I’m happy to report that i didn’t see a single round where collusion regarding the human player stacks occured.
While the FIRST representative notified us that they don’t condone or condemn the using of such a tactic, i believe that it made the regional much more enjoyable, and the rounds more legitamate.
Did anyone else notice this in the 4th week of regionals?
I hope that this will persist in the championship event, and that it has been a shift entirely in how people play the game.
from watching the webcast of the midwest regional I noticed no collusion either. It was an enjoyable game to watch I can only hope it continues.
i was on the red side of the field during a match that i THOUGHT might have been a collusion, cause there was a HUGE 5-stack that was untouched
then i went to the other side to get a better look at the bots, and found the two blue bots were being trapped on their side by the two red bots 
good work!
I would definitely agree that there was no collusion. As well as there not being collusion, it seemed that many teams did not care if they optimized their score or not, it simply turned into one alliance beating the snot out of the other. Even when it was totally clear to any idiot that the other alliance was being absolutely murdered, teams still kept pushing boxes out of their opponents zone, and not letting one bot on top even when there were 2 of their own bots on top… I was just really stunned that people didnt care at all for the most part how high they scored.
Cory
I’m defintaly happy with this weekend. I didn’t see much that I would have even thought was collusion. Very fair, and happy to see teams playing the game its was suppose to be played
I didnt see any in philly and there actually was alot of score optimizing no mater what we always try to keep the score equal (except in the finals). in fact we lost a round to 204 (good job) by 8 points and gave them a high score of 236 i think that is waht it was atleast.
Despite the fact that there were no recorded instances of collusion, there’s a difference between collusion and just trying to get more QPs if you know you’ve already won a match.
I believe there was one match which we played in where it actually was fairly obvious we were going to win, despite the fact that the opposing alliance had a stack of four. There was then a miscommunication, and our driver was told to hit it, which he did, so the opposing side lost their stack, and we lost points.
Oh well. It was still quite fun.
Well I am really happy to read the above posts, and I hope that we have a “collusion-free” competition at the S. Calif. Regional this week.
Apart from anything else, I think the comradery is better, when teams are all playing the same game and aren’t involved in heated debates over the rules. We can concentrate on helping each other and having a great competition.
Did anyone do anything at the above mentioned regionals to help bring about “collusion-free” events? Or did teams just decide not to “collude” on their own?
I think that this board has been a great medium for showing support of a no-collusion game. Kudos to ChiefDelphi for providing this medium of communication!
i think 114 had a sign for “collusion-free event” and it worked i guess!
It’s funny, at the Canadian Regional, FIRST openly said they would be looking for collusion during the qualifying matches, and it would negatively affect the teams. Though I personally think this was an empty threat, i feel it worked, as I didn’t see any collusion at that regional either. It’s funny how different regionals had different policies (not being for or against it at SVR, and indicating they were openly against it in Canada).
We have competitive spirit to blame for this.
*Originally posted by BaysianLogik *
**It’s funny, at the Canadian Regional, FIRST openly said they would be looking for collusion during the qualifying matches, and it would negatively affect the teams. Though I personally think this was an empty threat, i feel it worked, as I didn’t see any collusion at that regional either. It’s funny how different regionals had different policies (not being for or against it at SVR, and indicating they were openly against it in Canada). **
As stated earlier, I am overjoyed that collusion didn’t occur this last weekend. As for the Canadian referees helping it to go that way, hey, that makes me feel like moving back to Toronto. Thank you referees for helping to make it clear what game we are playing this year. In the kickoff, it sure looked like 2-on-2 to me, and personally, I think that is a good enough reference on the rules in this case.
Anyway, sorry to beat a dead horse. I tend to think of collusion as more like a multi-headed beast that may rise up again if we don’t totally eradicate it.
While there was no collusion, When we were in a situation where one robot was not fielded, I instructed my team to be unaggressive, If we had the advantage, just defend our stacks and the ramp, and not go after the other robot or their stacks. Everytime we had two versus one this led to a lot of QPs for us. And even if the advantage was to the other team I’d rather have a 40pt then a 16pt game. Playing conservatively can sometimes backfire, In one Match we had two against one and left a lot of points stay on the opponents side. Our ally then proceeded to die on the field with 20 seconds left. No time to save the game, we ended up losing by 3 points.
I didnt see any collusion at Philly either. It was a very physical regional, and stacks rarely survived. In Match 9, teams 204, 122, 224, and 365 (us) all got on the ramp for KOH points. However, we let the other teams up at literally the last sec after a heated KOH battle because we had already won the box and KOH battle. This resulted in a 76-64 victory with 204 QPs. I am glad there was no collusion at Philly or SVR since it represents a trend away from collusion. Following this trend, there should be almost no collusion at nats.