[archiver]

Posted by Scott Vierstra.

Engineer on team #128, Cold Fusion (TOGA PARTY), from Grandview Heights and American Electric Power.

Posted on 4/12/2000 2:18 PM MST


In Reply to: Re: Alliances in touble? posted by Elaine Anselm on 4/12/2000 9:13 AM MST:



I agree that the use of arbitrarily selected alliances is great! It teaches that we have to be willing to rely on others to help us achieve a goal -- that we can't always rely solely on our own abilities and, if you choose to try such, the chances of success are less likely. I liked Woody's term for it, 'coopitition.' As far as the crowds were concern, I would agree that it is dissapointing to see them dwindle during the finals. I think that the multiple final venues played a big part in this happening this year. I would have prefered fro the finals to have taken longer and have been able to watch more from within Einstien. By moving the finals from 4, down to 2, and finally to 1 arena, FIRST inadvertantly, encouraged reductions in the audiences. Had it all been at Einstein, I believe that the audience would have been huge. Unfortunately, with the small buffer between the arena and the crowd, it is difficult for a large audience to see the playing surface and watch the action. How about a coopitition that involves a sloped surface or a wall so that we can all see the action better?!?

A FIRST Aholic

: Chris - I guess I read through the same comments and saw something different. Teams were disappointed at not making the finals, ours being one. We had some great matches and the team wanted to see more. It looked to me like just about everyone who posted notes about being disappointed could see beyond that and felt it was a great year despite the dissapointment. I do think there could be improvements to the selection process, but I also think that alliances are the BEST thing that FIRST has done since they got rid of the tethers in 1993.

: I do agree with you on the attendance at the finals matches. In 1998 the stands were about as full as during the awards ceremony and the mood was electric during the finals matches. People were dancing, teams were all having a great time. Last year it was just too hot. This year I was dissapointed to see so few people in the stands for what was one of the best finals ever.

: So what happened this year? You may be right that people lost interest once they were not chosen. It is tough for people to cheer someone on when they did not pick your team as an ally. I also thought that things were too disjoint and did not promote a sense of oneness. If I remember correctly matches were 9-10:15, selection 10:45-11, finals 1-3 and ceremony 6-8. A 2 hour break after the selection with people disappointed resulted in a mass exodus. I think some people intended to come back but then didn't when they thought about leaving again for after 2 more hours then coming back for the ceremony. If the format with alliances continues, which I personally would like to see, maybe the break should occur after the last seeding match, then have the alliance selection followed by a half hour break while teams strategize. During that time the DJ should get the crowds pumped up. In years past the DJ got the crowd moving, but this year it seemed like they just played music. Going back to a more gradual elimination like the one resulting from double elimination would be another alternative

: Our team has talked about telling team members that they cannot leave before the finals, but I would rather have them want to stay than make them feel forced into it.

: Elaine
: Team 191
: X-Cats