for any accusing. I heard about that match but didn't hit me cause it was the only high scored over 300. Watching the Central florida one with many high scoring matches made me wonder. Sorry again.

Time to change the scoring system
 

A quick way to get rid of all the controversy would be to change the scoring so that a team gets their score and thats it.

End of story.

We don't need the current aggravation.

Let's just score the competition the way these things are done in the sports world. I haven't heard of any baseball teams getting their score plus double the opponents.

I think it is time to put this particular turkey (scoring system) to rest.

In the meantime, let's all keep our cool, as the saying goes, and not make accusations.

Even if a team says they made agreements with the opposing alliance, the rules do not currently prohibit that.

The problem as I see it is that a few teams are playing a team of 4 game, whereas most are playing 2-on-2. That causes confusion which can lead players to suspect any high score as "arranged". However there can easily be a high score without agreements, so NO FINGER POINTING, okay?

Let us hope that we hear from FIRST concerning its original intentions for this year's game. Obviously there is no way to tell for sure if a high score is "arranged" or not, but if FIRST were to let all the teams know what their basic intention was for this year's game with regards to opposing alliances making agreements, that should help to get us all operating on the same basis, using the same rules. Without that basic agreement, it is hard to maintain harmony.

Then we need to get the scoring changed!

Wow! I am glad we didn't run into this last year.

Re: Time to change the scoring system
 

You know, after all the years of complicated scoring, either way the scoring goes, your gonna score. Its gonna be the same. Its just the amounts change. Plus, changing it to just getting your scored would make it a lot easier for people watching for the first time.

Good simple thinking Doug

If each team gets their own score, that will only make matters worse. If you say "I won't touch your stacks if you don't touch mine," it is all the easier to say yes, and you will ALWAYS reap the benefits in that case. You no longer would even have to worry about winning the match.

The best idea I can come up with is to just go with a scoring system similar to all sports out there: 2 (or 3) points for a win, 1 point for a tie, 0 points for a loss. That way, maximizing points for both sides doesn't help both sides, and immediately stops any possibility for collusion. Then at the end of the competition, points are used as a tiebreaker (e.g. 3 teams are undefeated at the end of competition, and whoever has the greatest point differential is in first).

Of course, in the larger competitions where teams don't play as many matches, the number of teams tied at a certain position increases, placing more emphasis on points, but at least there is less emphasis than there is now.

Also, SGK, the 10 second human player limit is for autonomous mode. If you are not back in 10 seconds, your robot does not start its autonomous. If you get back within 15 seconds, then your robot does not start in autonomous mode, but DOES start in remote control mode. So, all of the teams who did not have an autonomous mode programmed in their robot did not have to worry about getting back in 10 seconds, and thus took their sweet time, and just make sure they got back before the 15 seconds were up.

BOOOORING
 

I watched a couple of the super high QP matches of the Central Florida and they were incredibly boring. Teams carefully drove around their opponents delicate human player stack of 8 so as not to disturb it. They fought hard on the top of the ramp to fit everyone in.

The collusion in these matches is insanely blatant. :mad: At least pretend to compete by pushing each other around a bit. Watching fixed matches is like watching Professional Wrestling without the violence.

Not all the high scores were fixed but some certainly were. Replic is absolutely correct that finger pointing only makes everyone mad and defensive so no good comes out of it.

After one of the matches the announcer said something to the effect of :
"The 3 highest scores in the nation have been right here at the Central Florida Regional. That is because we have the best teams right here."
That statement was unbelievably disturbing. Manipulating the QP system was taking the spotlight off those who worked hard building great bots and putting it on those who could bargain their way to the top of the standings. Without fixing matches it would take a great deal of luck to achieve those high scores so the best teams with the best bots there were not necessarily getting that luck so they had reasonable lower scores that no one notices.

