Posted by Dan, Student on team #10, BSM, from Benilde-St. Margaret’s and Banner Engineering.
Posted on 3/28/99 12:24 AM MST
In Reply to: Yeah, but what happens when… posted by colleen on 3/27/99 10:59 PM MST:
>>>>>so the alliance of A and B go on to win it all. what happens to C? they did not actually
>>>>>compete in the elimination matches but their alliance did win, do they get to wear the
>>>>>gold too? how many of us would like to be team C? i wouldn’t want to go up there and get
>>>>>a medal for something i didn’t win, nor would i want to be the team that wasn’t good
>>>>>enough to play
That team should at least be happy it got some sort of approval by another team. Also, if you’ve ever sat on the bench of a very good sports team you know this feeling. It’s pretty helpless whether you win or lose, but it’s definitely better then watching from the stands.
>>>>> which two teams play each match? does the team who was in the top 8 always have to be
>>>>>on the field? or can this tri-alliance choose to have the two chosen teams play?
it was mentioned earlier that it’s the top 8 team’s decision who plays which matches. Frankly, I look forward to the occasion when that team decides it’s in the alliance’s best interest to sit out a match.
>>>>>if they can, what was the point of having a top 8, why not pick random teams from a hat
Because the top 8 team should be the best of the three. The third team introduces another layer of strategy and if a top 8 team is too stubborn to put the best robots on the field, they will pay.
>>>>>…the top 8 pick the team partner that best suits them, you don’t want to have to worry
>>>>>about choosing two alliances who suit each other.
I can’t see why that would be so hard. If the idea of a third team is such a pain, then don’t think about it and pick a buddy team of yours.
>>>>> how far in advance will you have to inform the opposing side of what team you’re
>>>>>playing with?.. or is there no room for strategy except absolutely on the fly? that makes
>>>>>for a whole lot of extra stress and pressure put onto the on the field players, and will rely
>>>>>much more heavily on their ability to perform under intense pressure rather then the
I really don’t think this is such a trouble. With 3 teams, there are only 3 possible alliances that you will face in a match (A-B, A-C, C-B). As for the pressure thing, I don’t think it’s that big of deal and it doesn’t even begin to make your robot anything less than the deciding factor.
>>>>>what’s to say this will save time, or take up less time then if you had the top 10, 14,
>>>>>16…pick on alliance and play… you figure if you have the tri-allainces switching partners
>>>>>between each match and everything, it’s bound to prolong the process, and the space,
>>>>>time, and chaos of organzing three robots around is much worse that two. that’ll seem to
>>>>>me to make it all more hectic in the long run…
If you had the top 10 or 14 pick alliances then you’d have to include byes or totally change the tourney process: not good. If you had 16 teams choose partners you more than DOUBLE the number of elimination matches from 7 to 15.
I don’t see any reason why a third team sitting behind stage with a robot is going to make things that difficult at all. And if a team has to carry their robot across the field at the end of the match anyways, then I don’t see the difference in having another team move their robot on the field instead.
>>>>>summing it all up, i just haven’t seen anything wrong with the process so far. if one, or
>>>>>both of the robots in your alliance breaks down, such is life, in the past if that happened,
>>>>>it was no big deal, you couldn’t pull another robot out of the crate and compete with it,
>>>>>you dealt with the problem at hand… it’s part of the territory.
This solution also solves the problem of having so few teams at nationals participate in the tournament. This solution is what we have been begging for. If 8 more teams can go home from nationals and feel happy that they were choosen over 200 other robots -even if they DID NOT PLAY - then that can only serve to inspire them further.
>>>>>the concept of the alliance exists, in part, so you learn to have trust is the abilities of a
>>>>>team other than yourself. you have to believe that no matter what happens, you can work
>>>>>it out, that’s part of the teamwork and part of the challenge involved in this year’s
>>>>>competition… the challenge this year was deciding how much to do, how much to rely
>>>>>on that other guy standing next to you, the strangers who are now your teammates… that’s
>>>>>the hardest part of the challenge, why shouldn’t we work to overcome that?
This solution doesn’t change the fact that there are ALWAYS 2 teams in an alliance and teamwork is still essential to winning. This ADDS more teamwork in fact, that top 8 team needs to hold themselves to realistic expectations, if they don’t it can mean the elimination of their alliance.
>>>>>i know the qualms too, that out of the 200 someodd teams, only 16 will move on, but why
>>>>>not only 16?.. so why is everyone so concerned about winning?
Does it hurt to have that third alliance? Even if they are not utilized at all, does it hurt? This solution actually increases the number of losers remember, even though there will be 3 final “winners.” This solution is NOT about winning, it’s about PARTICIPATION and RECOGNITION.
>>>>>if you can’t trust and believe in yourselves enough to think you’re one of the top 16 best
>>>>>teams in the nation, then how do you expect any potential alliance to think you’re good
>>>>>enough either??.. you have to meet the challenge, have faith is the way the competition’s
>>>>>set up, and believe you’re good enough to make it
This does not imply these extra 8 teams don’t believe they are good enough to be in the top 16. A team’s final ranking will most likely not reflect their “true” ranking due to natural inaccuracies in any tournament. Those of us asking for more teams in the tournament do not believe it is our only way into the tournament, I’m concerned for the overall effectiveness of the competition - as are Dean and Woodie. The fact is that if 8 more teams are recognized and can possibly participate, those 8 teams are happier with nothing taken away from anyone else.
>>>>> personally i don’t want to be one of 24 that gets picked but doesn’t play, breaks down and
>>>>>gets replaced, or wears a medal that two other teams one… that’s the point where i’ll think
>>>>>no one has trust or faith in my team and it’s capabilities, and then and not if we are not
>>>>>part of the sweet sixteen, will i feel like we lost…
What if you are one of 200+ teams that doesn’t get picked AT ALL?? Would you rather sit there and watch, or at least cheer for your own alliance?? You have both choices with this solution. If you feel offended that a team doesn’t trust you, you should realize that your machine is not always best fit for every match. Would you honestly want to compete even if you knew your alliance wouldn’t do as well? I think there are new lessons to be learned with this solution.