Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

They are absolutely not the same.

"Throwing" a match is intentionally getting a negative outcome for yourself and everyone on your alliance. This is extremely selfish and hurts your partners. People were advocating intentionally aiming for low seeding scores just to disrupt 1114.

1114 sought to maximize their seeding points for them and their partners in one match. The strategy that did that was to not win the match. The result was beneficial for the entire alliance, just a different strategy than is intuitive.

So no, 1114 did not do the same thing as everyone else advocated on Chief Delphi. They played to maximize their seeding points, not to bring down their alliance partners. Please stop pretending they are the same thing.

Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

My definition of 'throwing a match' is to intentionally lose the match for the benefit of an individual or group (consider Pete Rose). 1114 benefitted from intentionally losing the match, therefore it is 'throwing the match'.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Again, my issue is not with the teams involved, but with the system the promotes this.

Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

They are still two different things completely. 6v0 is completely different than, say, while you are partnered with 1114, your human player purposely hides a scored ball in the corral so that the entire alliance gets a bunch of dogma penalties causing the alliance (and 1114) to score 0.

6v0 to maximize your seeding score (and losing the match) vs. purposely getting penalties to cause your alliance partners to lose and score low are completely different things...

Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

Agreed. I have major issues with the system as well. My angry tone was not directed at those who were upset with the system. My angry tone was directed at those who were hurling insults at our team.

Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

a great match indeed!
I was there in person, this was the only match in the curie division, that not one of my team members was willing to miss, we were waiting for this match to come!
when we saw this match on the "match schedule" we marked it as a "must to watch" match almost immediately!

Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

Semantics aside, you said Karthik / 1114 / whomever had no right to get mad at people advocating throwing a match to bring down 1114 because his team played a 6v0 match. No one can honestly say those two things are anywhere close to the same level of "bad".

Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

I'm gonna elaborate on this if you don't mind Chris.

6v0 (regardless of my personal feelings) hurts no one. In fact, it was a viable strategy this year. 1114 decided to place itself in the best possible position from which to win the event. (Something all teams should do) This match left them with an awkward decision. They could gamble or they could take a lower payout. If they played their best they could lose and give 111 a massive boost in the rankings. They could also win and get a massive boost. Or they could take the assured payout. Say what you want about 1114 but you cannot say they are not logical. They decided, along with their partners, not to gamble.

A team throwing a match to hurt another team's standings is unsportsmanlike. There was talk about intentionally drawing penalties when playing with 1114 so they get losses so that they would not be #1. That is sick.

This isn't even comparable. One is a strategic move so that everyone at least gains. The other is a rude move that I feel should warrant expulsion from the competition. If you intentionally draw penalties to hurt another team you don't deserve to be competing.

Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

I posted the following on my Blog (the post was originally from a Curie Thread) but I feel it serves more purpose in this thread:

Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

Thank you Karthik.

Now I understand that some people are annoyed at Curie match 100, but the rules left it open. I am sure [after talking to our drivers] that this was not our favourite option. I believe, however, that it was not cheating, we were not throwing the match, or playing badly. We were playing with strategy in mind.

1- A close tie wouldn't do good for the losing team. I know ties were a killer to 288's rank at multiple competitions.

2-A close match, high also would be bad for the losing team. With many highly ranked teams on the field, this would be rather devastating to lose. .

3- A close, low scoring match. Devastating to both winner and loser's rank, no matter where they were in the system.

4- A huge loss. If one side scored a ton, and none for the other, both teams can get large amounts of seeding points.

I personally think 4 was the best option for both alliances. It didn't hurt either side. maybe it wasn't the clash of the titans everyone seemed to want, but it was a crazy match anyhow.

As a side note, I congratulate 469 for having a robot that had thoughts that were outside the box and maybe outside of the normal configuration ^.-

Thank you to 1114, 231, 111, 469, and 888 for an exciting and unforgettable match 100 at my first time to Atlanta!

~Abby Wilson, 288/216~

Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

I understand the point of the statement - but I don't think we need to add any more unenforceable rules to the book. Just tweak the system so that the losing team gets their own score and this all becomes academic.

Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

This has pretty much been said in past posts, but this is where I stand.

The game and competition both have rules, I would imagine the ultimate competitive goal of the competition for just about all teams is to win the competition. 1114 followed the rules and pursued their goal, to win the competition. They did what they had to do to seed first, and give themselves the best chance possible to win. It's hard to have a problem with that. Let' be honest, we all want to win, it just happens 1114 is really good at it. If you have a problem with the system that is something different, there is no fault in following the rules, and giving yourself the best chance to win.

Re: Curie Match 100, 28-0
 

When a team or alliance pursue a tactic there are consequences that impact the rest of the field. For example, had the 1114 alliance scored just three points in match 100, then 2612 would not have won the Coopertition Award on Curie.

So 2612 could look at it like we took home some hardware because of the 6v0 match :) which some would say is like being run out of town on a rail - if it weren't for the honor of it, they'd just as soon pass. :rolleyes: Or, we could look at it like we won the award because we were in shoot-outs all weekend, and 1114 was in the one situation that could help them seed first. However, we choose to see that it was what it was, which was a whole lot of fun, an honor just to be part of the action, and certainly nothing to get bent out of shape over.