Chief Delphi - A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

Page 4 of 8

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)

- Rules/Strategy (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)

- - A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=83911)

Integral

07-03-2010 13:05

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcf747 (Post 932554)

This was our alliance team 1515 in our last Qualifying round. Is took quite a bit of convincing to get the other teams to play along because as you said and a few people on this thread have said.....alot of team don't understand the seeding rules.

There is an inherit issue here though at a large regional with 60 or so teams not only are you boosting your seeding score it is also boosting everyone else's on the field or about 10% of the teams at the regional.

Because of this it is really only an effective tacktick for your last match because if this was done the entire time the efectivness of it would diminish.

In a sense it almost turns the game into a 6 on 0 and sees who has the best set of 6 bots on the field instead of 3.

Although the match didn't turn out as well as we expected (the other alliace couldn't really score and were having some control issues) the best part was listening to the announcer (who was a great guy) but had no clue how the seeding worked and could not figure out what we were doing.

[rant/]
This raises another important issue of the scoring. I am not going to get into it (as there are already many other threads) but it is very complicated and can be taken advantage of. I look at it both in a positive and negative way however. I consider it part of the game just like a "field element" and strategy has to be developed to deal with it. In the same light though because the "match score" and not the "seeding score" is shown on the score board there is alot of confusion and I think misleads people who do not know the rules as much as us rule worms that study them extensively. A great example of this was at the organ regional there were 2gopc reps walking around and they came to watch a match. I had spoken to them earlier so they approached me and asked me who won. They were very surprised to find out that the team that got 0 won. If FIRST really wants the public to enjoy the game I think they need to have more strait forward scoring or at least more clearly display the seeding score which is really the only thing that matters durring the qualifiers.

[/rant]

Sorry for the long post,
Matthew Forman
Team 1515

I am stunned and really have lost a lot of respect for your team. My team 957 was one of your allies. Perhaps the one who resisted (I sure hope so) this stupid game the system strategy. Of course you guys had won several matches and were high ranked. You gave no consideration to the struggling team who has not played on a winning alliance in 2 years. When finally our bot is working and we have good allies you betray us. Our team was crushed by this match.

Hope your are proud of yourself.

jspatz1

07-03-2010 13:36

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

As I said in a similar thread:
I think it is fair to say that the GDC probably did not foresee all the possible ramifications of this seeding system. I understand and agree with the concept of coopertition, but when a win is a loss and a loss is a win, when poor robots rise to the top of the seeding, and when it becomes smart to forfeit matches and not play the game, then something is clearly very wrong. I talked to both students and mentors this weekend that were discouraged that building a good robot meant less than knowing how to game the seeding system. If the cooperition factor is taken too far and begins to effect the participants' moral, or if FRC gains the reputation for being a league where building a good robot doesn't really matter, then that is potenitally very damaging ground for FRC.

Integral

07-03-2010 13:40

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

In my mind purposly throwing a game is unaccepable in any sport at any time for any reason. Just play the game and let the chips fall where they may.

I am waiting for an apology from your team to ours.

pfreivald

07-03-2010 13:45

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

Quote:

Originally Posted by jspatz1 (Post 932773)

As I said in a similar thread:
I think it is fair to say that the GDC probably did not foresee all the possible ramifications of this seeding system.

More specifically, I think they expected teams to play with honor, integrity, and gracious professionalism instead of just playing to "win".

Winning is an outcome. How many times have we heard Woodie say not to let outcomes dictate your behavior?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jspatz1 (Post 932773)

I talked to both students and mentors this weekend that were discouraged that building a good robot meant less than knowing how to game the seeding system.

This just is not true. At one point we were seeded 20th, even though it was clear at the time that we had the dominant bot. (It still seems weird to say that... Weird in a very, very good way! :D ) We were very confident that we would be one of the first (if not *the* first) robot picked, regardless of where we were seeded at the end of the day -- because we built a good robot.

Of course, that we did not even once try to game the system and still ended up 1st seed -- and the Cooperatition Award -- was just glorious. That the alliance selection followed good robots over high-seeded robots reinforces my point.

I agree with Integral -- this is a cheap tactic that prioritizes a certain low cunning coupled with gamesmanship, instead of cooperatition and gracious professionalism.

Play each game to win. Show off that robot you've worked so hard to build. You won't regret it, and neither will your parents, fans, mentors, or sponsors.

Patrick

XaulZan11

07-03-2010 13:45

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Integral (Post 932781)

In my mind purposly throwing a game is unaccepable in any sport at any time for any reason.

Teams need to understand that by not trying to maximize your seeding points you are, in fact, 'throwing the game'. By playing defense or any other thing that will hurt your seeding points, you helping no one and effectively throwing the game. Teams need to change their mindset that winning each individual match is not the goal.

Integral

07-03-2010 14:08

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

I may be weird, but I enjoy the play of the game. Winning or losing takes second seat to a well played game.

I sincerely hope that when 1515 arrives in Atlanta they will be ostracized for pushing this misbegotten strategy. Any team that proposes this needs to be taught the fundamentals of FIRST. Once again shame on your for ever suggesting it.

1515 (Beverly Hills HS) is, believe it or not, is a very well funded team they are scheduled to attend multiple regionals and stole a slot to Atlanta at the Oregon regionals. Our team on the other hand struggles to find students and money in our economically stressed area. Our team would have been energized by playing on a winning alliance. 1515s tacky strategy could well destroy our team.

