Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Petey
3) Threee teams means that it is more unlikely that a good robot can carry an alliance. If one stellar robot is, by draw, paired with two less-than-stellar robots, that alliance will probably lose.
This is unfair. This is unfair because it is disingenuous to the very spirit of competition--any competition--to have hard work, ingenuity, and talent rewarded with loss.
|
I disagree with you.
If the game was about having one team carry an alliance, it would be 1v1, not 2v2 or 3v3. Because this game and FIRST is about cooperation and coping and adapting to the new unknowns, i think that this game will bring out teams that were previously unknown, and that a good robot is even more just a small part of winning. A great robot can be beaten easily if they have a bad strategy.
Unfair? Try to look at it this way, focus the hard work, ingenuity and talent toward a different direction. These qualities will never be rewarded with loss, only with triumph. Remember, it all comes down to the finals, and even a team with a poor record can and will be pick if they have a strategy or a quality that will be helpful in the alliance.
I think this years winners will be determined by how well the scouts and strategist pick their partners. I believe that even if the 3 best robots are put together, they can be beat by another, superior
alliance.