pic: BAE Systems-Granite State Regional High Score

[whytheheckme]

Originally Posted by Neo3One3

As a member of one of the teams who attained this high score today at the Manchester Regional, I am seriously unsettled from some of the comments to this. How can an alliance who have well built robots that played the match extremely well, working together in every way, possibly be against anything that FIRST is trying to promote.

It has been suggested that the alliance should have not scored so many points, but why is that? Is it more gracious to intentionally do worse? I don't think many, if any people here could agree with that.

I agree. I have no problem with attaining as many points as possible, seeing that this is the purpose of the game. Again, I believe that this particular match was played fair and square, and this these robots really work awesome together. Why should you limit yourself to what you can do?

Jacob

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by DDAwg3

Personally I found this match the exact opposite of what is suppose to be one of the biggest elements of FIRST -(Gracious professionalism) not with play like that......they had the match wrapped up and still went and put not just one but two robots up for the additional 60 points. I feel they should be ashamed not applauded. As amentor I would not of allowed that by my team.

I have to strenuously disagree on two fronts.

First, it's been discussed over and over that GP can not be used to measure others; it's only really used well as an internal measurement of what you should be doing as opposed to what you are doing. But Rich Kressly has gone far deeper into the subject than I, so I'll leave it to him.

Second, and perhaps more important: there is nothing that 1824/175/501 alliance could have done to help their opponents; they can't score for the opponents without penalty, and they can't go up the opposing ramp without a DQ. I can only assume (and feel free to correct me if this wasn't the case) that taking a sip of the mighty Eighterade doesn't involve much defense on the part of the alliance scoring it, either. When you're in a match, you have to remain focused on a million things other than how far ahead or behind you are.

Back in 2005, my old team (1293) had the distinct misfortune of competing against 179 at Palmetto--twice. (Anybody who was around 179 that year knows how crazy that robot was.) While we groaned both times we came up short, I couldn't fault 179 at all--they went hard, played smart, and took their four QPs (and oh so many others) all the way to a Palmetto Regional title. In the end, I wasn't bitter because of it; rather, I wanted to figure out how the heck they did what they did so well.

I fully expect my team to put up the best effort possible, whether we're up against Beatty or a brick. Sandbagging because of the opponent is both a poor strategy (what if they pull out a fluke hang at the end of the match?) and a really lame thing to do, both for the spectators (they see a boring match), your team (scouts see you only hanging a few ringers instead of your true potential), and for the opponents (many of whom, I imagine, feel like I did in the above paragraph).

[katiyeh07]

Originally Posted by Billfred

I have to strenuously disagree on two fronts.

First, it's been discussed over and over that GP can not be used to measure others; it's only really used well as an internal measurement of what you should be doing as opposed to what you are doing. But Rich Kressly has gone far deeper into the subject than I, so I'll leave it to him.

Second, and perhaps more important: there is nothing that 1824/175/501 alliance could have done to help their opponents; they can't score for the opponents without penalty, and they can't go up the opposing ramp without a DQ. I can only assume (and feel free to correct me if this wasn't the case) that taking a sip of the mighty Eighterade doesn't involve much defense on the part of the alliance scoring it, either. When you're in a match, you have to remain focused on a million things other than how far ahead or behind you are.

Back in 2005, my old team (1293) had the distinct misfortune of competing against 179 at Palmetto--twice. (Anybody who was around 179 that year knows how crazy that robot was.) While we groaned both times we came up short, I couldn't fault 179 at all--they went hard, played smart, and took their four QPs (and oh so many others) all the way to a Palmetto Regional title. In the end, I wasn't bitter because of it; rather, I wanted to figure out how the heck they did what they did so well.

I fully expect my team to put up the best effort possible, whether we're up against Beatty or a brick. Sandbagging because of the opponent is both a poor strategy (what if they pull out a fluke hang at the end of the match?) and a really lame thing to do, both for the spectators (they see a boring match), your team (scouts see you only hanging a few ringers instead of your true potential), and for the opponents (many of whom, I imagine, feel like I did in the above paragraph).

