Quote:
Originally Posted by 1885.Blake
Somewhere along the line I got the impression that using brain power well and celebrating the skillful use of science and mathematics was part of that higher standard. I guess I was wrong about that.
You are right, we should stop keeping score during matches and play them only for fun and for the benefit of the audience. We should stop using success in the tournament as a way to recognize teams that have worked hard to understand fully how the tournament system works and how to use a well-designed and built robot to maximize their chances of being in the winning alliance.
See above - Also, since when did meticulous analysis of the mathematics and social interactions of a tournament become known as "finagling"? In my math, science and engineering studies it has been known as "optimizing".
|
Blake, you and I have been at odds about this before. Using your "brainpower" to do things correctly from the start will always trump trying to squeeze the system for what it's worth. "Optimising" also has the underlying assumption that you already have some measure of reliable success. Throwing a match hardly shows success, and I'd even venture to say that it'd backfire if the #1 seed recognises that it was your team that caused the alliance to lose. Mathematical analysis will always have the inherent flaw that it cannot predict human behavior.
I'd like to point out that Blake's posts here are NOT 1885's strategic, practical, or otherwise viewpoint(s). Our viewpoint has always been to do the best with the bot we have in its current state, regardless of where it would put us in rankings. I know and believe this because I've been the driver coach for the last 2 years.
If a hypothetical team has the opportunity to be in the top 8 yet has not done the legwork to scout other teams that have the chance to topple the #1 seed, then that hypothetical team deserves the fate it gets. Case Study: Newton 2007 Seed #8 -- they did their scouting and we all see where that got them.