What if...

What if Dean and Pals decided to not show us the field, but rather to give a vague goal for the robot to achieve? Would it really change the game that much?

While it might be a little more interesting…

*Originally posted by Dan_550 *
**Would it really change the game that much? **

That’s a big yes. First off, I dont think that ‘Dean and pals’ would do that (watch, now they’ll do it because I said that), but if they did, there would be so much confusion to as what was going on with the game, it just wouldn’t work. Leaving the game open to individual interpretation would also lead to disagreements concerning the game later on. I’ve seen many people get quite emotional about the game. Personally, I don’t think that is what FIRST is after. I could go on and on, but I’m going to hold back…

I want to be clear though, that I think it would be very interesting to not have every detail of the game laid out. I’m just answering the question that yes, it would change the game.

hey dan while their at it why not give us a vague idea of what to do with the parts and a vague idea of where the regional are

lets face it if the idea doesn’t make sense

what would be the sense of having a competition and no one knows exactly what should be done

While this would definitely change the game dramatically, it would not be impossible.

Consider any sport where your standing is based on judged’s scores rather than a definite team sport (gymanstics, figure skating, etc.). The game could have a vauge goal for each robot to accomplish, then your robot could be judged based on how well and to what degree your robot accomplished the goal and also the way in which you achieved it.

I’m not sure how well a game like this would go over, but if it were done right we would definitely see a lot more creativity and originality amoung the robots than we have in the past.

Caroline, you’ve hit the nail on the head there! I was looking for an analogy, and there it is, Gymnastics. With a freestyle competition, the robot is judged solely on how well it does a certain task, and how it makes its task entertaining. Thanks for that, Caroline.

That introduces a lot of subjectiveness into the game. I could see teams getting extremely angry and dissatisfied because they received an “unfair score from a bias judge” or something along those lines.

Currently, poitns are awarded on clear objectives. Either the ball is on top of the goal or it is not. When FIRST has to start judging the performance of a robot during a match, people would probably grumble and complain about an unfair score of some sort.

I think for FIRST, objective scoring is much better than subjective scoring.

I agree with adrian… i think it would be impossible to score teams based on subjective scoring… after a day the judges would cleary see the more “popular” teams and there would be the possibility that they would judge them higher…maybe just on the way the team presented themselves or how their robot looked…

Just a though…

*Originally posted by Caroline *Consider any sport where your standing is based on judged’s scores rather than a definite team sport (gymanstics, figure skating, etc.).

And consider how few people watch these sports as compared to the big 4 team sports.


I think we can all agree that they’re looking for a more media friendly game this year. Its much easier for people to see a game and figure out that “oh, they got a point because they put the ball in the goal” than try to understand why the judges gave that team a 8.3 when another team got a 9.5 for doing seemingly the same thing. At least thats what I try to figure out on the rare occasion i watch figure skating (no offense intended to any ice skaters).