FIRST Says NO Negative points!

[Raul]

Here is an email answer I received from FIRST:

Your question:

This has been highly debated on the Delphi forum. Can a negative base score result due to an opponent robot creating a stack with a single container?

Answer:

This point will be clarified in the next Team Update. There will not be
"negative points".

36F

[Raul]

And here is another related question - I hope they do show scoring examples:

Question:

Update 3 was not completely clear on SC9. Can you show examples of the scoring when a robot is holding a single container more than 2 SHU's high in the opponents scoring zone?

Answer:

This point will also be clarified in the next Team Update.

36F

[illumanat'i]

now all we need is the next team update .....


three weeks later: team update 4 released

[meaubry]

I'd expect that FIRST is now on the Tuesday, Thursday, Friday schedule. I believe that they had server problems or something that was hindering them from answering the posts. It looks like they are catching up fast. Be patient, I'm sure it won't be 3 weeks.

[Quentinfool]

now dont all the people worrying about negative points feel kinda silly?

[Noah]

Team Update 4:

Multiplier stacks must have a continuous chain of contact through a set of
containers from the Scoring Zone (stack starts with a container touching the carpet
in the Scoring Zone) to the highest point on the stack (e.g., stacks supported
EXCLUSIVELY by an opponent robot, in which there is no direct contact
between the stack and the Scoring Zone, are ineligible to be the multiplier stack –
any containers in such a stack are only included in the base score, as identified in
Rule SC8).

[JTH]

And there was much rejoicing!

[Quentinfool]

yeaaaa |>
|

[EStokely]

So far I gotta say I really really like the way the "Ask FIRST" site has been working. The updates are good and consise. And the site is fairly easy to navigate.

I am glad no negative scores. It made us rethink what we were building.

[Collin Fultz]

Originally posted by Quentinfool
now dont all the people worrying about negative points feel kinda silly?

actually...no. it was a ver unclear issue that was open for debate. that rule could have made or broken a team.

[Quentinfool]

the thought of negative points never crossed my mind until these forumns. i think if there would have been negative points they woulda told us plus they want simple scoring.

[Yan Wang]

Reading about all this SHU and negative scoring... I laugh loudly realizing one of my friends and a team member on our team is named, 'Shu'... oh boy we've got some bad jokes about that.

[illumanat'i]

i would like to repeat what i said, oh, about three, maybe four times, each in different forums:

NEGATIVE POINTS WOULDN'T OF CHANGED ANYTHING!

you might be saying what? how can that idiot think negative points wouldn't of changed anything?

weelllll. . . qualifying points = score of winners plus 2 times score of losers....

if losers score = -15, winners qualifying points = score plus NEGATIVE 30 (i repeat -30).... if you get minus qualifying points, whats the point of giving negative points? so what was the big deal?

this post was not intended to offend anyone or make fun at their momentary lack of knowledge!