Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison
The part I don't understand is how people don't see this sort of thing as competition in the first place. The matches we play don't exist in a vacuum and the results from each -- this season more than any in recent years -- are more important than simply scoring higher than your opponent. I'm sure you understand all of that and my post was simply to illustrate to folks that may not always see the bigger picture that any one person's view of what "competition" actually is may be different than any other.
|
I agree ... to a point.
The definition of 'competition' is probably the sticking point. Many see each match as a competition, while others see the regional/championship as the competition. Thus they have very different goals during each match.
The point I was trying to get at (and probably failing miserably) is that if FIRST wants a 'spectator friendly' competition, then they should create rules that foster/nurture that type of game/strategy. The rules, as they stand, create a strategic disconnect with attempting to win every match since it
may be in an alliances interest to not play for the win.
Again, I understand the strategy and I understand why some will employ it (just like stuffing a defender into the goal ... to get stuck). It's a strategy, and it's valid, but it's also one that challanges ones ideals of what a
'competition' is about.