Thread: 50 Pt. Climbs
View Single Post
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 05-09-2013, 00:26
cmrnpizzo14's Avatar
cmrnpizzo14 cmrnpizzo14 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Cam Pizzo
FRC #3173 (IgKNIGHTers)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 522
cmrnpizzo14 has a reputation beyond reputecmrnpizzo14 has a reputation beyond reputecmrnpizzo14 has a reputation beyond reputecmrnpizzo14 has a reputation beyond reputecmrnpizzo14 has a reputation beyond reputecmrnpizzo14 has a reputation beyond reputecmrnpizzo14 has a reputation beyond reputecmrnpizzo14 has a reputation beyond reputecmrnpizzo14 has a reputation beyond reputecmrnpizzo14 has a reputation beyond reputecmrnpizzo14 has a reputation beyond repute
50 Pt. Climbs

This season, it seems as though there was a negative rep for the 50 pt. climb and dump. People said that it was a bad strategy for teams to solely devote themselves to and as a whole this was in fact a largely unsuccessful strategy for most teams.

My question, mostly to teams that attempted this but also to those who considered it, is why did you find this strategy successful or unsuccessful?

Keep in mind that according to EWCP's Twenty Four blog, a 50 pt. robot on an alliance should be more than pulling their own weight. The median alliance score was below 50 points (for qualification in week one, not the greatest sample but it should be indicative). There were few alliances in qualifying that could attain over 150 points and at most regionals few that could in the elimination matches as well. Statistically speaking, a robot that contributed 50 pts should be a huge alliance contribution.

Was it consistency issues? Was it too defensible? Why didn't this work?
__________________
FIRST Team 3173 The IgKNIGHTers

"Where should we put the battery?"