If FIRST wants to move into the realm where this event is televised on a commercial station, they needs to stop match fixing because no one wants to watch a sport where teams dont try their hardest to beat each other. FIRST needs to abandon the policy of giving the winner points based on the loser's score or go back to the 4 team alliances of 2001. Sure this QP system keeps more capable bots from blowing away less capable bots, which would discourage the less capable bot makers from competing. However, awarding QP's based on the loser's score has lead to the "chokehold" strategy (score 0 so the other bots get 0) of last year and match fixing this year. Koci has the right idea for a qualifing system. Unfortunately, it depends too much on the strength of schedule in your random pairings, but what are you gonna do? Please dont say BCS system. At least FIRST didnt make the same mistake as I-A College football.

P.S. Strange how quickly so many threads turn into ones about match fixing isnt it?

Unfortunately, the simple solution of keeping your own score only complicates the matter. If you think about it, it makes fixing matches much more tempting. Not only this, but the amount of ties for posistions will be much greater. There may be, depending on the game (if similar to 2002), several exact ties for 1st.

Also, a team that dominates 100% of the game would gain more. Meaning- you can shut out the opponnent and get no reprucussion for it. This is the exact opposite of what FIRST wants. They do not want shut outs!

Sorry for my poor writing and spelling, for I am tired.

FOR THE LOVE OF.... LOL Can ANYONE get my name right on the first try? Geez, go type it in google and get a ton of hits (the first one being my web page).

Hm.. good thinking. That would be better. I hereby change my vote to your point system.

I can see where you're coming from. I still think this will make teams think about doing only the bare minimum to win a game. FIRST wants high excitement- high scoring close rounds that are constantly moving, fast, furious, and not fixed. In other words- they are trying to remove the domination team and level the playing field while bringing in more and more viewers.


Sorry about writing three messages in a row people. I simply did not see the messages before each sending.

Sorry about that. I am a horible typer and rely on the spell check to correct that. It doesnt work for names. I actually noticed it and edited it before i read ur last post.

im sorry but just because the human player stacks stay up does not mean that the match was fixed. im sure a few matches were but its not fair to say that they all were.
more teams are beginnning to realize that leaving your opponents stacks up is very beneficial for their own score. in a match we had today at Great Lakes we had a score of 75 to 85, with both teams still having a stack of 5 in their zone and 0 robots on top(neither team counted due to a pushign match on top where both were touching the ramp). they werent up because the match was fixed they were up because it was a close match(2 bin difference) each team had a robot protecting the stacks and both teams were willing to take the risk of losing for a high QP.

if teams were more focused on a high score they would leave their opponents stacks up if it was a close match. if you loose you may still have a high score (75 instead of 17) and if you win you would get 150 from your opponent rather than 34
just my feelings, leave em up unless you absolutely need the win and arent willing to risk a possible loss

Has anyone thought that FIRST could be pairing the teams like they are on purpose. Because at kickoff I distinctly remember hearing that the game this year will not be fair. Maybe this is just an extension of that same idea.

some high scores was strategy and luck not collusion
 

As a member of 762 (one of the teams with in Florida with high scores) and the winner of the seeding matches. I feel obliged to say that there was no collusion in our matches. One of our higher scores was won by one of our opponent's robot not functioning and the other was tipped upside down in autonomous mode. After that it was easy for us to take advantage of the situation to maximize our score. Another of our top scoring matches was won by good strategic blocking of our highest stack.

As the Florida Driver of My team ( 710 ) I will say that fixing on saturday did go on in just about every single match that took place today...

It started with one of the first matches ( won't mention it ) and a when judge came to look at our bot later she even comented that they most likely had made an agreement

The fixing that went on is plain and simple No one knocks over stacks everyone gets a big score get as many bots as you can to the top, the only thing it did was guarentee high score for the winner, it did nothing to actually dertimine the outcome of the game

Dan

FIRST would not, under any circumstances, expect one team to do better than another. In other words, they don't play favorites in any way.

<sigh> If you only knew...
 

... how honest and fair the chief delphi driver coach is, those accusations would not have been claimed. I should know, I'm his son.

