4 Team Alliances
 

I wonder, for the Championship Event only, if F.I.R.S.T. would consider dropping the "Stand By" process and replacing it with a Four-Team Alliance process based on the Three-Team Alliance process used in 2004 (when there were only two robots per Alliance on the floor per match) ?

Seems like it would be an opportunity to involve more teams in the Elimination Rounds and create some interesting strategy options in this year's game.

Re: 4 Team Alliances
 

FIRST will not change an underlying tournament rule that would change how the game is played. That would be like saying just for championships only 2 teams per alliance. Also there is plenty of strategy with the current game and system.

Re: 4 Team Alliances
 

I think what he is saying is instead of having 3 people on the finals alliance, have 4 but each round you have to pick 3 robots to play. The example was from when there was 2 playing each match, but there was 3 teams on an alliance.

I think it is an interesting option strategy wise, but I think there is some value in letting teams play each and every match in the finals if they make it that far.

Re: 4 Team Alliances
 

I don't see it happening this year. Certainly not at the regional level (some regionals are just too small), and likely not at Atlanta. I would submit it to the radical tournament ideas thread when it opens after Atlanta.

On a side note, would anyone like to try this at a large offseason event? Offseason events are great places to tweak tournament rules to see if they can be improved. (Or to just play differently--the Fall Classic 2006 comes to mind, when there were only two robots per alliance and no backbot rules in place.)

Re: 4 Team Alliances
 

I was giving an example of another radical rule change. Like if they changed it to best of 5 matches.

Re: 4 Team Alliances
 

I know they have done it at Ramp Riot, however the 4th team did not have to be used.

Re: 4 Team Alliances
 

FIRST has changed rules like this at Nationals in the past - something just like this happened in 1999, I believe. That's when the third team was added to the alliances of two. That being said, after 2 years without an additional team on each alliance, I would imagine that FIRST has decided that it's better this way. I wouldn't expect such a change.

Re: 4 Team Alliances
 

Wasn't that change was made at the beginning of the season, not at the Nationals? I seem to recall an alliance of 111, 128 and 188 at GLR that year.

Re: 4 Team Alliances
 

The change was made mid-season. It was announced at GLR on the Friday of the event.

The alliance was 111, 123 & 188. :p