Think about it

Think about this if you think all this debate about collusion should not be such a big deal:

Do teams that collude have a distaste for team that do not? Probably not, unless they refuse to collude with them! They figure if most other teams do not go along with the idea to artificially increase their QP’s, they have a better chance to seed in the top 8 and get to pick who they want.

Do teams that do NOT collude have a distaste for teams that do? Most likely yes. They figure that teams that colluded did not fairly earn the right to pick before them. They also fear that the top 8 seeded positions will be occupied mostly by teams that colluded and they will have no choice but to accept an alliance with one of them!

My point is:
Not colluding is the higher road to take.

I really like the bonding that occurs between teams in FIRST. But, if what I said above is true, it will cause animosity between teams. This is NOT good for FIRST.

I wish FIRST would come out with a statement one way or another on this before the Championship.

Well said, Raul. I know I haven’t seen much collusion at my two regionals (Great Lakes and Midwest), but the few times I did see it, it really disappointed me. Do the right thing, and play the game for yourself, the way it was intended to be played.

The question I want to be answered is why people do it? Do they wanna win that bad that they’ll rig matches? Please tell me, cause I’m not seeing a reason for it.

I think one reason many teams do it is because they see it as a type of strategy or something. Either that, or they’ll do anything (legal) to win.

Another simple way to think about it:

Collusion = controversy among teams
NO Collusion = NO controversy among teams

Which does the FIRST community of teams prefer??

Which is the path that a Chairman’s award winner would profess to follow?

No Collusion.
I know our team prefers that kind of thing didn’t happen… at all. But that’s in a perfect world, and I wouldn’t count on anything being done about it. :rolleyes:

I admit I thought the controversy over this was over. But it sounds like it is still going on if recent posts are any indication.

I agree with Raul. Collusion is destructive because it gives an advantage to teams that ask for favors from their opponents with the sole purpose of artificially inflating their QP’s. Teams that do the right thing (no deals, no upfront agreements, just play the game) are disadvantaged and might even be put into the position of being picked by a colluding team later on (it’d be nice to say no, but who wants to decline a spot in the big show?).

It would be great if FIRST would take a stand (how about an annoucement at the drivers meeting, FIRST?), but I’m not counting on it.

In the absence of that, the teams need to take a stand. We should make our opposition to collusion visible. We should explain this to the less experienced teams so they are not taken advantage of. We should consider taking extra effort to take out the big stacks of teams that suggest collusion. And we should not pick as allies teams who suggest collusion.

Our team has never and will never collude.

Ken
Team #65

*Originally posted by Raul *
**Another simple way to think about it:

Collusion = controversy among teams
NO Collusion = NO controversy among teams

Which does the FIRST community of teams prefer??

Which is the path that a Chairman’s award winner would profess to follow? **

Couldn’t of said it better my self…

Andy Baker told me this one:

“Do what people wouldn’t talk about when you win the nationals.” - 'Nuff Said

*Originally posted by Matt Attallah *
**Couldn’t of said it better my self…

Andy Baker told me this one:

“Do what people wouldn’t talk about when you win the nationals.” - 'Nuff Said **

To clear this up… I’ve had the great opportunity to be an inspector 4-5 times over the past few years. When a team has a design issue where they are in a “gray area” with regard to the rules, I often say

“When you win the Championships, you don’t want anyone pointing to your robot or team and questioning whether you were ‘legal’ or not… do you?”

Most of the time, this makes sense and the team makes the effort to do what they can to be as purely legal as they can.

Andy B.