View Single Post
  #40   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 05-01-2009, 22:58
{td}'s Avatar
{td} {td} is offline
Registered User
FRC #0167
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Iowa City
Posts: 10
{td} will become famous soon enough
Re: My case against <G14>

Quote:
And I'm a little disappointed that no one so far has responded to what I think was my most important point. FIRST has apparently assumed that blowout games are somehow bad and need to be eliminated. In my opinion, not only can a blowout loss be a valuable learning experience for a team, but an false close loss will certainly be no better.
Okay, I'll do it I agree with just about all of your reasoning and especially this point. Let me share an example of just how a blowout game can be inspiring, a good learning experience, and certainly not inherently bad.

Two years ago at the Milwaukee regional, team 1736, Robot Casserole's alliance scored all along the top row (i think they did that singlehandedly, too, but i'm not positive). This meant they had 250 points. (Here is video, courtesy blue alliance: http://www.thebluealliance.net/tbatv...hp?matchid=679)

This got everyone's attention and I think motivated our team to do better the next year and got us pumped up, because we wanted to be like that time one year.

Now, imagine this rule was in place then. They would have secured maybe 4 around the top and then gone to play defense, ensuring a victory. They would have still won, and they wouldn't be penalized the next round. However, i would have lost something i could point to as an awesome achievement. It would have made that game average and not interesting or inspiring.

I personally think this rule does (accidentally) discourage reaching for the stars both in the design phase and during each and every game. Obviously everyone still is going to try hard during games, but who will try to make a statement if it means losing an advantage next game? Nobody who is reasonably sure of a spot in the tournament will try to dazzle, just focus on winning. Especially when there are 15 point swings with a single ball. I imagine there will be close, low scoring games when someone dumps a super cell and ends up winning, but doubling the other team in a close game.

That's the biggest problem, in my opinion. Perhaps if they made certain adjustments (like a minimum difference for the rule to take place, removing the zero score problem, and accounting for penalties) it would be better. But I too am at a loss for a concrete reason why this was needed. I think the tiebreaking score based on opponent's performance already does enough.
Reply With Quote