Go to Post FIRST isn't a competition. It's a learning experience. Share the knowledge, and you'll learn more because there's bound to be someone who sees something about your project that even your own team didn't realize it can do. - CalTran [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Competition > Rules/Strategy
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-04-2008, 10:16
Bongle's Avatar
Bongle Bongle is offline
Registered User
FRC #2702 (REBotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Waterloo
Posts: 1,069
Bongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via MSN to Bongle
Re: Intentionally Losing Matches

The highly negative response this thread has elicited is hilarious given that many elite (i.e. the ones we all strive to be) teams will actively score against themselves in years when the rules allow it so that they can have a higher RP.

Every time I see a team scoring on themselves, I think of it as being a fairly mean thing to do. They are essentially saying to the other alliance: "We feel that We have you beaten so badly, and are so confident that you lack scoring skill, that We're going to score for you". There aren't many other ways to interpret scoring on yourself. Sure, they're just trying to climb the rankings and it isn't anything personal, but it does send a message to the losing side. I wonder if that is why the last 2 years have had rules prohibiting teams from being able to score for their opponents.

Anyway, 1281 could have benefited (but obviously didn't) from this strategy at Waterloo this year. An effective lapbot, we ended up 8th alliance captain. Since Waterloo is a quite small regional, we might have been picked 2nd by a not-8th team and had a better run during eliminations than we did getting crushed under the wheels of the 1114/2056 juggernaut in quarterfinals.


I think a good way to make this (throwing games to avoid being a captain) strategy ineffective would be to allow teams to deny their alliance-captainship and just join the pool. I'm sure there are teams that would do it, hoping for a selection by a more powerful alliance. You throw away your guaranteed position in eliminations for a much lower probability of being selected by a better alliance.

Last edited by Bongle : 07-04-2008 at 10:19.
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid AdamHeard General Forum 205 08-09-2008 11:45
Intentionally tipping and disabling your own robot FTW... Mr. Lim Rules/Strategy 30 14-01-2008 13:35
losing air pressure razor95kds Pneumatics 3 13-02-2007 07:17
Highest Losing Score Ben Piecuch General Forum 9 03-04-2005 23:17


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 14:19.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi