Lunacy = Greatest Game Ever

[ShaunT]

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

Second, I see sportsmanship and professionalism as something you step onto the field with, not what you come off with. Meaning that if a team "blows you apart" or out of the water then how is that them not being professional? YOU as the losing team should know you played your hardest and that the other alliance did too. I don't see teams being maniacal about beating other teams when they know they can. Hell, at our regionals there are teams who can pummel others without really trying, but when we lose to them there is no distaste, there is no contempt, there is no lack of sportsmanship. We all play as we would in any other sport. If FIRST believes this is not the meaning of sportsmanship then perhaps they should reevaluate what professionalism means as well.

To add on to this, consider a situation where you know you are going to lose. Do you really want the other team to sandbag half the match because of an arbitrary rule, knowing that they still have a clear victory? I would feel insulted if I played someone and they didn't respect me enough to give it their best, regardless of the strength of the two alliances or the scores after.

It's almost taunting... as if FIRST is making the victors say "We know we can beat you by so much we need to slow down so we don't get penalized," without even having to say it.

And if a team tries to avoid a G14 but ends up causing a loss due to poor real-time scoring, do you think the rule got the desired effect? It could certainly happen; realtime scores could often be off by more than 20 points per alliance. Also, do not forget 188's strategy in GTR. If they managed to get the triple G14 they might have won the entire event.

Understand that it is not the effect of the rule on this game (which was important, but not completely gamebreaking), but the concept of penalizing teams for being to effective at the stated goal of the game that I have a problem with.