|
|
|
 No one ever said that this was easy. - Jaine Perotti [more] |
 |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
| View Poll Results: What will the alliances be like this year? | |||
| 2 vs. 2 |
  
|
60 | 65.93% |
| 4 vs. 0 |
  
|
1 | 1.10% |
| 1 vs. 1 vs. 1 vs. 1 |
  
|
3 | 3.30% |
| 3 vs. 1 |
  
|
3 | 3.30% |
| 3 vs. 3 |
  
|
11 | 12.09% |
| 2 vs. 2 vs. 2 |
  
|
13 | 14.29% |
| Voters: 91. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Jason's right
Jason is correct... there were a number of teams who got ganged up on. I especially recall that ChiefDelphi got ambushed during about every match at Nationals and they were out quickly. This was largely due to the fact that they won 2 (or 3?) Regionals going into Nats, so everyone seemed to be shooting for them.
As for us, we were seeded 53rd and went on to win that year. But, we actually lost our second match of the elimination rounds and went to the finals by route of the losers bracket. I think that we played 5 or 6 straight matches in the losers bracket. We played some tough teams and matches in route to the finals. In the semi's we won two incredibly close matches with team 67. I agree that the days of having 1v1v1 or 1v1 is gone. There may be a way that they could do 1v1v1v1, but the game would have to discourage teams from "ganging up" on one of the robots. Andy B. 
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| 2004 Championship Eligibility Criteria!!! | dez250 | General Forum | 214 | 28-12-2003 20:11 |
| Let's say you are the CEO | Aidan F. Browne | General Forum | 24 | 04-11-2003 18:35 |
| Championship Qualification - How you would've done it | Ken Leung | Championship Event | 6 | 26-10-2003 14:00 |
| Wow! what a year | archiver | 2000 | 8 | 23-06-2002 22:43 |
| Making heads or tails of the new announcement... | Jessica Boucher | General Forum | 66 | 26-09-2001 11:13 |
Hybrid Mode
