|
Mr. Johnson has it right!
If FIRST wants the big media and big sponsor attention, they need to go to 2-out-of 3 with total points used as a tie-breaker. With the present scoring approach, a first match score 90 to 89 makes the second match totally anti-climatic. The winner of the nail-biter has a totally insurmountable lead and can sit idle (or just knock over a stack) and walk away with the trophy. Not at all compelling to spectators that would expect the next match to be even more exciting. Not viewer friendly!!
If FIRST doesn't implement 2-out-of-3 in the National finals , they're going to confuse the same viewership that could help push FIRST into every school in the country almost overnight.
__________________
"There's never enough time to do it right, but always time to do it over."
2003 AZ: Semifinals, Motorola Quality; SoCal: Q-finals, Xerox Creativity; IRI: Q-finals
2004 AZ: Semifinals, GM Industrial Design; SoCal: Winners, Leadership in Controls; Championship: Galileo #2 seed, Q-finals; IRI: Champions
2005 AZ: #1 Seed, Xerox Creativity; SoCal: Finalist, RadioShack Controls; SVR: Winners, Delphi "Driving Tomorrow's Technologies"; Championship: Archimedes Semifinals; IRI: Finalist
2007 LA: Finalist; San Diego: Q-finals; CalGames: Finalist || 2008 San Diego: Q-finals; LA: Winners; CalGames: Finalist || 2009 LA: Semifinals; Las Vegas: Q-finals; IRI: #1 Seed, Finalist
2010 AZ: Motorola Quality; LA: Finalist || 2011 SD: Q-finals; LA: Q-finals || 2013 LA: Xerox Creativity, WFFA, Dean's List Finalist || 2014 IE: Q-finals, LA: Finalist, Dean's List Finalist
2016 Ventura: Q-finals, WFFA, Engineering Inspiration
|