|
Re: Worst Scoring System in Years
The only difference I see is this years system eliminates the significance of freak matches.
In 2002 if you win your match 70-0 and your apponents got DQ'd you got 210 qualifying points. If you get any reasonable amount of points for the rest of your matches you would have seeded 1st (this did happen). This year you would get 2 points for winning and move on.
I think if anything the scoring system does a better job of showing robot performance. It shows how good you are at winning. If all you had to do is score one ball more than your apponent why would you do more? If you had 10 balls and they only had 4 why would you hang?
|
The robot competition is the most obvious, visible, and distilled-media-friendly part of the picture... We shouldn't be surprised that it's all that gets into the news coverage, when that coverage is managed by someone who isn't already well versed in what FIRST is trying to do. - Alan Anderson [more] 
Threaded Mode
