Quote:
Originally posted by SuperDanman
Besides, for the most part, games were not rigged. Why let just a few bad seeds ruin the fun for the rest of us? Keep 2 vs. 2, I say.
|
Back in '98 when it was still 1 vs. 1 vs. 1 there was a lot of controversy. Here's the short version of it all. In the double elimination matches at EPCOT it was not uncommon to have a match with one dominant team and two very weak ones. In many of these matches it was suspected that the two weaker teams colluded to stop the dominant team. The weaker teams would forget about trying to score and would both pin the stronger team. The match would be decided by the human players, since none of the three teams were scoring (they were busy having a pinning contest). The game was essentially reduced to a free throw contest. (The game in 98 had a 8 foot high goal)
There was a very small number of teams who engaged in this type of behavior, but there were enough that FIRST took notice. The following year at kickoff Woody described the above situation. He then said "So you guys decided to work together last year, so this year we're making you do it!" (I'm paraphrasing, but it's pretty close) So that's part of the reason we have our current alliance format. By no means were the majority of teams playing this way, but there were still enough for FIRST to make the change.
As a result of the colluding that a small number of teams participated in this year, I would not be at all surprised if FIRST decides to revamp the game. Going back to 4 vs. 0 could be a possibility.
Of course, knowing FIRST I would expect them to have some sort completely new and challenging format for us!