Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Ross
I think the strategy of making sure you get blown out in the 2nd match would be not unlike a strategy used in the eliminations in 2003.
That year, there were only two matches in the eliminations. They used the same qualifying point formula as the qualifying matches (that year it was 2x opponents score + your own score). The alliance that had the highest combined qualifying point score between the two matches advanced. It was to your advantage that if you were losing, you wanted to minimize your own score so that you minimized your opponents qualifying score. If you look over the elimination rounds at the championship's scores ( http://www.usfirst.org/community/frc....aspx?id=9304), you generally saw either a very close score, or a blowout. You would often see a team descoring their own boxes, or pulling off the ramp at the last second to minimize their own score.
One thing that would be interesting this year is if a losing team starts scoring for their opponents trying to force <G14>, and then the opponents start scoring for the losing team, trying to not get <G14>. You could see some very high scoring matches this way. |
I called that the scorched earth scoring system. I'm gonna knock all of the tubs out of all of the zone (mine and theirs) just to play it safe!
What a crazy year that was.
There is no controversy in FIRST that will ever match 2003's "Collusion" controversy. Where teams protected their stacks by brokering deals with the opposing alliance so that no one's stack would be knocked down and both alliances would score well and seed well no matter who won or lost. This <G14> stuff is a trifle compared to that.