Perhaps a gain of a few seeding points was great advantage to higher ranked teams. We were low middle of the pack there is no way we gained anything for this match. So what if we moved from 35 to 33.

Throwing a game is simply unforgivable.

Vikesrock

07-03-2010 14:22

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Integral (Post 932804)

I may be weird, but I enjoy the play of the game.

Personally, I consider the ranking system part of the game, it is released to us at the same time as the game and governs how success in the game is measured (strictly in terms of competition related, qualifying results).

Quote:

1515 (Beverly Hills HS) is, believe it or not, is a very well funded team they are scheduled to attend multiple regionals and stole a slot to Atlanta at the Oregon regionals.

They didn't steal anything, they earned their spot by playing the game that we have been given. If FIRST wanted to prevent this behavior they would have gone with a different ranking system or put something into the game to discourage it.

I do not agree with a strategy of collusion between alliances, but I feel that a single alliance should be able to do anything within the rules to maximize their seeding points.

Quote:

Our team on the other hand struggles to find students and money in our economically stressed area. Our team would have been energized by playing on a winning alliance. 1515s tacky strategy could well destroy our team.

While I do understand the excitement of winning, if your students are only staying around for wins then frankly you are not doing your job as a mentor. This gets said over and over, but there is much more to this competition than robots, and certainly much more than winning with those robots. It is up to you and your fellow mentors to help the students enjoy the experience of the build season and competition season even when you aren't earning the W's you may have hoped for.

Koko Ed

07-03-2010 14:24

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

To those who have issue with team "playing the system" all I gotta say is : Hate the game, not the player.

Koko Ed

07-03-2010 14:29

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

Quote:

Originally Posted by jspatz1 (Post 932773)

FIRST knew what they were doing when they put this in.
To them it's just another element of the game like the bumps and the towers to tickle your brain to make you figure out how to navigate your way to the top of the standings.
And I would not be surprised if they knew this would happen. They're too smart not to see it coming.

martin417

07-03-2010 14:32

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

I think this discussion about "this is wrong" or "un-gracious" is silly. The rules are published at the beginning of the season. The goal of this, or any competition is to win. Do you think Dean Kamen will give away the rights to the Segway to be "Gracious"? If you don't plan to do all you can do, within the rules, to win, then why play? I realize that Gracious Professionalism is the heart of FIRST, but as I have said before, if we weren't supposed to compete, we wouldn't keep score. If we weren't out to win, I know I wouldn't have many kids interested in joining the team. The better the team does, the more students are interested joining. Is that not the goal of FIRST? To get get kids involved? Like most people, kids are interested in wining traditions. Look at football. Teams that win a lot have a lot of fans. In FIRST, those fans become involved in the team, and maybe in engineering and technology. The reason I am involved in FIST, and plan to stay involved, even though both my kids will have moved on to college, is to inspire more american kids to become engineers. At my place of business, less than 50% of the engineers are native born Americans. I am not knocking those talented foriegn born engineers, but the fact that we have to import talent because we don't have enough of our own tells me that there is a fundamental flaw in the way we inspire kids.

I, for one, will continue to inspire the kids that are on our team to do everything they can do (within the rules) to win. If winning gets more kids involved, and therefore interested in science and technology, then it is, by definition, within the spirit of FIRST.

Integral

07-03-2010 14:33

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

Quote:

Incredible. Our combined teams ( cross town rival HS have combined resources and stopped competing for scarce funds to compete) have gone 2 years without playing on a winning alliance and you castigate me for only wanting to win.

Just wow.

We simply want to play a well played game.

I find your attidude self serving and disgraceful.

This is my last word on this.

XaulZan11

07-03-2010 14:39

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Integral (Post 932815)

I think one problem is that your definition of "winning" is different than many other teams and the rule book. I get the impression that you would rather win 1-0 instead of losing 3-4, which would give you more ranking points. I understand that you may want to win a match but that is a little selfish to your two alliance partners who are trying to win the regional.

jspatz1

07-03-2010 14:46

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

The problem is not with teams that choose to forfeit games or collude, the problem is with the system. If you invite smart kids to play within a system, then they are going to figure out how to play the system smart. Asking teams to NOT do what the system invites them to do is not reasonable or realistic. If throwing matches 6v0 is not a behavior we want happening, then we need a system that does not reward it. I'm afraid the GDC simply over-reached on the cooperition factor, with unintended consequences.

Vikesrock

07-03-2010 14:46

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Integral (Post 932815)

Wanting to win is not a bad thing. I am a very competitive person and want to win every time our team is on the field. Having said that, I will not be "crushed" if we do not win a single match this year. I know that we have already had our best year yet, by building the most technically advanced robot in our team's short history.

Your attitude that your team's single match victory is any more important than your two alliance partners trying to win the regional seems to me to be the self-serving one.

Johnny

07-03-2010 14:55

Re: A novel strategy: Always score for your opponents

Please don't post your "dirty laundry" on this thread. We are supposed to be talking about the implimentation of this strategy. It is clear that this strategy can and will be an effective means of being ranked in the top seeds. If you don't agree with using the strategy, it is fine to say so, but please don't turn this into a fight. The real spirit of FIRST is teams who have different backgrounds, beliefs, strategies and idea's coming together to share these things and create friendships with people across the world. If teams are working together and discussing strategies such as this one, i don't see how this isn't in the spirit of FIRST.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:37.

Page 4 of 8

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page