Talk:Robot Wars: Series 8/Heat 5

Right. Part of me thinks this should be a forum post, but I'll do it here because I've listed them both as judges decisions on my sandbox and I'd like to make sure a discussion of it is in the mainspace.

Let's talk about those head-to-head judges decisions (Gabriel v Beast, Ironside 3 v Pulsar). I must say I found them highly questionable. Giving the judges the power to award a knockout decision goes against everything the 3 and 2 point system stands for. Someone calls cease, if they don't you don't get to retroactively call cease just because the knockout you were hoping for didn't happen. Awarding a victory via judges doesn't make it not a victory, it just makes it a 2 point victory, but the judges seemed to think that they had to make it a knockout. The only practical difference of that is that a robot gets to move higher up the leaderboard than the other.

I must say how sorry I feel for Team Mouse, who were pretty much screwed over by both decisions, as they allowed Gabriel and Pulsar to score 6 points instead of the 5 that they should have gotten by winning via judges. Had even one of those robots been given the 5 points they should have given, Ironside 3 would have been in the final. It probably would have lost to Pulsar again, but the robot who dominated so many of the battles in Heat E, to go out the way they did seemed horrendously unfair.

These judges decisions that are actually knockouts smell really bad to me. I must say, I'm not a big fan. Accusations of favouratism come from things like this. Am I the only one who thought this?  Toon Ganondorf    (t    c)  11:59, August 22, 2016 (UTC)