You can put the Baxter Bomb Squad on the list.

on behalf of team 48 Delphi ELITE, i sign this code of honor... no match fixing here...

Not only has FIRST come right out and publicly said that any "rigging of the game" is not in the spirit of the COMPETITION (see the forums), but any team which benefits from this non-competitive attitude would necessarily have their ranking legitimacy questioned.

Also, if my team were picking alliance partners, we would be looking for a proven track record and/or special features that fit well with our robot and strategy to win. Any match where a team fails to knock over a stack that would have resulted in that alliance winning will have their strategical capability questioned, and may be passed over for this reason alone.

Needless to say, my team will not participate in any rigging of the game, in any way, shape, or form. Do not attempt to legitimize it when speaking to my team, for you will be wasting both your time and ours.

Playing smart
 

I think the thing that you need to realize is that just because a team does not make an agreement does not mean that they will attack the multiplier stacks. Most of us figured out a long time ago that is not the smart way to play this game. The priorities in any match need to be as follows:
1.) Win the match
2.) Leave the opponents with as many points as possible
It is important to keep the priorities above in the correct order.

MattB
Coach
Team 902 - The Delphi Robohawks

Well said !!

Go Paco!
 

As an adult member of Team 48, let me echo Paco's statement - Delphi E.L.I.T.E. is proud to add our name to this code of honor.

Our last competition, the Canadian Regional, was free of any prearranged agreements, and what resulted was a very intense, highly competitive, immensely exciting competition. I'm looking forward to the challenge of competing in the Curie Division with so many highly respected, high quality teams. I fully expect that I will look back upon this upcoming Championship as the most exciting event I've experienced in my three years as a member of the FIRST community.

We on 229 always play it smart. We will go into each match and do what is best to achieve the win.

Those that have worked with us in the past, know we would never agree to somethign like this, simply because it lowers the amount of strategic options we have.

For every move, there is a counter move. Why agree to not use certain counter-moves? We'll let other stacks stand, if it's in our best interest to do so. Otherwise.... timmmmmmmmmmber.

Why would we make our opponents agree to leave our stacks alone? If we need them up, we will defend them. If we get beaten... at least we tried our hardest, and lost fair and square.

We play to win, not to seed.
Sorry to all those who disagree with this philosophy, but I believe that if your not at least playing to win, your not really playing.

MVRT 115 Will play FARE!

Re: Playing smart
 

Well stated.

I think there was some question as to whether we fixed the match where we achieved our High Score of 383 QPs. But we did not. The match was in favor of us because on of the oppositions robots had flipped over, and I believe that the team thought it was in it's best interest to leave our stack alone so they would recieve more points. Not to mention we were well prepared to defend our stack had the robot attempted to knock down our stack. So refering to what MattB said above I think both of the alliances had our priorities in order. But there was no pre-match agreement made. And if we could have afforded to go to Nationals this year/we were in Curie. I would sign this honor code on behalf of my team.

-Thanks
Jonathan

Team 470, just as at Great Lakes Regional, will not aide our opponent because they ask us to, nor will we ask that of our opponents.

Team 610
 

We definitely won't be getting up to any of those deeds. I am happy that a lot of teams have replied to this post and have given their word of honour.

Deciding, during the game, not to attack your opponents if they are not attacking you is one thing. Deciding upon this before the round, is dishonourable.

I urge all teams to seriously consider what this agreement entails.

And props to woburn for qualifying. Well done. See you in Houston

Now, those of you here who are saying that fixing matches is okay, your reasoning for this is fairness, right? What about the teams that spent weeks upon weeks building a stacking mechanism, to achieve great stacks. They built a robot that could accomplish this task. They wanted to stack, so they thought of a solution. Now, this fixing matches thing is a solution, but is it in the interests of grasious professionalism? Personally, I dont think so.

Now, I'm no where near the decision making end of Team 108. I've talked to some members of our team about it, and its usually the same result... "Well....its not right to do.."

So I don't speak for Team 108, but I know I wouldn't be caught fixing a match..

::shrugs:: theres my two cents

I guess you just don't get it. Thats too bad. Fixing matches is not gracious professionalism. Giving your opponents a fair chance and playing your best is. This premade arrangement cheats anyone not a part of that round by artificially inflating the scores. You think that is fair or gracious?

Good luck in the competition. I hope you can succeed without making these deals and eventually see the light.

WC

consider it signed
 

some of my greatest friends are a part of this division. may we all play fair and all succeed. see you in a few days.