View Single Post
  #29   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-04-2010, 12:37
Wayne TenBrink's Avatar
Wayne TenBrink Wayne TenBrink is offline
<< (2008 Game Piece)
FRC #1918 (NC Gears)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Fremont, MI, USA
Posts: 529
Wayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Thoughts on CoOpertition

Two separate questions are being discussed in this thread.
1) What is coopertition supposed to be, and did the 2010 system reward it properly?
2) Did the 2010 seeding system do an accurate job of ranking (seeding) the teams?

Coopertition is a lot like friendship - It is priceless and cherished, but any system to measure it or put a price on it will create ulterior motives that can cheapen or destroy it. I view Coopertition as the "rising tide that lifts all boats". It is an aspect of Gracious Professionalism that happens off the field (pits, CD, mentoring, etc, etc.). FIRST always fostered that sort of coopertition with the system of random and shifting alliance partnerships. Strategies that resulted from the 2010 coopertition bonus were all about improving ones own standing. I would prefer to see coopertition rewarded by the judges.

I support the idea of a seeding system that rewards victory and scoring (sorry all you defense bots, but your recognition comes during alliance selection). I would like to see the winners receive their own score plus the losers score, and the losers receive their own score. Perhaps there could be a guaranteed minimum seeding score for the winners (eg: 10 points) instead of a fixed bonus (5 points) for winning (values would be scaled to fit the game). This way, even a 2-1 victory is well rewarded, a 15-14 loser still does better than the 2-1 winner, the 15-14 winners and losers do better than the 15-1 winners and losers, and nobody benefits from 6v0.

But then, I don't know what the GDC's goals were for coopertition, so I could be way off base.
__________________
NC Gears (Newaygo County Geeks Engineering Awesome Robotic Solutions)

FRC 1918 (Competing at St. Joseph and West MI in 2017)
FTC 6043 & 7911