Coopertition award hint?

[Grim Tuesday]

Forgive me if someone's already seen this, but Radical Pi on my team just pointed this out to me. Looking through the administrative manual, the cooperition award minuses the qualification score. There are two possible explanations for this:

6.5 COOPERTITION™ AWARD
To determine the winner of the Coopertition Award, the FMS will rank all teams in decreasing order, using the following sorting criteria:
1st Order Sort: 2 x Coopertition Score – Qualification Score
2nd Order Sort: Coopertition Score.

The team or teams receiving the top ranking after both sorts will receive the Coopertition Award.

Emphasis mine.

It is designed to make it easier for worse teams to win it, which seems unlikely, it shouldn't be a consolation prize. The second option is that better teams should win it, and a low score is better than a high score. What game is this true in? Golf. What year are we on? Based on a real sport year. What year are we on? A ball year. What are heavy game pieces? Golf balls. I have no idea how a game like this would work, but it all seems to fit together. Thoughts?

[Sean Raia]

It goes with slopes, and golf balls go at high speeds. They aren't very safe, however, which eliminates the possibility in my mind.

[Grim Tuesday]

Nets around the field? That could be heavy as well.

The one final piece of the puzzle we haven't been factoring in is the Kinect. Allowing human control with it should help accuracy, so a game that requires accuracy, based on golf, with a different gamepiece could be interesting. We also haven't had a 'hording' (ie 2009, 2006) year recently, so lots of small balls are probable.

[DonRotolo]

I think more likely is that super-high-scoring teams are being penalized for this award. Think of Ranking points as recently as last year, where each team got the other alliance's score - so a blowout score of 100-to-2 was a disadvantage to the winning team, while a close game score of 52-49 was an advantage

[Drivencrazy]

The game doesn't necessarily have to use golf balls for it to be similar to golf. I think it could make use of a large number of different balls and play similarly to golf and use the same scoring style. An interesting find. Guess we'll just have to wait a few days and see.

[Guppy294]

That seems probable. It doesn't necessarily have to be real golf balls. Basketballs may make a good bigger system. They're heavy and bounce without thrashing quite as much. Golf would be fun.

[Grim Tuesday]

Just to resurrect for current discussion a bills blog from a while ago, entitled 'The wooden beams have started creaking'

This is going to be a heavy field to set up when all is said and done. Our pallet jacks can handle up to 5,000lbs in a single load and the engineering staff tell me we’ve been pushing the jacks to their limit recently. At the moment we have an estimated 8,000lbs of polycarbonate sheets, four 1,000lb pallets of game specific steel elements, a pallet of aluminum, three 1,500lb pallets of a game specific item plus a fourth 1,000lb pallet of a different game specific item, two full pallets of gaffers tape, an entire pallet of carpet tape and multiple pallets of game pieces. None of which takes into account the existing field components we will be bolting, zip tying and otherwise attaching these items onto or the elements that have not been delivered yet.

Great find Tuesday! (May I call you Tuesday? Grim doesn't seem like a nice name to greet people by. :\) While it is something to think about, I also like to stop and admire FIRST's doing this. It's a very interesting score, and can constitute for many things.

Personally, I think the Cooperatition score will be a large range of numbers (ie. 0-200), and then then the game score is subtracted from that. A larger range of Cooperatition scores make it so that low scoring teams with little to no cooperatition don't get it as a consolation, and high scoring good cooperatition teams can't get it either, because their high score lowers their score. This leaves behind the teams that didn't score very high, but followed the rules of FIRST, Gracious Professionalism, and Cooperatition that have an evened out score. Example below:

Team 1 is a low scoring team with a low cooperatition score:
Score: 40/100 Cooperatition score: 50/200
Team 2 is a high scoring team with a high cooperatition score:
Score: 90/100 Cooperatition score: 170/200
Team 3 is a mid scoring team with a high cooperatition score:
Score: 50/100 Cooperatition score: 160/200

Team 1's final score is 10
Team 2's final score is 80
Team 3's final score is 110

Because of this, team 3 who competed admirably and graciously, but did not score well, wins the award.

[Sean Raia]

Someone deduced (at some point in the recent past ) that the game pieces were small and heavy, based on one of bills posts. Basketballs aren't exactly small, but i agree that it could be a golf-like game with some other type of ball.

[Guppy294]

I'm curious. How did they come to that conclusion?

[Sean Raia]

Originally Posted by Guppy294

I'm curious. How did they come to that conclusion?

From "The wooden beams..." blog post, and some unknown knowledge of the maximum volume of a pallet. I wish i could tell you who, or where, but my memory is slipping me and running a quick search didn't yield the source.

[Guppy294]

Hmmm... that'd be interesting to do. We could google the volume of a pallet for balls then look up the mass per pallet ratio and deduct the game element! Unless the element is ridiculous.

[Karibou]

Originally Posted by Guppy294

Hmmm... that'd be interesting to do. We could google the volume of a pallet for balls then look up the mass per pallet ratio and deduct the game element! Unless the element is ridiculous.

But wouldn't we need to know the number of elements on each pallet? Assuming you're trying to get the mass of each individual element from the mass of the pallet, and then try and find a possible element with that approximate mass...

[Guppy294]

Couldn't we find the number of elements on the pallet based on the volume of the pallet? I'm saying we could find the total volume each pallet could hold, then we could look up each plausible game element's weight and volume and calculate how much each pallet would weigh with each game element filling it. But then again, other game elements could infect each pallet making that impossible without knowing the mass of just the manipulated game element (avoiding the term ball because for all we know, its a frisbee). But it's still worth a shot? It wouldn't be 100% accurate by any means, but its better than nothing.

[Grim Tuesday]

Lets do it.

Oh and also, in response to Supernerd256 above, you can call me Tuesday if I can call you Super!