Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan 1038
As others noted, I agree whole-heartedly... We had two instances where we only had one match between ours, which actually cost us a match. Never in 1038's history, prior to Pittsburgh, had we ever missed a non-practice match... But, we broke a chain in match 26 and were unable to get the chain repaired and the robot back on the field in time for match 28. I get that FIRST is trying to use an algorithm which scrambles the alliances for fairness, but how was it fair to our alliance partners to go two on three in a qualification match because of a brutal schedule? Due to the fact that 20% of the teams were on the field at any one time at Pitt, possibly the smaller regionals should forgo trying to give all teams 12 matches and drop back to 10 or so, with an additional 3 minute break between matches to allow the teams to catch up... Our apologies to 1503 and 128 for missing match 28, we would have been a powerhouse alliance!
|
I, for perhaps only one, did not have a problem with the match schedule. Yes, it is intense, but no more intense than competing in the Elimination Rounds.
What it did do was put a premium on having a robust machine, obviously, we did not at the time - we're fixing that for Cleveland.
I prefer having more matches. If schedulers want to avoid the short turn around times at "smaller" regionals, perhaps a break could be built into the schedule between "rounds" in Qualifications to ensure some minimum time between matches?