2003 Game Flawed....

[Andy Grady]

Maybe so, maybe not. You can play the first match in such a manner that if you lose, you still can come back. All that matters is that you play the game with the correct strategy, inherent to any game. Just because the scoring system is not traditional does not mean it is flawed.

If you look at how chaotic this game was, many teams didn't quite understand the rules, so in the first match in an elimination round, they would keep themselves on the ramp, so on and so forth. Fact of the matter is if there is a difference in EP's of 90 points or more after the first match in an elimination round, it should be virtually impossible for any team to make that up if the leading team just plays smart. Score yourself 0 points, take out the stacks...there is nothing they can do to win. Not overly difficult with two free robots on the field. This, my friends, makes for a flawed game. I agree with Justin, there should be no such thing as a 1 match final. These games were more fun when it was two out of three...and isn't that what this is all about...making engineering fun? This is why we criticize the game, because we want it to be more fun. When its more fun, more students get into it, and it tends to stick in their minds. I understand that FIRST wants to get a point across about working together and other similar messages, and thats ok. But in the end, we all just want to have fun...you can get the same message across without making the game a metaphor.

thats just my opinion

Congrats To Everyone,
Andy Grady