Galileo Teams: Collusion, yes or no?
 

Note: I am not trying to start a debate here -- there are other threads for that.

There are some greatly differing opinions on collusion (a.k.a. rigging matches to obtain ultra-high scores).

I don't want our division to be torn apart by these differences in opinion.

I would greatly prefer that we all come to understand each other so we can have an awesome three days of competition.

In order to open that discussion, I am posting this poll so we can collect some data to find out how we are all approaching this issue.

Good luck to everyone -- we have an awesome division!


:)

Added 03/03 ---> I had specifically requested that this not turn into a personal debate of opinions -- that has happened in many other threads. I intended this thread to be a statement of Team intent for Galileo teams only, not personal opinion. Please respect that. If you feel you must post your personal opinion and not your team's stance, then please do it elsewhere. If you are in another division, please read, but do not post. Thanks!

For the record:

- I do not believe in collusion in this years game.
- I will not participate in collusion.
- the Buzz team does not support collusion.
- the Buzz team will not participate in collusion


We believe the game was designed to be a true competition between the two alliances. Otherwise they would not have described it as two alliances competing against each other in a match. If they wanted collusion, they would have refered to all four teams on the field as an alliance.

:)

Aidan, good points. Team 45 Agrees.

We will play to win, not collude.

However, if our opponents wish to leave our stack alone, that would be swell. Heck, they're welcome to even join us on the ramp!

Maybe I'm a bit naive, but I don't think that collusion will happen at the Championships. We've all learned alot since the first and second weeks of the regionals, when the majority of this was happening.

Andy B.

Team 814 has never even thought of it. We certainly do not support it. We have been to two regionals and we were never asked to participate in fixing a match. If you win, good job. If you lose, you did your best and probably had fun doing it.

I, personally, think it is an awful idea and whoever participates in it should be ashamed of themselves for sinking so low. Fortunately I don't know of any teams who have.

The other side of the story
 

Collusion is such a dirty word. It's really a form of teamwork!

REAL WORLD: Even Motorola and Nokia sometimes get together and agree ("collude") what's in the best interest of both companies, even though we're trying to kill each other in market share. There's times when we must help each other for both of us to succeed.

Please, no hate mail, but what's the real issue? Why can't 4 teams agree (in the QP Rounds) to leave stacks alone as long as the rest of the match is a free-4-all? How about capping the SHU to 5?

I like seeing high scores no matter how they happen. The game is more exciting when there are big scores. Ever cheer during a 0-0 baseball game? Not unless one pitcher has a no-hitter going. Is not All-Star NHL game fun to watch as the scores gets to 13-12 score? Sure its all-star and not playoff, but dont tell the players they dont care who wins.

Also, it comes down to desparation. By Saturday, low seeded teams know they often get overlooked as alliance partners. If a captain isn't on a good scouting team he may (and this has happened) just pick the highest remaining seed not picked.

KA-108 :cool:

Edit: This is my opinion, and not necessarily that of 108's drive team.

Well said. Also I don't know who watched Midwest and UCF. But the low scoring aggressive play of Midwest was much more entertaining than what was going on at UCF. Frankly I'm not interested in watching a match with two stacks of eight and four robots on the ramp sitting there with :45 seconds in the match left.

217 Will not Collude
 

I'm with Andy and Aidan on this one. The Thunderchickens will not collude, without exception.

I will say that our game plan hasn't changed in 3 regionals. Leave all stacks alone until you need to destroy them ... this only makes sense.

-Paul

Hey, I'm feeling left out. Wasn't Archimedes a friend of Gallileo?

Oh, right, wrong time period. Okay, I guess we'll have to do our own survey.

(I messed up on the last survey I did on this subject, because I let people vote more than once. Then the number of votes didn't add up to the total. Still a good survey, but I like the results of this one better.)

Team 662 will not collude. If both alliances use good strategy, then there should be no need for collusion.

*Note: This is only my opinion and not necessarily's 384's opinion*

I think collusion is a good idea from the stand-point of strategy, but not a good idea morally. People will hate me, but think of this, what if this years game is beyond just a 2 vs 2 match but a game where the 4 must work together to create a bigger score. I also think that this 'collusion is bad and we must kill it' idea is going to kill yourself. Your going to find that instead of having fun and enjoying the competition, you find yourself running around trying to enforce this idea.

Have fun. If you don't support the idea, then fine. Don't do it. For the teams who do it, then let them. When they get to the finals then they will fall since they won't be able to collude.

*Note: This is my opinion and not necessarily's 384's opinion*

Ya what if it was 4 vs. 0, but it was made to be a 2 vs. 2. Not being mean to you. Look at 2001. 4 vs. 0 and there were many complaints to FIRST about how boring it was because it was no longer a competition. People wanna see 2 vs. 2 with robots deffending. If you want a 4 vs. 0 in a 2 vs. 2 competition, then dont play the game. Dont ruin it for the rest of the teams trying to play the game. Thats just my 2 cents. O ya, this is a thread for teams in Galileo, not Archimedes.

