Go to Post FIRST encourages us to innovate and try new things, lets do the same for them. - Katie_UPS [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 19 votes, 4.05 average. Display Modes
  #241   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:29
RyanB RyanB is offline
Registered User
FRC #0360
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Tacoma, Wa
Posts: 22
RyanB is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

I feel like this thread is a good place to express my opinion on the competition aspect of FIRST. Let’s begin with the purpose of FIRST and how it applies to these competitions. Nowhere in the FIRST mission statement or vision statement does the word competition appear, with this said I do realize that the competition aspect is a big part of what got me personally enthralled with FIRST alongside being able to do hands on design work as a high school student. Competitions provide many learning opportunities for students such as time management, problem solving skills and an introduction to statistical analysis and how it applies to strategy implementation. All of these skills and more are extremely valuable to companies and increase the employability of students that have been exposed to these through FIRST. I can’t speak for FIRST but in my opinion I think too much emphasis is being placed on winning competitions. When I see the integrity of a HOF team being questioned for strategic implementation completely within the rules set forth by FIRST, it makes me uneasy about the direction we are headed in. I understand the urge to win and who is involved (students, sponsors, parents, schools), but I also believe that students are being engaged and inspired regardless of the amount of banners they receive.
I wasn’t at the regional, I don’t know exactly what happened but we are getting a pretty good depiction from both sides on the decision process and what those decision led too. It seams both alliances wanted to win and decided to do what they thought would win them the competition and the challenge set forth by a sponsor. With regard to defense itself, there is nowhere in the manual that sais defense must be played. Defense is a strategy that many teams employ and has been deemed by many to be a big part of the game, that doesn’t mean it has to be.
These are expressly my opinions and I do recognize other viewpoints made on this thread as valid concerns, and as such I though it important to also express my opinions on the matter.
Reply With Quote
  #242   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:30
Nirvash's Avatar
Nirvash Nirvash is offline
Registered User
AKA: Bryan
FRC #4676
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Orland Park, IL
Posts: 221
Nirvash has a spectacular aura aboutNirvash has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave McLaughlin View Post
Do you honestly think that if I asked in the official Q&A if providing challenges with monetary rewards to teams that have the potential to alter match play is legal they would say yes?
I think the better question would be if an alliance is allowed to discuss strategies with an opposing alliance that may alter match play.
__________________
Team 3488 - Electrical Lead/Programming Lead 2011-2013
Team 4676 - Electrical/Programming Mentor 2013-Present
Reply With Quote
  #243   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:30
Rangel's Avatar
Rangel Rangel is online now
John Rangel
FRC #0842 (Falcon Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 745
Rangel has a reputation beyond reputeRangel has a reputation beyond reputeRangel has a reputation beyond reputeRangel has a reputation beyond reputeRangel has a reputation beyond reputeRangel has a reputation beyond reputeRangel has a reputation beyond reputeRangel has a reputation beyond reputeRangel has a reputation beyond reputeRangel has a reputation beyond reputeRangel has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Okay I am hearing a lot of opinions and statements that do not really reflect the teams in questions but individuals. Right now most of the teams and their members are feeling attacked and judged and emotions are starting to run statements. Everyone just needs to take a breather and take the events of the finals for what they were. You've heard plenty of different perspectives and accounts of what happened and it is what it is. Never did I or any teams involved think of how controversal this would be when the decision was made. If we offended anyone then I apologize but at this point we are just beating a dead horse. I suggest all involved in this heated discussion take a break from it and ponder on it to themselves for a bit.
__________________
2012 Dean's List Winner
2011-2014 Arizona Regional Winners
2016 Las Vegas Regional Winner
2014-? Mentor


Reply With Quote
  #244   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:32
Maxwell777's Avatar
Maxwell777 Maxwell777 is offline
Is allowed to touch stuff now
AKA: Jackson Gray
FRC #0842 (Falcon Robotics)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 72
Maxwell777 has a spectacular aura aboutMaxwell777 has a spectacular aura aboutMaxwell777 has a spectacular aura about
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Quote:
Originally Posted by bduddy View Post
That's one of the worst examples you could possibly set. Lose the first match? Just give up!
Nobody gave up! That's the beauty of it! We both decided to play the game a different way. Mutually giving up defense isn't giving up. If anything, blue played a better match against us. They improved their score even more than we did!
Reply With Quote
  #245   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:33
N7UJJ N7UJJ is offline
Teacher
AKA: Allan Cameron
FRC #5465 (BinaryBots)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 253
N7UJJ has a reputation beyond reputeN7UJJ has a reputation beyond reputeN7UJJ has a reputation beyond reputeN7UJJ has a reputation beyond reputeN7UJJ has a reputation beyond reputeN7UJJ has a reputation beyond reputeN7UJJ has a reputation beyond reputeN7UJJ has a reputation beyond reputeN7UJJ has a reputation beyond reputeN7UJJ has a reputation beyond reputeN7UJJ has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Play 100% every match?
I felt the #1 seed playing the #8 seed should have played a more conventional 1assist game and save the double assist as a surprise in later matches when it would be a surprise and an advantage in perhaps a more difficult round.

In the finals, blue would have had to win two matches after they fought their best to defeat red. While it is possible they could win the next two, it seems extremely unlikely. In fact, they still had a chance to out score red in the shootout, although also unlikely.

Six teams playing a friendly match who set a goal for themselves that had no effect on any other team's ranking or playoff chances and entertained the crowd was great to experience.

As for the $500, it was the challenge itself that made this, in the final match of the day, a refreshing alternative to a crash and bash slugfest.

Note that the International Chairman's team receives a $10,000 scholarship to give to one of their students. I doubt it is the motivation for submitting an entry. But even if it was...

The spirit of FIRST has little to do with robots or winning. I think the teams who were involved have explained themselves well. Not much more to add.
Reply With Quote
  #246   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:33
dodar's Avatar
dodar dodar is offline
Registered User
FRC #1592 (Bionic Tigers)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Cocoa, Florida
Posts: 2,928
dodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGuy View Post
No. You are using margin of victory. I am using the ratio between scores. Different metrics.
Ok then lets use ratios:

Blue(Finalists): They scored 1.09x more in F1-2 than the average of their 5 Elim matches before. Thats only 15 points more.

Red(Winners): They scored 1.55x more in F1-2 than the average of their 5 Elim matches before. Thats 108 points more.
__________________
1592(Student and Mentor) 2007-Present

Blue Banners: 2008 Colorado, 2012 Orlando, 2012 South Florida, 2014 Orlando, 2015 Buckeye

Mechanical Engineering - University of Central Florida(Class of 2016)
Reply With Quote
  #247   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:36
MrForbes's Avatar
MrForbes MrForbes is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jim
FRC #1726 (N.E.R.D.S.)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Sierra Vista AZ
Posts: 6,028
MrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboAlum View Post
Well you obviously know red would win the Autonomous period but you could of still had 60 and Gila monsters play def on 842. You guys had a good bot and could of ran the field with doing truss shots and high goal shots and 1 assist. Yes your alliance wasn't a powerhouse but there is always a chance as long as you try.
With 60 and Gila playing defense on 842, 2486 would be scoring away as we are defended by 2403. We knew the only way we could have any chance of getting points was by getting the three assists, and it just took too long with the limited ball handling ability we had on our alliance. We could pick up the ball when there was defense on us, but we could not truss or score fast unless 60 was blocking for us, and if they were doing that, they could not be defending 842 or 2468 at the same time. Gila took a while to get set up for the inbound if they left the corner to defend, and could not truss or score.

I think we did respectably well in both finals matches. If we looked like we were not playing hard, I don't know what to say. We gave it our all in both matches.
Reply With Quote
  #248   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:37
George Nishimura's Avatar
George Nishimura George Nishimura is offline
Lurker
no team
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: London
Posts: 231
George Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud of
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Every team is entitled to act the way they do within the rules of the game and the spirit of the competition.

Playing no defense is not necessarily the wrong strategy.

The six teams do not owe us anything, but personally I believe they should ask themselves:

did they believe they could win?
did they try their best to win?
would they have played this way if there was no financial incentive?

If they answer yes, fair play to them.

I hope that any financial incentives offered in the future tie directly in to the existing regional incentives (ie winning an award/match).
__________________
Team 1884 - The Griffins (2007-2014)
Reply With Quote
  #249   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:40
jspatz1's Avatar
jspatz1 jspatz1 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jeff
FRC #1986 (Team Titanium)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Lee's Summit, MO
Posts: 836
jspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to jspatz1
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

The 500 lb. gorilla in this story is not these teams, or if or why they decided to play a certain way, or whether it was right or wrong. The much bigger issue is whether it can be acceptable at a FIRST event for a sponsor, or anyone else, to offer money rewards to teams for running up a high match score, or a low score, or any other goal that could be manipulated or affect outcomes. Where would this stop if permitted? I do not fault the teams for taking the temptation of the cash reward (nicknamed the "challenge".) I fault the sponsor who made the proposal, and any FIRST official who knew of it and allowed it to go on. It is a dangerous phenomenon that FIRST would be wise to nip in the bud.
Reply With Quote
  #250   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:41
dodar's Avatar
dodar dodar is offline
Registered User
FRC #1592 (Bionic Tigers)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Cocoa, Florida
Posts: 2,928
dodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond reputedodar has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Quote:
Originally Posted by jspatz1 View Post
The 500 lb. gorilla in this story is not these teams, or if or why they decided to play a certain way, or whether it was right or wrong. The much bigger issue is whether it can be acceptable at a FIRST event for a sponsor, or anyone else, to offer money rewards to teams for running up a high match score, or a low score, or any other goal that could be manipulated or affect outcomes. Where would this stop if permitted? I do not fault the teams for taking the temptation of the cash reward (nicknamed the "challenge".) I fault the sponsor who made the proposal, and any FIRST official who knew of it and allowed it to go on. It is a dangerous phenomenon that FIRST would be wise to nip in the bud.
Well according to those who were there, the man who proposed the "challenge" is on the FIRST Board of Directors.
__________________
1592(Student and Mentor) 2007-Present

Blue Banners: 2008 Colorado, 2012 Orlando, 2012 South Florida, 2014 Orlando, 2015 Buckeye

Mechanical Engineering - University of Central Florida(Class of 2016)
Reply With Quote
  #251   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:48
MoHottaMoBetta's Avatar
MoHottaMoBetta MoHottaMoBetta is offline
Mentor
AKA: Bruce Kahn
FRC #0842 (Falcon Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 12
MoHottaMoBetta is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Quote:
Originally Posted by dodar View Post
Then F1-2 was all about the money for the both alliances. In their 5 previous Elimination matches the Blue Alliance averaged 165.
Apart from S1-1 where we tried a different strategy, our other elimation wins were by respectable amouts.

Is it really that surprising that an aliance might want to try a purely offensive game to see if they could win on that alone? It was a different way to play but that was fine by us. We played the "stock" defend-when-not-holding-the-ball style in earlier matches and it worked too.

As the teams involved have already (repeatedly) stated, noone was forced into this and everyone played their best to win the match even if it did not involve trying to bash the other robots mercilessly. (Does anyone really think that Blue did not want to win the tournament??)

If it was just about the money then we could have just foul'd them over 200 and claimed the prize. We did not because thats not the spirt in which we were competing. The challenge was on the table the entire tournament and noone did that in any match because its not how we complete.
Reply With Quote
  #252   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 17:54
Andy A. Andy A. is offline
Getting old
FRC #0095
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,017
Andy A. has a reputation beyond reputeAndy A. has a reputation beyond reputeAndy A. has a reputation beyond reputeAndy A. has a reputation beyond reputeAndy A. has a reputation beyond reputeAndy A. has a reputation beyond reputeAndy A. has a reputation beyond reputeAndy A. has a reputation beyond reputeAndy A. has a reputation beyond reputeAndy A. has a reputation beyond reputeAndy A. has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nirvash View Post
I think the better question would be if an alliance is allowed to discuss strategies with an opposing alliance that may alter match play.
Why wouldn't it be?

