Thread: Scoring Clarification -- copy of posting in General
View Single Post
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-06-2002, 00:11
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
  
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Scoring Clarification -- copy of posting in General
Posted by Raul.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]


Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.

Posted on 10/22/2000 3:51 PM MST


In Reply to: Scoring Clarification -- copy of posting in General posted by Joe Johnson on 10/20/2000 1:27 PM MST:



This is an interesting scoring scheme. In all cases it benefits both teams to maximize all scores.

1)In no case is it better for the winning team to give the doubler to the losing team.

2)In cases where the losing team cannot win even if they get the doubler, the losing team should prefer to give the doubler to the winning team to maximize their score. Unless, they are trying to prove a point.

3)And in #2 above, if the winning team sees that they cannot certainly get the doubler, they should allow the losing team to get it rather than squander the points.

Raul


: : As an exercise for the folks at home, please consider the following situation.

: : Suppose the Blue Alliance is winning a seeding match 22 to 10 near the end of a match with the doubler sitting on the center line, which way will Blue be trying to push the square rack? What about the Red Alliance?

: : Does the situation change if the score is 22 to 6? 22 to 12?

: : Interesting, no? I can't wait to see how you folks think on your feet.

: : Joe J.





__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.