pic: BAE Systems-Granite State Regional High Score

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

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.

As a friendly reminder, the true spirit of GP is found on and off the playing field, and ChiefDelphi definitely qualifies as the latter. So before everyone becomes so quick to hit the Reply button, think about what you are going to write. Would it qualify as 100% Grandma Approved?

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.


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.

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??

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!

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!

Team 175 always drives up the ramp. That has been a major point of our strategy for two years. When you can score bonus points by driving up a ramp, do it. We won the Chesapeake regional last year on the strength of doing just that.

We know what it’s like to be beaten by a wickedly awesome score. Last year in the quarter finals at nationals, we were beaten by what I believe is the highest score from last year-171 points. Was it disappointing to lose? Yes. But was it a good show? Yes, it was one of the best matches played all of last year.

And I agree with jgannon, how would it honestly feel to have a team just stop playing because they are absolutely sure that they have beaten you? Frankly, that sounds a lot worse to me than seeing the opposing team play as hard as they can and losing to them by a landslide.

We’ve all been in matches where our alliances have been crushed, or have dominated. That’s part of the luck of the draw. Being on the receiving end a big lose has value, too. Did the drive team fall back to a backup plan or just choke? Did they give up or continue to drive in a calm and professional manner? As an athlete, I would always do my best regardless of how out-classed I was. I don’t want my opponents easing up on me, because I won’t reach my personal best.

This match was extremely clean and there was NOTHING unprofessional about it. If I was on the losing side of this match I wouldn’t be offended, especially when it’s the first match of the QF. Time to come up with a new game plan in a hurry! That’s what seperates winners from losers. Adapt and overcome, or give up and go home. There is still victory in losing. I would have left this competition knowing that I was beaten by the winning alliance in a fair match. 501, 175, & 1824 obviously had a great alliance and a great game plan. It’s obvious watching the match that they executed their game plan perfectly.

Congratulations to team 501, 175, & 1824 for winning the Granite State Regional!

Billfred pointed out correctly that the alliance would suffer penalties for trying to assist the losing alliance. There was a match at VCU this weekend that was LOST by the alliance dominating the rack scoring because they were hit with several penalties. This was also a Quarter-Final match, not a qualifying match, things are just a little different.

Eliminations are to win period.

As far as banning the 1-4 seeds from choosing each other, why?

Alliance selection is about picking teams and robots that will compliment your strengths and offset your weaknesses. I’ve seen many of these high seed alliances LOSE a competition because they simply chose the other high seeds, and not the teams that would work best with their own robots. It’s no different than certain professional ball teams that spend ridiculous amounts of money to acquire the best players and still lose.

I’ve seen many high scoring robots low in the standings after the qualification matches, only because of poor alliance pairings and bad luck, and I’ve seen 1 and 2 seeds that were pulled to the top by their qualification alliances inspite of their own mediocre performance. I even recall a “no show” at a post season event, that nearly ended up as an eigth seed alliance captain because they weren’t pulled from the match lists and the alliances they were supposed to be in ended up giving them a 4-2-0 record! :yikes:

Moral of alliance selection… choose well grasshopper!

Listen one and all…It was not my intention to get everyone’s panties in a bunch AND I was not making a reference that any of those teams were not very good or effective…IT was very evident throughout the tournement that 175 and 501 were scoring machines and only increased their potency by picking their ramp team. NO DOUBT ABOUT IT! Also I have no ill feelings or before or after any of these teams and have played with and agianst them in the past. I also want everyone to realize we did not get the oppurtunity of playing with or against any of these three teams and I have no sour feelings or don’t think they are deserving champions of the GSR.

All I did and still stand by my initial (YES I SAID MY) view, not trying to throw sand in the eyes of the champion but for everyone to come up with all these reasons.

Listen they did have great scouting, plans, drivers, robots, etc. and with that said they were finely tuned enough to know they did nt need the points, the ratio for any tie breaker, etc.

Once and for all to kill the poor discussion ---- My bad for saying it apprehently but that it still one man’s view and I have no ill feelings toward them. I apologize if I have OFFENDED any of you…



I have always found this take on things within FIRST puzzling. It seems that within the last few years (probably post-2001) there is an increasing school of though that some how if a team plays the game to win they are just being bullies and it is not gracious professionalism.

I have to say I reject that. Dean likes to talk about “coopertition” but frankly FIRST is still a competition and that is what makes it fun, that is what makes FIRST work, that is what makes the business world that FIRST tries to hard to emulate work. Without it we are stuck with something as horrific as 2001.

Lastly, from a strategy point of view I can say that over the years I have seen lots of teams who have taken the approach of being gracious professionals on the playing field loose by taking some of their balls/whatever and giving them to the other team. On the playing field I think a team has every right to compete, play hard (within the rules), and play to win. As long as that team can go up and shake hands with the alliance after, that is what gracious professionalism is about. Perhaps the best example of my thinking on this is there are teams who will play quite hard on the field perhaps even damage a robot from the opposing alliance but the true test of gracious professionalism is when that same team goes over and helps the opposing team that they damaged fix their robots for the finals. That is how it is supposed to work. Sadly if we want to talk about “ungracious professionalism” this match was the least of what I saw in terms of ungracious professionalism.



