In order to allow equal time between matches for all ALLIANCES, the order of play will be:
QF1-1, QF2-1, QF3-1, QF4-1,
Then QF1-2, QF2-2, QF3-2, QF4-2,
Then QF1-3*, QF2-3*, QF3-3*, QF4-3*
Then any QF replays due to ties*
More time between Quarter-final rounds 
oo dang, that is interesting.
Alas, the serpentine draft still lives. And is it just me, or do the rules say an alliance canât call their timeout for an opposing alliance anymore?
**<T20> **
[LEFT]In the elimination matches, each ALLIANCE will be allotted one TIME-OUT of up to 6
minutes. If an ALLIANCE wishes to call for a TIME OUT, they must submit their TIME
[LEFT]OUT coupon to the Head Referee within two minutes of the Head Referee issuing the
field reset signal preceding their match. When this occurs, the Time-out Clock will count
down the six minutes starting with the expiration of the arena-reset period. Both
ALLIANCES will enjoy the complete 6-minute window. In the interest of tournament
schedule, if an ALLIANCE completes their repairs before the Time-out Clock expires, the
ALLIANCE CAPTAIN is encouraged to inform the Head Referee that they are ready to
play and remit any time remaining in the TIME-OUT. If ALLIANCES are ready before the
6-minute window, the next match will start. **There are no cascading time-outs. An**
**opposing ALLIANCE may not offer their unused TIME-OUT to their opponent.**[/LEFT]
[/LEFT]
[LEFT]
[/LEFT]
I read this rule as well, and was very happy to see this bracket arrangement. Not only does it give alliances more time, it also sets in stone what order the regionals will/should run the matches in. Too many times you get the alliance pairings, but have no idea if youâre the first match-up, or the last.
They also brought back the âup-and-downâ alliance selection process. I think I still like it. 
BEN
Unfotunately, yes. While i wish they wouldnât do this (GP), they need to keep things on schedule. Notice, however, that there is no limit on other help from the other alliance (tools, manpower, parts, etc.).
Notice also, that this rule just eliminates cascading Time Outs. An opposing alliance can still call a Time Out for their opponent. Observe:
Red Alliance wins Match 1, but Redabot goes down in the process. They call a Time Out for repairs, but run short. Rather than call up another team, the choose to struggle on with the crippled Redabot, and lose Match 2. All tied up, the Blue Alliance does the GP thing and calls their Time Out to give Red Alliance a little more time to try to repair Redabot for the final round.
All nice and within the rules. Well I think. shrugs I suppose it might depend on if the refs think the Blue Alliance has no reason to call a Time Out and, I guess, just declare that the Blue Alliance doesnât need a Time Out and canât call it.
When I first read the rules my first reaction was âOH NO!â. At the Colorado Regional Finals this has been one of the major ways teams have shown GP to each other. But read it again, it says that you canât âgiveâ the time-out to an opponent. They just donât want one alliance being gifted 5-6 time-out coupons from other alliances.
The rule says nothing about conveniently using your time-out to be nice to an opponent. Though I do wonder what the cascading time-outs means. Does that mean no 2 time-outs in a row?
-Chris
Iâd be mighty upset if a ref decided you donât âneedâ a timeout, and revoked it. You could call a timeout just to cool your motors. You donât need any reasoning for doing so.
Thatâs right refs should not be come part of the game. Just like in some sport events you do not want to remember the call a ref or umpire made more than what happen in the game.
This rule does not disallow calling a timeout for your opponent. It simply is clarifying that you canât call a timeout after a timeout (thus giving 12 minutes) and states you canât give your coupon to someone else (letâs say, if you were eliminated). Since the timeout is an actual coupon, we all know someone would have asked, âcan we give our coupon to another team if we are eliminated?â The GDC was just being pre-emptive.
Iâm not aware that referees have the authority to decide you donât âneedâ a timeout? And, if they do . . .
:rolleyes: Maybe you should have a can of metal polish and a few rags on your robot cart, so you can insist the robot needs to be a bit more buff for the next match!
[quote] An opposing ALLIANCE may not offer their unused TIME-OUT to their opponent.
[/quote]
Loophole: In the early tournament, when there are a more than one set of matches, is it really an opponent if theyâre not playing against each other?
observe:
alliances 1, 2, 3, 4
alliances 1 and 2 play, then 3 and 4. On the second round, alliances 1 and 2 tie, and 2 breaks down. alliances 3 and 4 play, and tie. alliance 4 calls a time out because 2 doesnât have any left.
Iâm pretty sure Paul has it correct in his assessment
That sounds like solid change that should reall make it easier to run the tournament stage. Also, it makes it more interesting, as instead of seeing the same alliances go at it again, you get to see all alliances one after the other.
Loophole: In the early tournament, when there are a more than one set of matches, is it really an opponent if theyâre not playing against each other?
observe:
alliances 1, 2, 3, 4
alliances 1 and 2 play, then 3 and 4. On the second round, alliances 1 and 2 tie, and 2 breaks down. alliances 3 and 4 play, and tie. alliance 4 calls a time out because 2 doesnât have any left.[/quote]
according to the new rule. after alliance 3 and 4 play, it would be alliance 1 and 2 playing once again. so alliance 4 would now be back in the queue, and would not ba able to use their timeout. correct?
Incorrect in the quarterfinals, where it goes through all four sets of alliances before returning to start. In semis, you have the right order. However, there is a time limit on when you can ask for a timeout. In the scenario above, if 4 called the TO within the time, it would go into effect. If not, it would not. Please read Section 9 thoroughly for the exact rules on this, including time limits.