301 points! and could have done more

[dodar]

Originally Posted by s_forbes

I need some clarification... what exactly was FIRST's challenge?

It seems to me that the collaboration between the alliances in the finals to set a high score was a very "GP" performance, even neglecting the achievement goal set forth by one of our regionals primary sponsors.

FIRST didnt set up a good portion of the rulebook to govern defensive play just for alliances to completely disregard it by saying we wont touch you if you dont touch us. The game was made to have defense.

Would you consider this "GP" if this was performed during quals to get as many assist points as possible?

[s_forbes]

Originally Posted by dodar

Would you consider this "GP" if this was performed during quals to get as many assist points as possible?

Yes.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by s_forbes

Yes.

All I can say to that is wow.

[s_forbes]

Originally Posted by dodar

All I can say to that is wow.

Me too!

[Anupam Goli]

Originally Posted by dodar

All I can say to that is wow.

And I counter your wow with this. 6v0 is not an alien concept to FRC, and so what if both alliances in quals agree to play no defense to maximize ranking points for each alliance? There's even more incentive to do so if none of the teams are close to a picking position in the rankings.

[s_forbes]

Originally Posted by Anupam Goli

And I counter your wow with this. 6v0 is not an alien concept to FRC, and so what if both alliances in quals agree to play no defense to maximize ranking points for each alliance? There's even more incentive to do so if none of the teams are close to a picking position in the rankings.

I would argue that the 6v0 matches from 2010 are not even on the same page. Agreeing to play with no defense says "I bet we can fire our guns faster than yours" rather than "lets all shoot our guns in the same direction".

[dodar]

Originally Posted by Anupam Goli

And I counter your wow with this. 6v0 is not an alien concept to FRC, and so what if both alliances in quals agree to play no defense to maximize ranking points for each alliance? There's even more incentive to do so if none of the teams are close to a picking position in the rankings.

That was what I said. And I would frown upon those teams doing that as well. If you feel like you deserve to be ranked higher, earn the points by being able to play through defense and get them. Being able to score through defense will get you picked alot easier then telling a team that you are better at trying to get teams to not play defense if you wont.

I was also still a student when the 6v0 happened in 2010, I did think what happened was cool but I never thought of it as THE high score and I still didnt like how those teams did that towards raising their ranking scores.

[Nathan Rossi]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmMEl2QoDSU

Here, watch the announcement yourself.

[TheOtherGuy]

Well, this is one of the more interesting threads on CD I never thought I'd read!

The match was exciting to watch as a spectator. Everyone around me was out of their seat. That match was nothing short of inspiring.

[s_forbes]

Originally Posted by TheOtherGuy

That match was nothing short of inspiring.

Oh, you... that's not what this competition is all about!

[Joshua Sicz]

Originally Posted by TheOtherGuy

Well, this is one of the more interesting threads on CD I never thought I'd read!

The match was exciting to watch as a spectator. Everyone around me was out of their seat. That match was nothing short of inspiring.

I Agree with this.

I was the driver for team 2403 in the Finals of the AZ regional. I wanted to clarify some things.

The first first match of the finals we offered the same pack with the other team but they rejected it. So I was able to drive defensively. Once we showed that we can beat them we offered the same pack for them. This doesn't hurt either alliance because the objective was to see if can beat the challenge that hasn't been broken and we have already won the first so why not TRY for it.

For me it was fun because the score was behind me and I was on my toes to see if we have beaten the challenge. It is also fun to drive I also played all the matches so far with defense so it was exciting to see a change.

It was GP in the scene that we worked together to try to reach some no one else has done. AND we still were against each other for the winning of the regional.

If I have missed anything some one had for a question for me just ask.

Thanks,
Joshua Sicz

Project Manager for Plasma Robotics

[seg9585]

Originally Posted by Joshua Sicz

For me it was fun because the score was behind me and I was on my toes to see if we have beaten the challenge. It is also fun to drive I also played all the matches so far with defense so it was exciting to see a change.

Okay, but I watched the video and you didn't drive that match. You sat in the corner the entire game and did not move out of that spot. Your switch operator pushed a button 4 or 5 times to flick a ball a couple feet in the air. Surely you must have been doing more driving while playing defense. Your driver may as well have been a spectator.

As an employee of one of your team's major "Titanium Sponsors", it's a little upsetting to me that the funds didn't go towards a team interested in putting forth a best-effort towards winning the game because of handshake agreements

[Gemmendorfer]

Originally Posted by seg9585

Okay, but I watched the video and you didn't drive that match. You sat in the corner the entire game and did not move out of that spot. Your switch operator pushed a button 4 or 5 times to flick a ball a couple feet in the air. Surely you must have been doing more driving while playing defense. Your driver may as well have been a spectator.

I think you are oversimplifying it here. If you want to use that logic, every operator just stands there and hits a couple of buttons to make the robot "flick" the ball out of the robot, whether it a couple feet or more than a couple feet. In the case of an inbounding robot for that alliance, why wouldn't it be okay to sit there and stay in position, since they were cycling pretty quickly anyways, and the few times the other alliance got the ball down the field to shoot, moving to defend would slow down the cycle time of their own alliance, and possibly not being a net benefit for the alliance anyways. Sometimes it is okay to not drive much in a match.

[Joshua Sicz]

Originally Posted by seg9585

Okay, but I watched the video and you didn't drive that match. You sat in the corner the entire game and did not move out of that spot. Your switch operator pushed a button 4 or 5 times to flick a ball a couple feet in the air. Surely you must have been doing more driving while playing defense. Your driver may as well have been a spectator.

As an employee of one of your team's major "Titanium Sponsors", it's a little upsetting to me that the funds didn't go towards a team interested in putting forth a best-effort towards winning the game because of handshake agreements

I agree with you about us driving but there is one thing different. I was driver and I also controlled the flicking of the robot. We only had one driver controlling the whole robot. Our other driver reads stats and condition control for the main driver. But I disagree with you about your money went into. We really do appreciate it. It did go to a good place. Like other people were saying, people were up and standing for the match. It was still intense for me. And for effort we but our best effort into. I can say that for all of the teams on both alliances. We gave it our best effort to score the most points. It is also our best interest in winning the game. It is everyone interest. I can also say we couldn't have done it without you. This year wasn't easy for us, we used all of the help we could. I thank you.