301 points! and could have done more

[TheOtherGuy]

Originally Posted by Libby K

Why?! Does he think FIRST isn't doing a good enough job of that? If so, he has plenty of other channels through which to change things.

What's wrong with a little push? Is he somehow destroying the integrity of FIRST with this small proposition? He did the same thing last year, and the competitive edge was heightened - I don't recall a single complaint. I think he set the goal a little high this year, but I'm glad at least someone rose to the challenge, even if they fell short.

[cadandcookies]

Originally Posted by Cory

The sad/funny part of all this is that the two best alliances at the event couldn't even each score 200 points in a practice match...

You might think it's sad or funny, but I think it's still an admirable effort that they got closer than any match all weekend at their regional. Not every team can be 254. Not every competition is Waterloo. Not every match is between world champions, with an undefeated regional streak or a 34th blue banner on the line.

Achievement is relative. It's awesome that your team can compete on such a high level and I admire that, but belittling another regional, another set of teams, another set of stories and achievements is so far beneath you, or at least it should be.

[Libby K]

Originally Posted by Nirvash

Maybe he as acting outside of this other responsibilities and just wanted to offer a challenge privately?

When representing a high level of FIRST, you don't HAVE the opportunity to act 'outside of this responsibility'. Everything you do and say is applied as a representative of FIRST. Why do you think he should be allowed to do this and represent FIRST at the same time?

Dean frequently speaks about how 'we want to steal from the playbook of sports, but not take all the bad stuff, like unsportsmanlike behavior', and I think bribing teams is something not even the sports world wants. So why would we?

Originally Posted by TheOtherGuy

What's wrong with a little push? Is he somehow destroying the integrity of FIRST with this small proposition? He did the same thing last year, and the competitive edge was heightened - I don't recall a single complaint. I think he set the goal a little high this year, but I'm glad at least someone rose to the challenge, even if they fell short.

Yes, he is. That's how I see it. By the dictionary:

bribe [brahyb]
noun
1. money or any other valuable consideration given or promised with a view to corrupting the behavior of a person, especially in that person's performance as an athlete, public official, etc.: The motorist offered the arresting officer a bribe to let him go.
2. anything given or serving to persuade or induce: The children were given candy as a bribe to be good.

Money was offered, it changed the outcome of match play. In my head, that's a bribe. I'm wondering why someone who is, essentially, a FIRST official, thinks that's okay.

[Gemmendorfer]

Originally Posted by Cory

The sad/funny part of all this is that the two best alliances at the event couldn't even each score 200 points in a practice match...

Just because two alliances make it to the finals doesn't necessarily mean they are the two best at the regional (although the two alliances making it to the finals are normally the two best...)

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

You might think it's sad or funny, but I think it's still an admirable effort that they got closer than any match all weekend at their regional. Not every team can be 254. Not every competition is Waterloo. Not every match is between world champions, with an undefeated regional streak or a 34th blue banner on the line.

Achievement is relative. It's awesome that your team can compete on such a high level and I admire that, but belittling another regional, another set of teams, another set of stories and achievements is so far beneath you, or at least it should be.

I think Cory's post was probably inspired by 842 making two threads bragging about their victory.

[Rangel]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

I think Cory's post was probably inspired by 842 making two threads bragging about their victory.

This is probably true. Ledge was a little overexcited about the team's performance at regionals this year and came off as bragging with this and the other thread. This is not his true intention but this is how it looks and I agree. Nevertheless, insulting the other members on the alliances as well as the regional as a whole is not okay by any means.

[TheOtherGuy]

Originally Posted by Libby K

Money was offered, it changed the outcome of match play. In my head, that's a bribe. I'm wondering why someone who is, essentially, a FIRST official, thinks that's okay.

Is it alright if the reward was not monetary? I'm well acquainted with the teams on both alliances and feel comfortable saying they would do the same in that situation.

I certainly hope this doesn't devolve into an argument where the integrity a man who has transformed STEM in Arizona is questioned.

[Libby K]

Originally Posted by TheOtherGuy

Is it alright if the reward was not monetary? I'm well acquainted with the teams on both alliances and feel comfortable saying they would do the same in that situation.