I did exactly that in 2002 in front of Woodie Flowers (he was literally standing right by me as I called the other alliance drive coaches over to discuss the match). He seemed to think it was funny.

Qualification points were a little weirder back then- if you lost you got your score or, if you won, three times the losers score. So it was beneficial to make sure you won but also to make sure the other alliances scores were high. It lead to all kinds of funny stuff; teams scoring for their opponents and, in a few cases, 'fixing' the match. In our case both alliances came out of the match with higher rankings than if we had played a 'normal' match.

At the time it caused a little controversy but people pretty quickly figured out it was just the smart play in some cases and, not surprisingly, FIRST didn't disagree.
Reply With Quote
  #253   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 18:01
falconmaster's Avatar
falconmaster falconmaster is offline
Registered User
AKA: Ledge
FRC #0842 (Falcon Robotics)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 1,406
falconmaster has a reputation beyond reputefalconmaster has a reputation beyond reputefalconmaster has a reputation beyond reputefalconmaster has a reputation beyond reputefalconmaster has a reputation beyond reputefalconmaster has a reputation beyond reputefalconmaster has a reputation beyond reputefalconmaster has a reputation beyond reputefalconmaster has a reputation beyond reputefalconmaster has a reputation beyond reputefalconmaster has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via MSN to falconmaster
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Nishimura View Post
Every team is entitled to act the way they do within the rules of the game and the spirit of the competition.

Playing no defense is not necessarily the wrong strategy.

The six teams do not owe us anything, but personally I believe they should ask themselves:

did they believe they could win?
did they try their best to win?
would they have played this way if there was no financial incentive?

If they answer yes, fair play to them.

I hope that any financial incentives offered in the future tie directly in to the existing regional incentives (ie winning an award/match).
I hope that any financial incentives offered in the future tie directly in to the existing regional incentives (ie winning an award/match).
I hope so too, it would have made this a lot easier....
__________________
Faridodin "Fredi" Lajvardi KD7WKD
Reply With Quote
  #254   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 18:03
TheOtherGuy's Avatar
TheOtherGuy TheOtherGuy is offline
Unregistered User
AKA: Kevin Forbes
FRC #4183 (Bit Buckets)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 408
TheOtherGuy has a reputation beyond reputeTheOtherGuy has a reputation beyond reputeTheOtherGuy has a reputation beyond reputeTheOtherGuy has a reputation beyond reputeTheOtherGuy has a reputation beyond reputeTheOtherGuy has a reputation beyond reputeTheOtherGuy has a reputation beyond reputeTheOtherGuy has a reputation beyond reputeTheOtherGuy has a reputation beyond reputeTheOtherGuy has a reputation beyond reputeTheOtherGuy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Quote:
Originally Posted by dodar View Post
Ok then lets use ratios:

Blue(Finalists): They scored 1.09x more in F1-2 than the average of their 5 Elim matches before. Thats only 15 points more.

Red(Winners): They scored 1.55x more in F1-2 than the average of their 5 Elim matches before. Thats 108 points more.
The dynamic of the game changes drastically depending on who you play. It's a mistake to include their previous elimination scores. If blue scored more in the first 5 elim matches, it goes to show how much better the defense of the 1st alliance was.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #255   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-03-2014, 18:05
MoHottaMoBetta's Avatar
MoHottaMoBetta MoHottaMoBetta is offline
Mentor
AKA: Bruce Kahn
FRC #0842 (Falcon Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 12
MoHottaMoBetta is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: 301 points! and could have done more

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tottanka View Post
My problem here, is that i feel that instead of giving all they got to win the game, the teams decided to give all they got to pass the challenge. The 2 things don't line up, and contradict each other.
As a FIRSTer, i want teams giving all they got to win 100% of the time. Seems like here it didnt happen.
So the only way to play AA is to be playing defense when we dont have the ball?

I'm pretty certain that all the teams were trying their best to score as much as possible and win the match and the blue banner.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 16:25.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi