|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: IRI - 4th Alliance Team?
I would have to say that the 4th team is almost to serve the other teams. This is because they are in the finals only because of the other teams picked them. If they play great, if not that was part of their "job" as to help out their alliance.----That made sence right?
|
|
#17
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: IRI - 4th Alliance Team?
I had a much longer post typed out, but the wording wouldn't work right. So I'll just suffice to say this:
As a driver, I didn't particularly like it. As a strategist, I really liked it. |
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: IRI - 4th Alliance Team?
Strategy-wise, the 4th robot was a brilliant idea.
But once your robot doesn't take the field... blame shoots around. Although it was a good idea, I think that telling one team that they can't play can bring about hostility between teams. And that certainly isn't GP. |
|
#19
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: IRI - 4th Alliance Team?
Quote:
Each year, I am amazed when I see teams who get picked and they try to take charge of the alliance and don't listen to the alliance captain. This regretfully takes place when the partners don't know each other very well, and more often when the alliance captain is a young team who picked an old veteran team. Of course, the alliance captain needs to listen to the input of the partners, and the partners need to state their opinions. However, these teams on the alliances are not equal partners. The Alliance Captain is in charge. All of the partners need to follow their leadership. If they disagree, they can tactfully voice this opinion in a proper way without causing hostility. Andy B. |
|
#20
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: IRI - 4th Alliance Team?
Quote:
Although I agree with you, the alliance captain doesn't always have the experience to know whats best to lead their team so when vet teams take charge, they have a [usually] solid history that enables them to make MORE informed decisions to benefit the alliance. On Paper - Bottom Line: Captain > ALL In Reality - Bottom Line: More Experience > Less Experience. |
|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: IRI - 4th Alliance Team?
If your goal is to have the “best of the best” compete against each other, don’t have the 4th team play (this is one of the things that makes IRI stand out of the crowd).
If your goal is to have more winners, and have the forth team feel like a winner instead a tag-a-long, require the fourth team to be played. Maybe require the fourth teams to all play in the first match. I agree with Sean, we felt very strange accepting an award that we did nothing to deserve. When we returned home and were asked how we did by friends and family, we said, “we won”... but...but. It is a very strange position to be in. We are used to earning awards that we receive. Rest assured we could not have been with better teams, they tried their best to make us feel included in the alliance win, but...but. It is one of those things that you have to experience for yourself. I would also like to see a poll, of the teams that were put in this position, as well as a general poll for everyone to vote in. Kettering Kickoff will probably have a fourth alliance partner, and they will probably be required to play. FIRST should adopt the fourth team format, play or not. Great job IRI team you did it again. |
|
#22
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: IRI - 4th Alliance Team?
This is sort of the same thing as a couple years back, where we selected 3 alliances and only played 2, in First Frenzy, That was useful, convinieant, and effective.
Alliances should be able to pick their backups, because it needs to fit their stratagy, if one of the 3 robots gets dammaged and is forced to withdraw from the competition, they move the highest ranked team not picked to go play for that alliance. instead, this is a much better solution. the order which they picked in also satisfied me, going 1-8 twice then for the backups going 8-1 was great. this type of system can't be used at Regionals (ie: minimum 32 teams needed, 30 teams at Waterloo 2007.), but this is a REALLY good idea for Championships |
|
#23
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: IRI - 4th Alliance Team?
I have to say I liked the way things went at IRI for obvious reasons. BUT I would like to see the fourth team play as much as they would like to play. IRI did as good a job as possible by allowing an alliance to pick a fourth team and letting them be part of the strategy from the start. Allowing the fourth human player on the field for all matches and perhaps a fourth coach make things even better. Under the current FRC rules, the alternates are not included until the last minute and have no benefit of listening to strategy discussions or alliance goals. The alternates do not get a chance to share in trophies either whereas the fourth alliance partner does. Good job IRI planners!
|
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: IRI - 4th Alliance Team?
Going back to what Travis and a few others have highlighted at IRI this makes sense having a 4th draft because the quality of the field is unbelievable. I thought it worked out well and gave many teams that went out there and proformed well but may have been over looked a chance to get a piece of the finals action. I think this should be done at larger regionals and Championship. The chances of that happening though are probably slim to none still it was fun to see.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Best Alliance in the Alliance Era of FIRST | Corey Balint | General Forum | 28 | 05-09-2006 20:14 |
| 3 Team Alliance + On Deck | Joe Johnson | Rules/Strategy | 9 | 09-01-2005 11:22 |
| More then 2 team alliance??? | Jeremy | General Forum | 35 | 29-09-2004 16:28 |
| 4th Annual Ramp Riot: Team List Update | OZ_341 | Off-Season Events | 14 | 09-10-2003 15:25 |
| Congratulations to the Team 71 alliance | archiver | 2001 | 1 | 24-06-2002 03:15 |