[Rick TYler]

Hmm... I've seen a couple of FIRST games where a team winning a blow out backed off to manage QPs. I've also seen teams actually score points for their opponents for the same reason. FIRST built QP into the scoring, taking advantage of that is not unethical. However. Trying to arrange a close win in a game where two or three tiny mistakes means 20 or 30 points takes more courage than I would have. I say blue would be smart to leave those red balls where they are as long as the score differential is at least 50, and someone needs to point out to YellaBot what the scoring means.

EDITED: In this match, one of the alliance partners stands to gain big by winning with max QP points. Is it a responsibility of the robots on an alliance to help one of their partners achieve its goal? How does Blue2 feel if its partners won't help them maximize QPs? Would it be wrong for Blue2 to score for red by placing goals on the overpass? They benefit by better QPs and their appliance partners don't, after all? I don't think "Ignore QPs, try to crush red" is an obvious answer.