"Fixing" matches

[Shawn60]

I just wanted to see what others think about team using the strategy of "fixing" matches so that they leave one another's stacks alone to get high QP points. I personally don't like. I think it is against the spirit of the competition and gracious professionalism. Yes it does happen in the real world (Enron comes to mind) but I think we are trying to make a better real world. I think it is more interesting and fun to let the two alliances fight it out and have to adapt and think on the fly and that it detracts from the robots on the field.

I am wondering what you think. Please explain why you do or do not like it. I am very interested hearing both sides.

Thanks

Shawn
Team 60

[Jeff Waegelin]

We had an opponent try to do that to us last year. They said they would help us get 50 points if we agreed to let them win. We declined, and smoked them 50-20. Fixing matches is ridiculous. Let it play as it will. If you tie, you tie, but don't agree to it beforehand.

[David Lantz]

Do you mean that the alliances will meet and decide not to touch each-other's stacks or something else? I think its wrong if they decide to score lots of points just so the winning team will have an insane amount of Q-points. However if a team is winning a match and decides to help their opponent score more points by moving or stacking bins then this is perfectly all right. I only think it is wrong if both teams decide ahead of time to "fix" the match.

[Jonathanb]

Fixing Matches? why that's untolerable!

[CHSRobotics03]

This was a big problem in the AZ Regional. We were approached several times to do it-- The #1 seed team, I won't say who but you can look it up, was more than 50 points ahead of my team, who was seeded SECOND! The majority of the teams there were disgusted with the obvious "gentleman's aggreements" made throughout the competition. We even started a petition going to try and come to a regional consensus that this is against the meaning and intentions of FIRST-- Suprisingly enough, the #1 seed refused to sign it. I think FIRST needs to crack down on this although there is no way to regulate it. :-( Any ideas? It's disappointing to see that there are teams and MENTORS who don't feel that fixing matching is immoral-- I thought FIRST was about GRACIOUS PROFESSIONALISM-- am I mistaken?

Alexis

[Gope]

I think this is exactly what FIRST dosen't want to happen. It dosen't make the competition fair, and can make some matches very boring. I saw alot of this happening in St.Louis, and it boiled me. But as far as I know there is no specific rule against such a thing, maybe someone can mention it to Dean?

[Wayne C.]

Originally posted by Jonathanb
Fixing Matches? why that's untolerable!

Our team TOTALLY agrees and proceeded to discretely alert the officials to this at a recent regional. As a high seeded team we were offered a deal by our opponent that they would leave our stacks alone if we later picked them. We declined and the stacks for both teams went down as played. The offending team did not get anywhere by doing this and now sits on our blacklist.

Get with it people- its only a game!! If stacking bins is more important than your self respect I suggest you go elsewhere.

If you want a trophy that bad I'll give you one....

WC

[Ryan Albright]

i think fixing matches is wrong and shouldnt happen it does take away from the fun i mean we didnt sitt ther for 6 weeks busting are buts to build a robot and then going to competiton to get out of this the easy way i want to see the robots at its full potentail but you know what first isnt all just buildign if you thinkg aobu tit its alot of poltics some for the good some for the bad

[soezgg]

in our regional (annapolis) there were 2 'fixed matches' in which teams agreed not to knock down stacks

the scores were like 160 something and 140 something

the REAL matches, that were played in accordance to competitive gaming got up to 280

nuff said.

[Wetzel]

I want a trophy!!

That said, this is not 2001's Co-Opertition. It is 2 on 2,not 4 together.

If you want your stack to remain standing, defend yourself.



Wetzel

[Yan Wang]

I considered the idea of cooperating between 4 teams to get higher points because I thought it was plain stupid for teams to keep knocking them down and with by points of 20-10. However, I realized, wait a second, this isn't going to work. No one is going to let someone win huge and keep true to their agreement. It's a good idea and would show one of FIRST's ideas of cooperation, but it's never going to happen and pointless to try.

[Wayne C.]

Originally posted by Wetzel
I want a trophy!!


Wetzel

Gee Wetzel- I have a tiki trophy left over from Brunswick Eruption if you seriously need one that bad. You just need to prove your machine can follow an obstacle course.....


WC

[Ken Loyd]

Originally posted by CHSRobotics03
...We even started a petition going to try and come to a regional consensus that this is against the meaning and intentions of FIRST...

Alexis

Alexis,

We had a bad regional as you could tell. We only managed to play in four matches. I saw a lot of the matches from the stands and a few were very confusing to me. It was with pleasure that I signed Team 68's petition. I hope we do not again encounter this problem in Los Angeles and Houston.

Ken Loyd
Team 64

[Danimal]

I don't know any circumstance where having an agreement with the opposing team would be ethical. It might not be against the rules but what about the rules of "life".

I suspect that if FIRST had an inkling that match fixing was going on they would find a way to make it a point of disqualification.

Best,

Danimal
Pit Boss
Hartford, '01, '03

[Mark Pettit]

Our team was also approached at AZ. At first, I was for the idea since other teams were advancing in the standings due to this practice, but some members of my team who were thinking more clearly than me convinced me that it was not in the spirit of GP. We did the equivalent of signing the above mentioned "petition" by displaying a copy of it in our pit area and we never fixed a match..
I approached the FIRST Regional Director and asked him what FIRST's position is. He said that FIRST is enjoying seeing the moral dilemna that the scenario has created. He also reminded me that it is not doing the teams that fix matches any good because fixing will not work in the finals where QPs don't matter. Those teams who are highly ranked through fixing will be the first teams to be eliminated in the finals.
I say that it's not cheating because there's no rule against it, but it's not right either. I hope that there are enough teams out there that understand the true meaning of GP and gamesmanship that the practice does not continue at other regionals or at the championships.