301 points! and could have done more

[seg9585]

Morality and consensual agreements between opponents aside, this was by far the most boring Finals match I've ever seen in any FIRST regional ever, considering how many points were actually scored. You really wanted to end a competition like this?

[falconmaster]

Originally Posted by seg9585

Morality and consensual agreements between opponents aside, this was by far the most boring Finals match I've ever seen in any FIRST regional ever, considering how many points were actually scored. You really wanted to end a competition like this?

Well its very fortunate then that there are many regionals. Our regional is what it was. Gracious professionalism and coopertition.

[seg9585]

Originally Posted by falconmaster

Well its very fortunate then that there are many regionals. Our regional is what it was. Gracious professionalism and coopertition.

Let me ask real quick, then: Would this type of match be acceptable if it was the Final match on the Einstein field? How big of a bribe would be required to make it acceptable on Einstein?

Conversely, would the teams have done this in Arizona if only $100 off was offered? Just $50 off? There must be a threshold...

Many teams and almost all spectators (and sponsor reps) only go to 1 regional so this is all they see.

[MrForbes]

Interesting questions. No one has mentioned that Mr. Sanghi also donated more money to pay for the winning alliance team's entry fees for Championships. It would be more valuable to a team to win the finals, than to get the 200 points. It might not have been as much about the money as you think.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by MrForbes

Interesting questions. No one has mentioned that Mr. Sanghi also donated more money to pay for the winning alliance team's entry fees for Championships. It would be more valuable to a team to win the finals, than to get the 200 points. It might not have been as much about the money as you think.

Thats not what is being put across.

[falconmaster]

Originally Posted by seg9585

Let me ask real quick, then: Would this type of match be acceptable if it was the Final match on the Einstein field? How big of a bribe would be required to make it acceptable on Einstein?

Conversely, would the teams have done this in Arizona if only $100 off was offered? Just $50 off? There must be a threshold...

Many teams and almost all spectators (and sponsor reps) only go to 1 regional so this is all they see.

It wasn't the money, it was the challenge! There was no bribe. The whole contest was public, no shady deals. The money was incidental. The interesting thing is that all involved are happy and enjoyed the whole event. Its only been the people that were not there that seem to have difficulty with this. I wonder if teams on Einstein would ever see the other possibilities that exist in this approach of the game, seeing who can outscore the other, money aside.

[dodar]

Would you rather watch the National Flag Football Championships or the NFL Super Bowl? Thats the difference you which you are talking about.

I could almost guarantee you 9/10 would pick the SB.

[MrForbes]

I'd rather watch NURC than any kind of football....but they're not holding it this year. Next year...watch out!

[dodar]

Originally Posted by falconmaster

Previous match 1 match in finals with defense 225 to 101
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNwCVSuy1vw
after this both alliances agreed to try to get 200 point plus each to get a bet made by Steve Sanghi, to get 500 dollars off the next years registration. almost made it 301 to 180

Originally Posted by falconmaster

It wasn't the money, it was the challenge! There was no bribe. The whole contest was public, no shady deals. The money was incidental. The interesting thing is that all involved are happy and enjoyed the whole event. Its only been the people that were not there that seem to have difficulty with this. I wonder if teams on Einstein would ever see the other possibilities that exist in this approach of the game, seeing who can outscore the other, money aside.

Something doesnt match here.

[s_forbes]

Originally Posted by dodar

Something doesnt match here.

Read as: We tried to match Steve Sanghi's challenge; it wasn't about the money.

As a member of the team from the stands: it really wasn't about the money, we really wanted to beat the challenge.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by s_forbes

Read as: We tried to match Steve Sanghi's challenge; it wasn't about the money.

As a member of the team from the stands: it really wasn't about the money, we really wanted to achieve the challenge.

I understand the point, but he and others have said they only did the challenge to get the $500 for the registration fee.

And what was so wrong as to achieve the challenge set forth by FIRST that it had to be modified by a sponsor?

[MrForbes]

I see all these people complaining about the FIRST game having perverse penalties for playing defense...then we play without defense, and still people complain.

I give up.

[Anupam Goli]

Originally Posted by MrForbes

I see all these people complaining about the FIRST game having perverse penalties for playing defense...then we play without defense, and still people complain.

I give up.

Similarly, people complain about poorly constructed robots and the new G27 update, but praise alliances for giving up their timeout so the other alliance can repair their robots. Sometimes the FIRST community is very conflicting and confusing.

[Oblarg]

Originally Posted by Anupam Goli

Similarly, people complain about poorly constructed robots and the new G27 update, but praise alliances for giving up their timeout so the other alliance can repair their robots. Sometimes the FIRST community is very conflicting and confusing.

These two things aren't at all contradictory. I have no idea what you're getting at.

[hammerhead_399]

Originally Posted by Oblarg

These two things aren't at all contradictory. I have no idea what you're getting at.

Stop. This thread ended. No more please.