301 points! and could have done more

[jspatz1]

Originally Posted by TheOtherGuy

Is it really that bad!?

What is "that bad" is the precedent it sets, and the pandora's box it opens. Where does this stop if it is allowed? Do we want any individual with money to be allowed to offer cash prizes at FIRST events to see teams perform feats they would like to see performed? This challenge was not directly in sync with the goals of the game and the competition. It encouraged teams to achieve a scoring feat just for the sake of the scoring feat. What do you tell the next sponsor who would like to pay to see their favorite feat achieved? Who can make the longest shot? Who can complete the most catches? Who decides if a challenge with a monetary prize is a legitimate one and whether to allow it? What amount is considered OK to offer, and what amount is too much? How many cash prizes can be offered at one event? This all may sound absurd, but once the precedent has been set to allow it, on what basis do you not allow it? I understand that the sponsor's intentions were good, and that he only wanted to "raise the level of competition", and that he had done it before. Having third parties offer cash prizes at FIRST competitions for performance feats is a bad idea. Not just because of this incident, but because of the next one, and the next one.

Originally Posted by TheOtherGuy

Can you point me to the negative effects of this challenge?

Putting into question the legitimacy of the results of the regional. Putting into question the legitimacy of the scoring and OPR data from the regional. Tempting teams and students to play in a different manner than they would otherwise play in straight competition. Tempting teams and students to play for a goal other than goals of the tournament. Setting the precedent for additional 3rd party monetary rewards that cannot be governed. Creating discord between the events with cash prizes and those without. Most importantly, inviting accusations of "pay-for-play" from FIRST detractors that could discredit the FRC and FIRST.