I am not mad about the accusation, and can sympathize with some that may want to look at the situation in the light you did. 304 qualifying points was untouched all weekend. But I can assure you that it was (as team 519 put it earlier) pure luck.

In order to do what people have claimed to have happened, this is what needed to occur...

1. Both teams would need to know exactly how many bins each team had in scoring position... not an easy task with so many obsticals in the way.

2. If they wanted to really run the score up, why choose stacks of 4 and not the Florida version stacks of 8? By the way, those watching the match in question would have seen Delphi take out an opponents stack of three (not being able to see the stack of 4 out of sight on the other side of the field behind another robot)...

3. All teams would have had to AGREE to let each other on the ramp... if you can say that happend you were watching a different match!

All in all, I am 200% positive that no collusion was involved and I believe that by looking at the facts so can anyone else. I thought that the Great Lakes regional was very well played by every team in attendance.

It appears to me, that there is alot about this particular game that forces each person to check themselves and what level of morality they put on this competition.

If asked if they would change anything about the game, now that they seen it, would FIRST change anything at all? I wouldn't, if I were them.

Why should they? I believe they have accomplished exactly what they wanted to do. Part of which is, providing you... the teams... with choices and grey areas. That's ethics, that's life, and I commend them if that was their intent! And you thought this game was all about knocking over a wall of plastic tubs....

Live with the fact that FIRST will not change the scoring system. Imagine the NFL announcing that field goals were worth 6 points right smack-dab in the middle of the season.

The only way to resolve this conflict would be to have everyone sign a agreement... and that's not likely to happen- Team 68 has already tried valiantly..


Remember that if one, one team says no, the match cannot be fixed. You all have the chance to be that one team.

Well put.

First of all, the petition DID work in AZ.

Second, I really like what Jason said

Although I do not believe it was FIRST's intent, I think that a lot of kids (and mentors, too) have learned something about ethical behavior. I think we should continue in this spirit and try to turn this into a positive learning experience for all of us.

Wow
 

This "fixing" matches in my opinion has gone to far here. Loo, some teams will do it, it is very tempting. I say, accept it happens and move on. It has been obvious this year that teams that should be winning arn't, it is just the game. Since everyone seems to have a solution, I figure I may as well give mine. :D Those opposed to "fixing" matches, don't do it; I know my team won't, but also don't accuse a high scoring match to be fixed. Let's just be Gracious Professionals, smile and move on! That's my $0.02.

carumba
 

this has been an interesting read here... i know i'm a little late here, but i think a lot of good points were made. i would have to agree that fixing is wrong, although there is absolutely no way to prove it, unless someone admits to it. some people are gung-ho against it, and some people agree with it, if you agree with it, i don't see the issue with admission, unless you don't think it's really kosher, in which case i would consider that not really agreeing with it. where there's fixing, there's going to be some back-stabbing, and that isn't the spirit of first. the way you can adjust the score, which i didn't see anywhere is "your score + the loser's" that would eliminate any sort of backstabbing, and i think there's nothing wrong with that style of scoring. there would be no benefit of blowing someone away vs. winning by a little, and both teams benefit. fixing is wrong, i've suspected it in the past, but we should end the discussion about certain regionals and teams and matches. just state your opinion, your solution, or if you think it's ok. otherwise, there is really no point in making accusations. and if you're not making an accusation or stating your opinion, there's no reason to post. i may be 'beating a dead horse' here, but i figured i'd try to help out :-p

It is most unkind to disparage a team on the very forum they most graciously provide. That match was among the many that this year’s format tends to produce - a fluke. The fact was that we could not maneuver well enough to reach the stacks, let alone knock them over. Out robot was having a mechanical problem, as evidenced by the scores in our matches – 35, 41, 304, 22, 6, and 150.

Chief Delphi did not cheat their way into the FIRST Hall of Fame. They were inducted because they, along with the other seven members, exemplify the Spirit of FIRST. Your remarks, on the other hand, do not.

Can we stop turning these threads into mud-slinging contests? Oh yeah, dont we already have what, like 3 or 4 threads on this topic? This thread started out in a bad way, and turned even worse. How do all you know what really went on at a competition? Because you watched a webcast? I think not. You dont know what *REALLY* happened unless you were a little fly on the wall of the alliance stations. Stop the acusations, stop polluting CD with foul remarks about other teams, stop the arguing. Lately I've seen a huge increase in ungracious behavior due to this so called match fixing, and you know what? Its really ruining CD. I know many people that may stop frequenting CD just because of these childish arguements. Why is it so hard to get along? Why do people feel the need to accuse others of something because you find it hard to believe they didnt cheat? Isnt the law in America "Innocent until proven guilty"? The fact of the matter is, as much as you may think a match was "fixed" you werent there, you werent one of the teams that played in these matches. Until someone who was on these "fixed" alliances comes out and says that the match was fixed, noone can say it was fixed. Is all this discussion and argument really helping matters? In reality, it is just tearing us apart. The more this is discussed, the more people are alienated. This isnt getting anywhere, FIRST isnt going to change the rules. They will never know if anyone "fixed" a match. What are they going to do, DQ a team from the competition because they had a stack of 8 standing? Are they going to submit the drive team of an alliance with 300+ pts to a polygraph test to see if they "fixed" the match? The answer: NO!!!!!!!! FIRST is going to do nothing about this matter, so stop beating a dead horse. If you have problems with this, keep them to yourself, or talk to your team about them.

Im sorry about the length of my post, but this is really saddening me, and I felt that I had to express my opinion. Im also sorry if Ive offended anyone, which Im sure I have.

Cory

My unsolicited opinion on pre-match agreements.
 

Rival corporations often partner together to share technology or collaborate on research projects. Both companies stand to benefit equally and positively from this cooperation. I consider any mutual agreement between alliance opponents to leave stacks standing to be a sensible and just agreement similar to those I mention above. Both parties recognize the possibility - not guarantee - of increased productivity (scores) as a result of such an agreement.

While these rival corporations recognize the positive mutual benefits technology and research sharing can yield, they also understand that they are competitors in a free marketplace, and to collaborate or collude any further to predetermine prices, profits, etc. in that marketplace is unethical and destructive to the concepts of competition and free enterprise. Opposing alliances that collude to predetermine the final match outcome in any way are destroying the competitive spirit of the competition and are creating a less exciting version of the game for the spectators. ALL TEAMS SHOULD FIGHT TO WIN THEIR MATCHES AT ALL TIMES. As discussed above, fighting to win does not necessarily include toppling the opponent's stacks.

In summary, I believe that:

A.) Agreements to leave stacks standing are fair, legal, and indicate an understanding of the scoring rules. The rest of the match MUST, however, be played with both alliances trying their best to win.

B.) Predetermination of match outcomes is unjust, destroys game excitement for the spectator, and violates the spirit of FIRST.

C.) It would be difficult and perhaps foolish for FIRST to institute disciplinary actions for match "fixing", primarily because it would be hard to demonstrate concrete proof of such violations, and such a system would only serve to spread mistrust and doubt among teams at these competitions.

I hope everyone can take a step back from this argument, relax, and take a breather. I wish those people who have a problem with the conduct of other teams would put their faith in gracious professionalism. Let's trust that those who predetermine match outcomes learn the error of their ways (their conduct in the qualifying rounds certainly doesn't help them any during the eliminations, does it?). In the meantime, perhaps it would be more honorable, productive, and preserving of our sanity to focus on improving the quality and performance of our own teams. That is the one thing we always have direct control over, and isn't it more satisfying to celebrate our own accomplishments than to question the performance of others?

I can see how fixing could happen or appear to happen but it should be VERY clear to everyone that if you get to the elimination matches by fixing your score, you will be out of the running rather quickly and it will be obvious to everyone in the finals if you can't perform to the level that your score shows.

This year is just like every past year where luck plays into it tons. If you are lucky to have great alliance partners you have a chance at getting great scores. Sadly some of the worst scores I saw were from 4 fantastic robots that literally gave it everything they had for the entire match and there were usually no bins left and maybe 2 robots on top. Your best chance for a high score is a dead robot or one that isn't performing well and 2 full powered robots.

Also I would like to add that a team like 111 was, well, 'wild' at protecting a stack with a wedge and swerve it is very tough to get around them. (Although Nachi had alot of success) anyone who didn't see the auto mode should check it out, it goes over the bridge and automatically comes over to the stack and parks in front of it ready for operator control. Very nice indeed.

You can go over 10seconds but autonomous mode will not activate. Maybe they did not have autonomous mode and used up more time becaue of that.
Hey I resent that remark about our robot.:) Anyway at the spbli regional there was no collusion what so ever.

Exactly, you could fix all your matches in QM's and then be number 1 seed. Then you get into the finals and it matters to win or lose and you can't do it cause you've never been in a match that was COMPETITIVE. I just hope that teams will accept what happens in Nats and not fix matches. Its just wrong.

Just to make it clear ALOT of teams were fixing matches in the florida competition, and it was just awful to watch....there was one team in particular that began doing it who I will not mention here (who I squarely blame for this situation at UCF), and they had such a lead most teams were just trying to stay competitive. My team talked to the head ref there about this and he says that FIRST is going to issue a statement about this before the Championship.

While it's true corporations frequently collaborate on research projects, those collaborations are (in most circumstances) made public. At this point one doesn't know if a high score was genuinely earned or achieved through collaboration. Perhaps the teams who made agreements ahead of their match could step forward and tell us which matches they collaborated on. Those matches could then be marked with an asterisk so we could draw our own conclusions about what the scores represent.

lets let FIRST deal with this
 

This issue goes on and on... I thought the thread was closed once already.

I personally spoke to a head referee at FIRST and was assured they would issue a statement. I am surprised it hasn't happened yet but that is their call.

Until they do something the problem is not going to change and there really isn't much point flaming about it. Even if a statement is issued condemning the game fixing there is really no way to know what matches are actually fixed.

As for pointing fingers at teams- please don't. Just turn down the offers when they come. And if their behavior offends you don't associate with them. And be sure to discuss the problem at the forum next summer when the game is discussed.

It is a shame that this situation can be lucrative for the fixers. But FIRST has always said that the game isn't important. I guess this proves that.

Hey have fun and do your best. Thats all we CAN do.



WC

Our team, #654 participated in collusion. It ended up with us having the highest score in the nation as of yet, 383 QP's (just wait for peachtree). In my mind, there is nothing wrong with co-operation over competition. It is in face HARDER to get a good mach with four robots going around the field. People after us tried to do it, but several unfortunate accidents lead to an all-out battle to take points away from everyone and a score of 1 to 2. If teams choose to co-operate instead of compete, and this is the best way to get the highest score, there is no problem with this. After all, 4 robots working together is much better than 4 robots breaking each other. Stop whining just 'cause you didn't think of it.

Well I actually talk to friends in other team at UCF and they were up front with me about it and admitted to it. Frankly I respect them for their honesty. That is the reason I am not speculating I KNOW who was doing it and who started doing it. Once that team did began fixing their matches it swept through UCF like a virus.

If you dont mind me asking, why did you do it? To get noticed? be higher in ranking?

Amen Wayne
 

After witnessing these "offers" at a recent regional and following these threads closely, I think we do a disservice by pointing fingers. As much as I hate the arrangement, it's impossible to know whether a team leaves a stack alone as a calculated risk during the match or if they were a part of an agreement beforehand.

As Wayne said earlier, just turn down those offers and continue to play the competitive game the way it was designed to be played. Part of this learning experience has to do with making sound, ethical decisions. The goal of FIRST is to build a better future for all of us. It isn't about the game, it's about what you find out about yourself in the process.

Have fun and do your best now, then help FIRST improve the rules by attending the summer forum with suggested solutions to problems.