[jzampier]

Our team leader tried something like this at Cleveland... although the flavor was somewhat different:

As i understood it... i wasn't actually involved in the conversations...
His suggestion was that each team play the match to the best of their abilities, but at the same time tried to maximize the score for everyone...

Now, some people got very pissed off at him because they see this as 'fixing' a match.

The way i took it, and i believe the way he intended was something long the lines of what first tried to accomplish last season w/ the scoring. That in order to help yourself, you must help your opponent.

For example, in one match, i believe the X-cats successfully defended the top of the ramp from an opponent bot, when both them and their team mate were on top and they clearly had a win. The smart move would have been to let the opponent on top, thereby increasing both scores, the winning team by 50pts.

I believe this is what my team leader was suggesting. That everyone play the game and try to win ( we do our thing, you do yours, and may the best team win ), but that it is advantageous to everyone to have a good scoring match.

In my opinion this is certainly not fixing a match. To me, fixing a match implies an agreement on a definate outcome, as in, someone takes a dive.... the agreement here is merely to allow each other to excel as much as possible.

Call me crazy, but isn't cooperation amongst opponents and allies one of the ideals of first?