I never said I wanted to play the game like this, but simply to point this out. I'm also saing this will hurt Galaleo more than help them.

Team 68
 

Truck Town most defineatelly does not support collusion in any way, shape or form.

We will not request any agreements, and will not accept any.

It is my team's belief that collusion is not "teamwork". rather, it is cheating.

Get a high seed based on your robot's performance, and your team's ability to strategise alone, not working with your opponent.

Good luck to everyone!

Re: The other side of the story
 

I totally agree with this post. IF I was playing this game there is no doubt I would try to get the highest score possible to get the highest seed possible. I guess its a good thing I am not playing this game.

Team 1011 will not fix matches. Enough said.

Missing the Point
 

Some people are missing the point. Leaving stacks is an obvious good strategy and many teams use it. However, at a few regionals overt pre-game colluding occured and it reflected in some of the matches. Talk to individuals at those regionals and they will tell you the stories (Arizona & Florida, for example).

The point of this poll is to get a sense of what the teams in Galileo are thinking when it comes to collusion.

Now, here is my position (and this is the last I will post about the subject). Sometimes in life you must take a stand and stick by it. I don't care what the rules say (or what loopholes some may think exist), but pre-determining ANY part of a competition meant to put 2 teams against each other is cheating. No "what ifs", no "but FIRST meant it to be this way". That is all bull! It is cheating and if you were held to an honor code (many schools are) and practiced this behavior, you would be disciplined. Here is one of many examples I can think of:

2 football teams get together before a game and discuss letting each others' punt returners run back every punt to the goal line, because they want to boost each teams punt return stats. They agree to play the rest of the game as normal and see how things pan out. Sports fans would be outraged (as they should be) and would accuse all involved of cheating.

Our QP boosting collusion advocates are doing the same thing.


Ask yourself this question: Could you look Dean or Woody in the eye and tell them that colluding with the opposition before a match is O.K.? .... I couldn't.

-Paul

I'm not in Galileo division, but I agree with what Paul says. Sometimes, leaving stacks can be beneficial to both teams. In those situations, I would have no problem with letting both stacks stay, giving each team more points. What I will not do, however, is make a pre-determined agreement not to knock over those stacks. If it helps me, I'll leave them, but I make no promises. Not ever.

Re: 217 Will not Collude
 

As Alex stated in an earlier post, Team 68 will not take part in any collusion.

Paul,

While I agree with your statement that you need not touch the boxes until you need to destroy them, Team 68 has worked out a few rules of thumb about knocking stacks over that can be determined as soon as the HP mood is over as well as a few moves the HP is to default to if something changes on the field during the HP time that I (coach) or drive team was unaware of before the match (put your thinking cap on :D). While we may not get the highest scores, this method has worked rather well for winning matches as well as placing high in QPs (2nd and 7th). I agree totally with leaving stacks for the other team, I just worry some times about missing a box or two and not winning the match because of it. Leaving the other team with stacks is a good method and a method that we use that has not failed yet, knock on wood!! Leaving the stacks is the call the drivers and coaches, alone with the human player should make on the field, not before the match. Good luck and hope to see you in T minus 5 days.

(PM me and let me know where you guys are staying again and if you can figure out what our rule of thumb is, Thanks)

Please keep the debate in the 100s of other threads please :D

461 will not participate in Collusion or rigging matches or cheating or gentelmans agreements or whatever you want to call it.

We have not and do not plan on doing it.

My main problem with it, is that if alot of teams start doing it (and i had heard rumors of this occuring atleast in cleveland) is that teams will make the agreement and then 1 team will back out at the last minute and stab their opponents in the back. This is an extreme opposite to the philosophy of gracious professionalism that FIRST is built around.

I agree with what Paul said about telling Dean and Woody this. Obviously this isn't what FIRST intended with the game this year or they would have pointed it out as part of the strategy.

So basicly to sum it all up: 461 will not and has not collude at any point this season.

Re: Galileo Teams: Collusion, yes or no?
 

Can you add a "I really dont give a darn and I am sick of hearing this" option?

Cory

Team 783 definitely will not participate in collusion.

If an opponent has a stack, we generally won't knock it down unless its absolutely necessary - why be destructive and knock over enemy stacks, when stealing them is so much more fun! it gets more cheers from the crowd too.

Team 341 will NOT seek pre-game agreements.

Good luck to all in Houston!!

Al Ostrow
Coach of 341

Here we go again... There was no obvious point colluding at the SVR. It made the competition more interesting and reflect what actually happened on the field, not how persuasive a team could be to fix a match before hand.

We will be in Houston to compete, not to collude in this years game... Stack Attack

As far as collusion goes,
JUST SAY NO