Whats 2 x 0 _ G-14

[Matt C]

Originally Posted by Danny McC

I mean if you hold them scoreless its not your fault that they didnt score so why should you be penalized?

Because in the spirit of FIRST, you should score FOR them.

[Danny McC]

Originally Posted by Matt C

Because in the spirit of FIRST, you should score FOR them.

Haha. What? I am sorry but that makes absolutely no sense.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by Matt C

Because in the spirit of FIRST, you should score FOR them.

Originally Posted by Danny McC

Haha. What? I am sorry but that makes absolutely no sense.

Oh but it does. For at least 5 years now it has been in a team's best interest to beat their opponents but allow them as many points as possible. There have been game rules that prohibit scoring for your opponents, met with much dismay.

[Collin Fultz]

Originally Posted by Matt C

Because in the spirit of FIRST, you should score FOR them.

This is a debate for another topic/thread (preferably not during build season...please???...).

I would like to see a minimum score difference clause added to the rules. Because 4-2 or 6-2 also applies. If my team has six points and the other team has two, I'm not scoring for them because I have no idea what penalties may be called on my alliance. Maybe the other HP entered a super cell too early on the opposite side of the field from our drive station, I don't know he did it.

Also, I'd like to know if this rule is pre-penalty score or post-penalty score.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Matt C

Because in the spirit of FIRST, you should score FOR them.

And what spirit is that?

Ook, I've heard this many times. Please define the SPIRIT of FIRST to me. And please, don't just restate their mission statement from the website as that has nothing to do with spirit of FIRST.

Just read the quopte in my signature and maybe you'll make sense of it. You are free to score for the other team, but don't stress that on others.

[Matt C]

With the lack of (easy) penalties and abundance of scoring elements, I honestly don't see many low scoring matches.

And I appologize for using buzz words, but I refer back to cutt-throat competition and the desire to crush your opponent. I guess I could have used GP, but that too is an overused buzz word at times.

Look back to the scoring structure in 2002 and 2003 for similar rules.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Matt C

And I appologize for using buzz words, but I refer back to cutt-throat competition and the desire to crush your opponent. I guess I could have used GP, but that too is an overused buzz word at times.

Look back to the scoring structure in 2002 and 2003 for similar rules.

Don't, you don't have to apologize for your opinion.

[Danny McC]

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

Don't, you don't have to apologize for your opinion.

Yeah what Stogi said no need to Apologize. But Stogi needs to apologize for coming at me for trying to be the PS.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Danny McC

Yeah what Stogi said no need to Apologize. But Stogi needs to apologize for coming at me for trying to be the PS.

LOL, fine. I iz sawry danny.

[dtengineering]

We've been doing some practice with the balls (or, technically, "Ball". Until our Logo Loc order arrives, we've just got the one. Apparently no one checked to see if Orbit Balls were commercially available outside the USA.) and I am willing to suggest that the chance of an alliance scoring zero... without intentionally TRYING to score zero... is, well... essentially zero.

Consider that red alliance is having bad luck. NONE of the red robots show up to play. That means that the players have sixty shots and just have to hit once to get a non zero score.

I think they'll hit at least once... it won't be easy, but it will be far from impossible for the human players... er... payload specialists... to score.

Jason