|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yeah, but what happens when...
Posted by colleen, Student on team #126, Gael Force, from Clinton High School and Nypro.
Posted on 3/27/99 10:59 PM MST In Reply to: RULE CHANGE!!! posted by Brandon Martus on 3/26/99 8:38 PM MST: personally, there's something i just don't like about this deal, or at least some technicalities that i would like to see explained before i could see it being a solution to what, well, doesn't seem like a "problem" 1. what happens when, persay, team A chooses teams B & C as it's alliances for competition. team B is the team they really wanted to play with, and they picked team C cause they are good, but moreso because they had to with this rule than anything. so, team A and team B go out and play. the alliance as is is competing well, and there's no need to change a good thing, so the alliance of A and B go on to win it all. what happens to C? they did not actually compete in the elimination matches but their alliance did win, do they get to wear the gold too? how many of us would like to be team C? i wouldn't want to go up there and get a medal for something i didn't win, nor would i want to be the team that wasn't good enough to play... but maybe i'm proud of my work and get embarassed to easily.. it could be me.. 2. and yet again, what about little old team C? what decision do they make? how do you decide what offer to take? how do you know when and what team's going to pick you and actually want you to play? talk about back door dealing.. 3. which two teams play each match? does the team who was in the top 8 always have to be on the field? or can this tri-alliance choose to have the two chosen teams play? if they can, what was the point of having a top 8, why not pick random teams from a hat or something? the top 8 pick the team partner that best suits them, you don't want to have to worry about choosing two alliances who suit each other. 4. how far in advance will you have to inform the opposing side of what team you're playing with? many teams will pick their two teams of the 3 to play based on the two teams they will be playing, so who calls first as to whom they are playing with? say red says it's going to be teams A and C on the field, and blue then decides to play with D and E, can the red alliance now change their mind? or is there no room for strategy except absolutely on the fly? that makes for a whole lot of extra stress and pressure put onto the on the field players, and will rely much more heavily on their ability to perform under intense pressure rather then the machine's capabilities.. 5. what's to say this will save time, or take up less time then if you had the top 10, 14, 16...pick on alliance and play.. you figure if you have the tri-allainces switching partners between each match and everything, it's bound to prolong the process, and the space, time, and chaos of organzing three robots around is much worse that two. that'll seem to me to make it all more hectic in the long run... summing it all up, i just haven't seen anything wrong with the process so far. if one, or both of the robots in your alliance breaks down, such is life, in the past if that happened, it was no big deal, you couldn't pull another robot out of the crate and compete with it, you dealt with the problem at hand.. it's part of the territory. the concept of the alliance exists, in part, so you learn to have trust is the abilities of a team other than yourself. you have to believe that no matter what happens, you can work it out, that's part of the teamwork and part of the challenge involved in this year's competition. i really don't think the difficult part of the challenge this year was picking up floppies, raising, climbing, etc... notice, practically everyone does it. but, the challenge this year was deciding how much to do, how much to rely on that other guy standing next to you, the strangers who are now your teammates.. that's the hardest part of the challenge, why shouldn't we work to overcome that? i know the qualms too, that out of the 200 someodd teams, only 16 will move on, but why not only 16? face the challenge and prove to other teams that you are trustworthy, a reliable partner that can coorperate and handle whatever comes head. dean and woodie always say, you win the competition the day that robot is put in the crate, not on any stage or in the middle of a gym, so why is everyone so concerned about winning? if you can't trust and believe in yourselves enough to think you're one of the top 16 best teams in the nation, they how do you expect any potential alliance to think you're good enough either??.. you have to meet the challenge, have faith is the way the competition's set up, and believe you're good enough to make it.. so i ramble, sue me, but i have a point. the competition was set up to challenge us, and it does..it wants us each to prove that we are one of the top 16 best teams.. personally i don't want to be one of 24 that gets picked but doesn't play, breaks down and gets replaced, or wears a medal that two other teams one.. that's the point where i'll think no one has trust or faith in my team and it's capabilities, and then and not if we are not part of the sweet sixteen, will i feel like we lost.. ok.. i'm done now..pheww.. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Proposed New Rule M11 | Joe Johnson | Rules/Strategy | 14 | 04-02-2003 14:41 |
| Stretchers | archiver | 2001 | 14 | 24-06-2002 02:15 |
| No Change Rule Yields More Openness | archiver | 2001 | 16 | 24-06-2002 01:23 |
| Kidnapping Opponent's Robot | Raul | General Forum | 51 | 15-01-2002 13:33 |
| 1 coach rule | Mike Soukup | Rules/Strategy | 14 | 07-01-2002 22:27 |