Scoring system for 2004?

[DougHogg]

Originally posted by Jim Zondag
The best scoring system is for 2 minute robotics games is the "Winning Bonus" system. We have been using this system in the Michigan OCCRA Robotics League for the past 3 years and it is much better than any scoring system FIRST has ever used.
In the winning bonus system, you get a fixed point bonus plus your score if you win..you just get your score if you lose. We scale the bonus value to be approximately what we expect the winning score to be in an average match. This gives you about a 2x score if you win. We like low scoring games (easier for the audience), our games usually have a max possible score of 30-50 points. Last year we gave a 10 point winning bonus. The beauty of this system is it encourages both offense and defense. If you win 1-0 you still get a half decent score. If you lose 30-35, you get a good score even though you lost. Basically, the better you are, the less winning matters because you can "outscore the system".
FIRSTs systems put too much emphasis on scoring, but make defense too easy. Our way is better.

That system definitely sounds better than the scoring system we had this year. However it seems like it would still encourage "opponent agreements" to leave stacks up, let all the robots on the ramp, etc. since there is an advantage to both alliances to have high scoring games.

I would like a system which doesn't reward "collusion", does reward a team for being better than their opponent, and keeps both teams competing to the end of the match. I think just making the qualifying points equal to the gap in the scores would accomplish that. The losing team gets negative qualifying points equal to the winners positive qualifying points. The only complaint I have heard so far is that this system would encourage "blowing out" your opponent, but that doesn't worry me. I personally would much rather be "blown out" than tipped over and immobilised (as happened to us this year on several occasions).