|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
After qualification matches concluded for the day at PNW District Championships, it was decided that there would be an exhibition match between the current top 6 seeded teams at the event. I thought it would be very cool of course to see this head-to-head match up between the best teams because it usually doesn't happen in randomly generated qualification matches. As much as I wanted to see this match, I thought it would be unfair of course to the other 57 teams competing at the event. The other teams did not receive this luxury of practicing an additional match. The match played was obviously not counted to the additional scores of the current top 6 teams. I also thought the teams received an additional benefit of being able to practice together and see which 'dummy' alliances worked well, and which didn't which could carry over into alliance selection tomorrow. I addressed my concern to Kevin Ross, the FRC PNW District Chairman, prior to the match and was told that everyone at the event had played close to over 48 matches and that one additional match wouldn't effect anything. I agreed the practice wouldn't effect other teams severely other than they got to practice together directly. That's to say I have never played with #### team in qualifications but got to practice with them during this exhibition match and we worked well together thus forming a bond that could be passed through to alliance selections. This exhibition match did not occur last year at the PNW District Championships and wondered why it occurred this year.
I just wanted to voice my concern as I thought I was cheated along with the other teams that did not get to practice with a potential alliance pick. Here is a link to the exhibition match that was played. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI3siLZ6br0 |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
1318 and 1983 had enough practice this year, I doubt one match further confirmed their chemistry.
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
I was watching this match on the webcast with mixed feelings. I agree with your point that this exhibition match amoung the top teams could mess with alliance selection Ie canburgulars could be valued more because it benefited the blue alliance. Also this match was an additional benefit of ranking well that was not specified that in the manual so its quite the grey area. I was an awesome match to behold but the precedent really isnt a great one to set.
Ps who made the call to mske the match happen? |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
I believe his name is Kevin Ross, the founding chairman of Washington FIRST Robotics.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
This is similar to the matches that the HOF teams ran at Worlds last year for The Weather Channel.
Those teams got more practice, worked with each other for potential elims, and it was FIRST approved. The precedent is already there. |
|
#6
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
That was a great idea! Thanks for sharing the video link.
I hope this can be done at other events... the elimination format doesn't always allow the top teams a chance to play together. It was very kind of the top six teams to take part in an exhibition match that presents the possibility of additional wear and tear and potential damage to their machines, just for the entertainment of those watching. It seems fair and reasonable to take the top six teams for this match. I'd suggest that if you feel this offers a significant advantage to those teams then you should make plans to be amongst the top six at the end of day one next year. Apparently there are advantages to being amongst the top eight at the end of qualification, too. Jason |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
Call me a stick in the mud, or say that it doesn't matter, but to be completely honest, I would not like if this happened at my event.
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
Stick in the mud...
|
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
I like it, and think it would be cool to see at our events (whether or not we're in the top seeded six).
Robots are fun to play with and watch, so exhibition matches are awesome in my opinion. You can make a point that it's unfair that these teams get to (have to?) run their robot through an additional match before playoffs, but I think the scheduling gods already do a good enough job of making the matchups unfair. |
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
Why couldn't the match have been played after playoff matches concluded? Why have it in the middle of qualification matches?
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
Quote:
1. This isnt Aerial Assault. Wear and tear on well constructed, well driven robots is fairly minimal. If you don't drop stacks on your robot, your robot will be fine. 2. I dont suggest that this gives those teams a significant competitive advantage but there certainly is some advantage in an "elims dry run" with two teams that you might have the ability to pick. 3. There are advantages of being in the top 8 at the end of qual rounds. The picking procedure is clearly outlined in the game manual so everyone knows how it will play out. I wasnt personally there so I dont know when or how teams we notified about the exhibition match but it certainly doesn't seem like it was anything formal. 4. Its interesting that you say there are advantages for the top 8 at end of qual matches seeing that this exhibition match was in the middle of qual matches. In theory all of these teams could have horrible qual matches tomorrow, they probably wont though cause they're good , and drop out of the top 6. Should the new top 6 at the end of quals get an exhibition match as well?5. This leads to my final point why I dont appreciate the notion behind an exhibition match of the top seeded teams; It is an arbitrary bonus awarded to these teams that is not governed by the manual. Giving arbitrary bonuses and arbitrary penalties to teams is unfair imo because we all teams should know what to expect at competitions by reading the manual and updates or else we have lost uniformity as it regards to the rules. |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
I don't know if I "agree" with the exhibition match concept or not. I don't think it really bothers me at all either way.
My team was one of the teams that played.... Competitively, it did not help us one bit: We were on an alliance with two robots that effectively do exactly what we do and have the same limitations. Frankly, I don't think we'd even choose one another if we were allied.... Due to those limitations, we agreed to pick up an RC and go to the landfill - something we have never done or even practiced.... We also put in our backup drive team - students who had not competed at all this weekend... We gained no competitive advantage. As for wear and tear - we've taken a lot of damage during matches this year. The risk is still there - though we were really careful not to harm our bots. My only concern is that the alliances were randomly configured and, though the "strengths" of the robots was reasonably comparable, one side had a wider range of abilities and complemented one-another so much better than the other that the "result" was a foregone conclusion. |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
I wasn't a huge fan of this either. No, it doesn't give the alliances a competitive advantage, but I still think it's unfair for the rest of the teams. I think I just stand on principle.
|
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
Personally, I concede all the points risen about this being a potential unwritten advantage in alliance selection for high ranking teams. BUT, I think there is a lot of value in an exhibition match for spectators. With everyone in the stands for awards ceremonies, the exhibition match generated a lot of hype and enthusiasm and it helped break up the usual monotony of recycle rush.
|
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PNW Exhibition Match Concerns
See, I always thought the twinned regionals (ie. GTREast/West when they were in the same venue, a couple in MN and a few others over the years) should have had a Exhibition match of the winning alliance from both regionals to crown an ultimate winner. I don't think people would decry that as unfair.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|