[Brian Maher]

Originally Posted by Ari423

This year we realized that we would have a hard time doing both tasks (cans and totes) so we decided to only focus on totes and forget about cans. We were able to get 3 4-stacks and a 2-stack in a match (we chose 4-stacks over 5 or 6 because they were easier to cap). This meant if we had alliance partners who could not or would not cap our stacks we were not very helpful to our alliance. But when we partnered with 1089 and 365 in elims who focused on capping our stacks rather than making their own stacks we scored pretty high. This strategy got us to semifinals in 2 district competitions. We were ~10 points away from beating out the #1 alliance at MARCMP which would have advanced us to semifinals and earned us a spot in St. Louis. So although specialization did not get us into Einstein, we are proof that if done correctly (which we could have done better) it can work very well.

I have some experience with this. At North Brunswick, we had the pleasure of working with 11 and 193 in playoffs.

11 could churn out 3-4 stacks of four totes from the chute door each match. 193 could cap each of these stacks with two totes from the chute door and a can, making 42 point stacks. We fetched a can or two from the Step, and contributed a couple short stacks from the landfill each match.

We made it to the finals, losing to 303, 2590, and 3340 in the finals. While 303 and 2590 were fast all-in-one stickers, our better finals score was a mere eight points shy of their worse finals score.

I think the moral here is that doing everything well is ideal but an alliance that exploits its strengths can be nearly as powerful, if not more.