You have just put every thought of mine on this topic into magical words...thank you

[EnderWiggin]

Originally Posted by DDAwg3

Personally I found this match the exact opposite of what is suppose to be one of the biggest elements of FIRST -(Gracious professionalism) not with play like that......they had the match wrapped up and still went and put not just one but two robots up for the additional 60 points. I feel they should be ashamed not applauded. As amentor I would not of allowed that by my team.

Thanks for pointing this out, people seem to think this is a competition [/sarcasm]

[JulieB]

Let start by saying I have not seen the match.

The drive team aren’t trying to be ungracious they down there talking about how they want to play the game. And there not saying “hey guys we are winning, stop we don’t want hurt the other teams feelings” as harsh as that sounds teams are only thinking about there game. And they have spend 6 weeks of blood, sweat and tears into something they want to see do its best. And I know most teams want to be both gracious and compete. When all is say done its COMPETITON it’s just a game we do to have fun and to learn about engineering and technology.

This is my opinion not an opinion of my team.

Good LUCK everyone awesome score guys.

[arabsponsor]

When the drive team is on the floor they are concentrating on doing the best they can. Every team has worked hard for 6 weeks and want to see how their engineering miracle performs. I applaud these 3 teams for working so effectively with one another. I hope we see a match like this at Peachtree and Palmetto. It would be wonderful to see. I think every team out there dreams of putting on a stellar performance like this.

[jgannon]

What's more painful: for someone to keep beating up on you when they're ahead, or for someone to be so confident that they've beaten you that they let up? There's no right answer; different people have different opinions, different feelings, different emotions. The best way to be beyond reproach is to always just play the game to the best of your ability. My understanding is that in this particular case there was no taunting, no jeering, just an alliance who played what is so far the highest-scoring round of Rack 'n Roll, and thus no need to accuse others of being ingracious.

[whytheheckme]

Originally Posted by jgannon

What's more painful: for someone to keep beating up on you when they're ahead, or for someone to be so confident that they've beaten you that they let up? There's no right answer; different people have different opinions, different feelings, different emotions. The best way to be beyond reproach is to always just play the game to the best of your ability. My understanding is that in this particular case there was no taunting, no jeering, just an alliance who played what is so far the highest-scoring round of Rack 'n Roll, and thus no need to accuse others of being ingracious.

I agree. BUZZ even came up to us after and thanked us for playing with them, and told us that we were an awesome alliance/team. I don't believe there were ANY hard feelings anywhere, in fact, I'm not even sure what the big deal is here... The alliance simply played the game and followed the plan that they probably set out beforehand. Score,Defend,Ramp. Sounds pretty generic. They were just able to implement it very well.

Jacob

[David Brinza]

The red alliance acted in a manner consistent with the tournament rules in achieving their highest possible score in a match (especially in their first match)!

Note added in edit:
I didn't realize that the score was for Match 5 of the Elimination Round (the match results from BAE hadn't been posted). The High Match Score only has ranking implications in the qual rounds. I noticed, though, that six teams (including 501) managed to score 256 match points during qual round matches at BAE - good work!

Per the game manual (Section 9):

9.3.9 Highest Match Score
The scoring system will keep track of the highest match score earned by each team during the qualification matches but this score will not be displayed.

The highest match score is a tie-breaker if the ranking points aren't sufficient to break a tie in the standings. The teams on that alliance couldn't assume that a complete ring wouldn't happen in another match. Their robots getting up on the ramp wasn't about "rubbing it in", it was earned as a result of hard work by those teams. The red alliance was simply being the best they could be...

Competitive spirit drives FIRST teams to achieve the highest score possible. If FIRST will be "the sport, the 21st century sport" (per Dean's kickoff message), then the FIRST community needs to applaud the effort it takes to play the game at peak performance. Especially when doing it right out of the box.

Good job, teams!

I just wonder if this score will stand through next weekend??

[EricH]

I did not see the match, but I have this to say:

I hate having someone back off on me during a competition, especially when they're ahead. That's kind of condescending, definitely bragging, and it's demoralizing to me. If you're going to cream me anyway, do it right!

