View Single Post
  #19   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 05-05-2014, 17:16
XaulZan11's Avatar
XaulZan11 XaulZan11 is online now
Registered User
AKA: John Christiansen
FRC #1732
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Milwaukee, Wi
Posts: 1,329
XaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to XaulZan11
Re: Successful teams in FRC history

A couple of people have mentioned the need to accurately analyze the game before prototyping/building. I'm not sure I agree with that being an necessity for all teams. Earlier on GameSense Tom from 254 said they thought the game would be more run and gun opposed to the focus on assists (turns out the traits needed for the 3 ball auto allowed it play the assist game very well!). I believe there was a post from 33 after their first district stating they were surprised by the game play, expecting to use their well-practice solo-cycles more often.

I think the take away should be that the high resource teams can over come a mis-step in strategy but the average or below average teams wanting to compete with those high resource teams need to nail the strategy as their margin for error is much smaller and they cannot waste precious time on functions not directly tied to winning (such as catching in 2014, climb/dump in 2013, suspension in 2010...).

Last edited by XaulZan11 : 05-05-2014 at 17:20.
Reply With Quote