Thread: <G28>
View Single Post
  #47   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 01:44
Tuba4 Tuba4 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Tom Albert
FRC #0063 (The Red Barons)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Erie, Pa
Posts: 134
Tuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant future
Re: <G28>

Not to lawyer this up but.....the problem with <G45> is the definition of exploiting. Is forcing one penalty exploiting the <G44> exception of <G28>? Does two, three or four forced penalties make it exploitation? I believe the issue can only be resolved by quantifying what becomes exploitation. Removing <G45> totally would give a greater advantage to the team who owns the particular key, bridge or alley by allowing a larger number of penalties. But setting a number too low could swing the advantage to the team not owning the key, bridge or alley by limiting their penalties for more aggressive play.