[Rick-906]

in my opinion, buzz and co. played extremely well, and are completely undeserving of any accusations or unprofessional play!

while they were a great alliance, they were by no means unbeatable [which we proved in the semis].

these guys had their strategy down, and they executed it perfectly, while we were focused on scoring final points, they scored the 2 12" ramp bonuses and came back from a losing score to win the deciding match.

good work guys!

[Tom Bottiglieri]

Originally Posted by DDAwg3

Personally I found this match the exact opposite of what is suppose to be one of the biggest elements of FIRST -(Gracious professionalism) not with play like that......they had the match wrapped up and still went and put not just one but two robots up for the additional 60 points. I feel they should be ashamed not applauded. As amentor I would not of allowed that by my team.

I hate to be profound, but..

Of everything I have ever read on Chief Delphi, and believe me, I don't miss much, this statement has to be the most ridiculous things I have ever seen. I think its a bogus claim to make that team Buzz, quite possibly one of the most influential and inspirational teams of them all, would purposely do something that went against the "morals" of FIRST. They went out and played a clean, fair match. Sure, the alliances weren't "balanced" or "fair", but may I ask when life is? You must remember that we play with alliances of three teams, and the third team can make or break a competition. Apparently 501 and 175 had great scouts because they were able to pick up such a great 2nd round pick in 1824. Every other alliance had the chance to pick them, but none did, which is their own loss.

Now, any of the alliances in eliminations could have beaten the 501/175/1824 alliance. NO team out there this weekend was polished enough to be called "dominant". So apparently, 501 and Buzz not only have great scouts, but a great strategist. They played the game in a way which made the most sense to them. Each team complimented each other, and they played off of their opponent's weaknesses. This seems totally "fair" to me.

And just for the record: After that match, I gave that alliance a standing ovation. That is the only time I stood up for ANY team all weekend. Now, I'm pumped to start strategizing for my next regional. ALL because of that one match.

[griff549]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

I hate to be profound, but..

Of everything I have ever read on Chief Delphi, and believe me, I don't miss much, this statement has to be the most ridiculous things I have ever seen. I think its a bogus claim to make that team Buzz, quite possibly one of the most influential and inspirational teams of them all, would purposely do something that went against the "morals" of FIRST. They went out and played a clean, fair match. Sure, the alliances weren't "balanced" or "fair", but may I ask when life is? You must remember that we play with alliances of three teams, and the third team can make or break a competition. Apparently 501 and 175 had great scouts because they were able to pick up such a great 2nd round pick in 1824. Every other alliance had the chance to pick them, but none did, which is their own loss.

Now, any of the alliances in eliminations could have beaten the 501/175/1824 alliance. NO team out there this weekend was polished enough to be called "dominant". So apparently, 501 and Buzz not only have great scouts, but a great strategist. They played the game in a way which made the most sense to them. Each team complimented each other, and they played off of their opponent's weaknesses. This seems totally "fair" to me.

And just for the record: After that match, I gave that alliance a standing ovation. That is the only time I stood up for ANY team all weekend. Now, I'm pumped to start strategizing for my next regional. ALL because of that one match.

may i point out that one of the morals of first is sportsmanship and humaliating a allaince so you can have a high score is not showing good sportsmanship if u ask me. this wasnt even against my allaince and i still think it is rediclious. did they really need to score over 200 points to win they could have stoped after 100 and would have won. so to back up my mentor this is not a rediclious statement at all if you think about it.

[Dan Petrovic]

Originally Posted by griff549

may i point out that one of the morals of first is sportsmanship and humaliating a allaince so you can have a high score is not showing good sportsmanship if u ask me. this wasnt even against my allaince and i still think it is rediclious. did they really need to score over 200 points to win they could have stoped after 100 and would have won. so to back up my mentor this is not a rediclious statement at all if you think about it.

In my mind, I'd find it more humiliating if the team put a little bit of effort into the first minute of it then just give up in an attempt to make the opponent look better.

If I'm going to be beaten by a team, I want them to show us what exactly they are made of.

[Jonathan Norris]

here is another video of the match (its nh_qf1m2): http://soap.circuitrunners.com/2007/movies/nh/