[Steve Compton]

So much has been written, well thought out, pro and con, trying to parse GDC intent, effectiveness and outcomes. My thoughts are simple and clear to me, and there are only two:

1. If my alliance wins 19-0, my team seeds less well than if we lose 25-0. At some fundamental level, a system that allows that is grossly defective.

2. Because 2 different games are played in qualifications and eliminations, teams that are solid prospects as a strong elimination robot (for instance a great defender) has to intentionally reduce their demonstration of effectiveness in qualifications and go for high seeding points according to whatever strange scoring strategy makes sense at the moment.

I still believe than winning matches needs to matter and that we each design our robots for specified functions, and that a ranking system that evolves to devalue robust implemntation of conscious design is compromised.