[FRC BLOG] Bride of 2017 Updates

[IndySam]

I can't believe that there is no discussion about "The Bride of Frankenstein" being a possible game hint

[EricH]

Originally Posted by IndySam

I can't believe that there is no discussion about "The Bride of Frankenstein" being a possible game hint

Nah, too obvious. They're bringing back an old game and playing it again but different. The question is which one, and I'm not willing to take a guess--there's only 24 of them to choose from.

[TDav540]

Originally Posted by EricH

Nah, too obvious. They're bringing back an old game and playing it again but different. The question is which one, and I'm not willing to take a guess--there's only 24 of them to choose from.

Well it's probably not gonna be 2008 and 2014. 1 in 22 seems like good enough odds

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

Probably. The question is going to be whether they keep the two fields for Einstein in each event, or have Mass in one and Energy in the other.

My vote is for Mass and Photoelectric in one, Energy and Relativity in the other. On the photoelectric effect and general relativity hang all of modern physics.

[efoote868]

I sent Frank an email about this a while ago. Glad to finally have the answer

[dodar]

Originally Posted by EricH

Nah, too obvious. They're bringing back an old game and playing it again but different. The question is which one, and I'm not willing to take a guess--there's only 24 of them to choose from.

But isnt Frankenstein, and his bride, put together with parts from a bunch of different bodies? Would lend to believe of another amalgamation of previous games.

[DaveL]

Originally Posted by sdangelo

Good guy Frank separates Carson and Carver, removing some verbal confusion. Thanks Frank!

To help the dyslexic and the nearly so, I would like to see unique first letter names.
For example: move one of the "D" names (Daly or Darwin) to Houston and find a name to replace either Carson or Curie.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
FIRST Championship Houston
Carver
Galileo
Hopper
Newton
Roebling
Turing

FIRST Championship St. Louis
Archimedes
Carson
Curie
Daly
Darwin
Tesla

[jwfoss]

Originally Posted by dodar

But isnt Frankenstein, and his bride, put together with parts from a bunch of different bodies? Would lend to believe of another amalgamation of previous games.

2004.

[Taylor]

Originally Posted by IndySam

I can't believe that there is no discussion about "The Bride of Frankenstein" being a possible game hint

An assembly (NOT stacking) game could be very cool.
I'm envisioning a cross between Logomotion and Hangman, then flip the switch and the figure comes alive to sing "Puttin' on the Ritz"

RIP Frank Barone

[mwmac]

I wish the powers that be had considered a Hawking subdivision given that the gentleman is still alive (will be 75 in January, 2017).

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by James1902

Eventually there would have to be a thread explaining the lack of winning teams coming from the division. It'll be titled: "Darwin's Origin of Superstition"

I feel particularly bad for the yearly Darwin Award Winners.....

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by mwmac

I wish the powers that be had considered a Hawking subdivision given that the gentleman is still alive (will be 75 in January, 2017).

Good idea. Although maybe they have a rule like stamps - can't honor any living person.

But if it's a game involving throwing things, I could imagine a game announcer saying "hurling on Hawking."

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by Tom Line

I feel particularly bad for the yearly Darwin Award Winners.....

...especially when I think about the stories of those few who won the Darwin Award and lived to tell about it.

[Sperkowsky]

Personally as a creationist I'm not too thrilled with a Darwin division. I'm sure there are others that feel similarly. Not trying to start a war here I just figured I'd throw that out there. Being Darwins 'discoveries' are controversial im not exactly sure why first thought it was a good idea to use his name opposed to thousands of other names that they could have potentially used.

[Gravity]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

Personally as a creationist I'm not too thrilled with a Darwin division. I'm sure there are others that feel similarly. Not trying to start a war here I just figured I'd throw that out there. Being Darwins 'discoveries' are controversial im not exactly sure why first thought it was a good idea to use his name opposed to thousands of other names that they could have potentially used.

Not that I'm trying to argue, but he was an extremely talented naturalist and geologist. As a compromise I propose we host the "Spencer" division, named after the famous Percy Spencer.

- Gravity