How in the world do you doubt their GP for playing the game! People have been complaining all week about the low scores and now you are attacking them for an awesome match.

I was really impressed to see this round.
I think that scoring the extra 60 points was being GP. If I was a grandmother of a kid on 501, 175, or 1824 I would have been very proud

Getting the points for the ramp did not embarrass the other team any more (i don’t think). The crowd got excited though. If they had gone to the other alliance after that round and bragged that would not be GP. But they didn’t do that.

FIRST is about doing your best, and 175, 501, and 1824 did that. Great job guys!

I’d like to point out on Buzz’s behalf: last year during the finals at Chesapeake, we were paired with them and one of our opponents suffered a big amount of damage to one of their gearboxes. They called their timeout to try and fix it, but when it didn’t look like they’d have enough time, Buzz suggested we call ours to give them a shot. This is after our alliance narrowly lost the first match of the finals, so we were one match away from losing.

Not trying to make any real point, just bringing up a story that this thread reminded me of. It’s the kind of thing that makes FIRST so much more than other competitions.

Yes, last year I was on 181, the loser of that set of 3 matches. Buzz was very, very Graciously Professional by giving up their time-out. I believe that Buzz is a very good team, both physically (their robot), and GPly. After the second match yesterday, their whole drive team came up to us (Myself and the rest of the drive team,) shook our hands and thanked us for playing. I am always really impressed by Buzz.


I was the driver and alliance captain (John Willis) for 501. The ramps were the best part (imho) of driving. It was the most challenge for me inside to line up and go. I had the chance and wanted to play the game since that is the whole purpose for our dedication to building a robot for 6 weeks. This is my opinion and im sad that it seems you think we were being unprofessional.

Ill admit i made one unprofessional mistake when i pushed a robot and then they caught the rack and tipped when i pulled away and were caught on them. That was my dumb dumb and i graciously appologized right after the match and offered any services to help fix them if they needed it.

Team 501’s goal this year was to play the game. We did and buzz helped us put up the tubes for the 256pts and 1824 deserved there chance at scoring points. They spent 6 weeks to build a bot with not much help and they made it to finals. i was not going to let them down by not driving on there ramp.

As for the seed picking it does seem unfair. I can see that because in the 2 days of competition i was so scared that we wouldnt be the top 1 or 2 seed. Because on average those two pair up and win. and i did want to win like most teams. I do agree with that but from our standpoint picking buzz was the best move for the team as was picking 1824.

I’m sorry if we upset anyone because 501 would like to make a positive image for itself among first. It has greatly influenced my life and i will always help first as a mentor when i am older.

The mere thought that scoring as many points as you can to win is ridiculous. It displays a flagrant disillusion about the values of FIRST, Gracious Professionalism, and competition.

A similar discussion arose for scoring for your opponents last season.

I said it then as well:

The thought that opponents are scoring for you to “rub salt in your wounds” is looking at it the wrong way. It’s not a matter of insulting pride, it’s a matter of placement (for both you and them), and in truth, gracious professionalism. Consider for a moment the alternatives. If this thread doesn’t exist about The Triplets scoring for the opponents, instead it would be a thread complaining about why the triplets beat them 300-10. “Why not simply stop at 100 and gather up all the balls so you can win decently, and have no chance at losing at all because you are denying us any points? Instead you went and tormented our loss even further by running the score up!”

Now this year, it’s a penalty to score for the opponent. So, we have more lopsided scores. And what happened? Someone started complaining about that. Now I don’t believe FIRST gave that penalty to discourage scoring for the opponent (but rather because of the limited quantity of game pieces).
Especially considering that this really actually could have become a close match very very fast. What if the opposing alliance had placed spoilers on the rack? They could have reduced that 256 row to a mere 16 points (2 rows of 3).

Scott, I wasn’t offended, nor did I see this as an affront to the winning alliance. However, I do see your views as hurting the FIRST program in general. FIRST is about inspiring students. Great matches inspire students.

Even when our team is on the losing side of a match, we get inspired by a great winning alliance. We try to take something positive out of the experience. Whether it’s new mechanical systems that made a great robot, great driving skills, a unique strategy, or just a well executed plan. Is it fun to lose? NO, but we WANT to go back and work harder! “Wait 'til next year” isn’t a bad thing, it’s a door opening to unlimited possibilities.

FIRST has gone out of their way this year to try to bring parity to the competition through the rules. Some of these changes aren’t for the better. Instead of inspiring teams to work harder and improve to compete with some of the “big boys”, they’ve tried to limit the “big boys” so others feel like they have a chance with a mediocre design. Inspiration doesn’t come from average performances or machines, but from the exceptional.

If teams are designing robots and playing the games within the rules, FIRST DOESN’T NEED NASCAR RESTRICTER PLATES!

May the best designs and best game play win. Game ON!

And, this is just my opinion. I don’t expect everyone to agree with it either. :wink: