[abinkow]

Yes, you have a point about "making friends". But that's not the point of the discussion.

FIRST wants to promote coopertition. I get that. I even support it. But this scoring system is not well thought out, and will actually DETRACT from coopertition. Consider a few cases:

1) The score is a blowout; let's say the score is 30 to 8, with 45 seconds to go. I'm on the alliance which is going to win. What is my best strategy? To turn around and score goals in the other team's goal (what is called in soccer an "own goal". Why? Because goals scored for me give me one point for seedings; goals scored for the other team give me two points in coopertition bonus.

2) Same scenario, but I'm on the losing alliance. What is my best strategy? Again, to turn around and score goals for the other team. Because goals scored for me are worth nothing to me and my teammates, whereas goals scored for the other alliance give us one point.

3) I'm on a losing alliance, and I have balls coming into the corral with about 30 seconds to go. What is my best strategy? I HOLD THE BALLS and take intentional penalties. I'm going to lose anyway, and this improves my proportional score vs. the opposite team.

4) Whether I'm on the winning or losing alliance, do I go after the bonus points? Absolutely not. No matter which alliance I am on, those points benefit my opponents more than they do me.

Yes, they are trying to promote coopertition. And yes, that is a composite containing "cooperation". But it's also a composite containing "competition". This scoring system is just not well thought out.

And no, I don't think that pursuing these strategies would hurt us unduly in the selection process. Everyone knows what the point structure is. Everyone also knows that seeding points no longer matter in the elimination rounds, so the strategy changes then.