Thread: Week 2 Analysis
View Single Post
  #57   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-03-2014, 10:38
Siri's Avatar
Siri Siri is offline
Dare greatly
AKA: 1640 coach 2010-2014
FRC #2641 (PCCR; Refs & RIs)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,639
Siri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via ICQ to Siri
Re: Week 2 Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karthik View Post
Consider the situation with an above average alliance on the field. Let's say they manage to score 5 balls in a match. With your "ideal" delay, that means this alliance would spend 45 seconds of the match waiting for the pedestal to light up. That means 32% of the match would be spent with an alliance waiting to be allowed to enter a ball into play. This is simply unacceptable. Both the teams and the volunteer referees deserve better.
It's unacceptable across the board, and its burden discriminates by strategy. Adding 9 seconds to the end of each cycles means that I could be preforming the incredible feat of scoring 20-point cycles three times faster than an alliance scoring 50-point cycles, and still lose the match because I'm waiting a 'reasonable' amount of time for the light to come on. This is nutty. Field speed should not be dictating strategy anywhere near so heavily. 6.4% of match time per instance.
__________________
Reply With Quote