[AdamHeard]

People keep mentioning the mediocre yet solid team that seeds high via the co-op bridge and how this change will unfairly punish them, I disagree with this point.

Lets assume normal FRC 2012 rules for IRI, then it would likely have the highest percentage of successful co-ops of any event, meaning win-loss would ultimately be the tie breaker.

The robots that had the strategy of focusing on co-op and merely being capable in other aspects of the game would actually likely do very poorly at IRI as aren't contributing much point value to the rest of the match. All year we've heard "cooperating is just as important as winning", at IRI it would have been "winning is just as important as cooperating".

What people have more credibility in being upset in is the triples being allowed in qualifying matches, but even that I don't think is something to be upset with.

It is going to be HARD to triple with a random qualifying alliance of robots that all have the physical capability to do so, so the success rate there would likely be lower than in elims. In elims teams were able to do it quicker due to better planning and repeated practice, in quals more time must be taken to perform the triple; as Tyler on 2056 already said, that is a LARGE amount of time for a competent scorer (which most random qualifying alliances at IRI will have) to score completely undefended with access to every ball on the field.

For any team that had a shot of leading an alliance to victory as a captain at IRI (keeping in mind that it's incredibly unlikely for a sub-par captain to win over the better alliances at IRI), their seeding will be mostly unaffected.