I certainly hope this doesn't devolve into an argument where the integrity a man who has transformed STEM in Arizona is questioned.

What reward would you have offered? I don't think offering anything for changing the match play or event outcomes is okay.

(EDIT:: I'm not questioning anyone's integrity - truly - if the guy's on the board, he's gotta be doing something right. I'm questioning the logic behind offering this at all.)

[Gemmendorfer]

Originally Posted by TheOtherGuy

Is it alright if the reward was not monetary? I'm well acquainted with the teams on both alliances and feel comfortable saying they would do the same in that situation.

Also somewhat knowing the teams, pretty sure the alliances would try it even if there was no reward added onto the challenge...

[TheOtherGuy]

Originally Posted by Libby K

What reward would you have offered? I don't think offering anything for changing the match play or event outcomes is okay.

A plaque?
A pat on the back?

Is it really that bad!? Can you point me to the negative effects of this challenge?

[Libby K]

Originally Posted by TheOtherGuy

A plaque?
A pat on the back?

Is it really that bad!? Can you point me to the negative effects of this challenge?

Winning or becoming a regional finalist get you medals (of differing colors) and high-fives from the judges and refs. What more do you want?

I'm in a class so I can elaborate on your question later, but bribing teams to play matches in a different way than normal competition at any other regional has played out, just seems shady to me.

[ejSabathia]

When I hear of alliances agreeing to how a match will be played, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I'm a competitor through and through, a virtue I hope to share with my students/teammates. When I heard about the offers being made at the AZ regional and then read about those celebrating the results...the following definition is all that comes to mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match_fixing

~EJ

[IronicDeadBird]

Shout out to the GDC, I hear for video game dev's its really hard when an aspect of the the video game they make is blatantly ignored by the player base. I mean its time and effort people spent on making rules to account for as many situations and in the end, none of them mattered because someone had a cash incentive.
Also shout out to teams whose strategies and building choices were invalidated by this cash incentive. I vouched heavily against certain choices like mecanum (the regrets T_T) because I knew defense would be a problem this year and I valued pushing power over mobility. Any robot built around being a goalie is instantly at a disadvantage if you built around blocking shots and you suddenly have a big sponsor say "score a lot." If the challenge that was proposed included all aspects of the game and did not invalidate any strategies it would be a great addition to the game.
I should also point out that "heavy defense" in a lot of events have been so brutal. My favorite team (<3) wasn't able to compete in all eliminations due to defense being played and a robot being torn in half. So a game without defense would be relaxing every now and then.

[Kevin Sheridan]

Originally Posted by ChargerRt6

I am a senior and I was convinced to do it. I didn't do it for me. I did it for my friends on my team and helping them have fun next year. From my 4 years of being on Team 60, I learned that fundraising is a difficult task that needs hard work. If I could work with my alliance and the opponent to make money less of an issue, I will. By the second match of finals, for me, it wasn't about winning. It was about having fun and helping the teams.

Originally Posted by Gemmendorfer

Also somewhat knowing the teams, pretty sure the alliances would try it even if there was no reward added onto the challenge...

Seems like the reward was a motivating factor for this student. He should never have had this thought come to mind at a regional. It is disturbing that a student chose to play differently because of monetary incentive. I find it insane that you guys think its ok to bribe these students.

Were the other drive teams pressured into agreeing with this? Were the other teams also thinking about their future rather than the competition at hand? If the answer to any of these questions is yes than the reward was a resounding failure. Students should not be put into situations where they have to change how they compete in order receive monetary benefits.

[TheOtherGuy]

Originally Posted by Libby K

I'm not questioning anyone's integrity - truly - if the guy's on the board, he's gotta be doing something right. I'm questioning the logic behind offering this at all.

I believe you! I just feel he's receiving a large amount of criticism for something I see as trivial to him. In all honesty, I think he just wanted us to have fun.

Originally Posted by Libby K

Winning or becoming a regional finalist get you medals (of differing colors) and high-fives from the judges and refs. What more do you want?

He wanted to raise the level of competition, which doesn't do much for the winners or finalists. The challenge was a little hard to attempt in qualifications, and a little hard to predict before seeing any matches. Like I said, it worked better last year (all 6 teams hanging, happened 3 times).