Throwing Totes

[TheLiterateOne]

Upon reading through the rules (by which I mean Ctrl+F for "throw"), there is nothing against throwing the totes. Is this a legitimate strategy? Because my team is seriously considering it...

[D_Price]

Are you saying as in the robot throwing the totes or the human played throwing the totes? Also, did you check under "launch" ?

[Taylor]

Throwing them where? Totes can enter the field of play by team members only through the Tote Chutes; if you want a robot to throw them, I suppose you could but if they break or go to the other side of the field, then expect some penalties.

[TheLiterateOne]

The robot throwing the totes. I'm not even sure how it's planned to be used as a legitimate strategy. I'm just wondering if the rules say anything about it.

[hootsowl]

Well, if you think that throwing the totes might cause damage to them, then that's a violation of 3.2.3 G16... but otherwise throwing doesn't seem to be on the list of prohibited actions.

[arichman1257]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I assume that you mean throwing them over the step to the other alliance's side of the field to take out their tote stacks.
With the exception of UNPROCESSED LITTER, if the actions of one ALLIANCE cause any of the other ALLIANCE’S game elements that are in scoring position to no longer be in scoring position, the affected ALLIANCE will be credited points for the displaced game elements at the conclusion of the MATCH.
This is from 3.1.2 of the manual. Knocking over the other alliance's totes would not help you because they would get the points anyway.
I read the entire game manual for this year's game for the rules test my team issues for driving.
G1 ROBOTS whose operation or design is dangerous or unsafe are not permitted.
This is in section 3.2.1 of the manual. It doesn't say no throwing totes but I'd bet that it would be considered unsafe.

So basically, don't throw totes. :D
The Manual: http://www.usfirst.org/sites/default/files/uploadedFiles/Robotics_Programs/FRC/Game_and_Season__Info/2015/2015GameManual0123.pdf

[cmrnpizzo14]

The robot throwing the totes. I'm not even sure how it's planned to be used as a legitimate strategy. I'm just wondering if the rules say anything about it.

Not sure how it's planned but.....

Because my team is seriously considering it...


To fellow Rochesterians, I would recommend against it.

[Koko Ed]

Upon reading through the rules (by which I mean Ctrl+F for "throw"), there is nothing against throwing the totes. Is this a legitimate strategy? Because my team is seriously considering it...

Considering the amount of danger you would be putting everyone around the field in I think Dante would have some very stern words for your team.

[BBray_T1296]

The robot throwing the totes. I'm not even sure how it's planned to be used as a legitimate strategy. I'm just wondering if the rules say anything about it.

In other news, I will begin selling these T-Shirts shortly: :D

[IronicDeadBird]

Popping a tote any large distance is very hazardous. If you are planning on using mad skills to shoot a tote onto the top of a stack I won't lie I considered it.

[Kevin Leonard]

There's no reason to throw totes in this game, unless you're a team with infinite resources and the ability to shoot totes to create a stack (Even the poofs won't do it, dude.)

Interestingly enough one of 20's prototype intake mechanisms has the ability to shoot totes and aerial assist balls as an added "feature". It was pretty amusing to find when we were testing, but also a completely useless feature.

In summary: Don't throw totes, focus on the tasks that matter and make sense in Recycle Rush.

[Addison4300]

Popping a tote any large distance is very hazardous. If you are planning on using mad skills to shoot a tote onto the top of a stack I won't lie I considered it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omMoT0rlXmU

[g_sawchuk]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omMoT0rlXmU
Those were two clips pieces together.

[Fields]

I would strongly consider it!

Throwing/launching is not prohibited. However, it has to be safe. If there is a decent chance of a game piece leaving the field you'll be in trouble. If it's not a long throw http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=132285 I bet you can get it to pass.

As far as being the best strategy... don't worry about it! I regularly intentionally take odd ball strategies when I design (or especially play card and board games).
Do I fail? A lot.
Do I win? Sometimes.
Do people laugh and say "Awesome! I can't believe that worked!"? Often.


What do I hope to see this year?
A thrower
A double/triple/etc bot
A conveyor
Something longer than 12 ft
A misshaped carousal

[Mrcope9]

In other news, I will begin selling these T-Shirts shortly: :D

Definitely want one of these regardless. Add that to my FRC shirt collection

[Addison4300]

Those were two clips pieces together.

Yes, I know. But hey, It's the idea that counts! ::safety::

[Kevin Leonard]

I would strongly consider it!

Throwing/launching is not prohibited. However, it has to be safe. If there is a decent chance of a game piece leaving the field you'll be in trouble. If it's not a long throw http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=132285 I bet you can get it to pass.

As far as being the best strategy... don't worry about it! I regularly intentionally take odd ball strategies when I design (or especially play card and board games).
Do I fail? A lot.
Do I win? Sometimes.
Do people laugh and say "Awesome! I can't believe that worked!"? Often.


What do I hope to see this year?
A thrower
A double/triple/etc bot
A conveyor
Something longer than 12 ft
A misshaped carousal

I'm going to discourage this- not because I want to discourage creativity in design, but for two reasons:

1) Safety. If a volunteer gets a concussion because an uncontrolled or poorly controlled robot fires a tote into their face, both that volunteer and that team are going to have serious issues.

2) Its not reasonable. This is a stacking game. Tote-tossing can easily draw fouls if it lands on the other side, it can easily knock over other stacks on your side, and its very difficult to actually stack totes this way.

[EricH]

Benefits: Faster stacking (hopefully), less driving (hopefully)

Drawbacks: Lots of misses, high chance for penalties (multiple types, some with red cards attached), high safety risk due to flying heavy objects.

Ya know, just a quick look says that maybe I should not try this. Two possible benefits vs at least three definite drawbacks.

[Mike Marandola]

Those were two clips pieces together.

No way! Next you'll be telling me this was fake. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKpFZGwJ82o)

[RoboChair]

This strategy is only valid if your robot is throwing totes through some window like frame on your robot. Call your robot "The Defenestrator!"

[Toa Circuit]

Throwing totes seems like a big safety hazard, given that:
1. It's unexpected; this year isn't a projectile game.
2. The totes are hard; past FRC projectiles have been soft to cushion impact
3. The totes are massive; about three times the weight of the Aerial Assist ball.
4. The totes have corners. They are not balls that are pretty much flat when they hit you.
5. There's no netting like in 2013 to prevent tote-alling something.

All of these mean that a flying tote is much more prone to damaging something than an Aerial Assist ball, and there were some incidents with those if memory serves correctly...

If I were a ref I'd be disabling a robot that is throwing totes based on this alone...

[Joe Ross]

Considering that the Cheesy Poofs are throwing totes, I'd say it's a viable strategy. https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=903012906405099&set=vb.122857901087274&type=2&theater

[g_sawchuk]

No way! Next you'll be telling me this was fake. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKpFZGwJ82o)
No, because that's "tote"ally legit.

[barn34]

You mean like this?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n8wQOAa35HU

Because I can't see that idea backfiring. At all. :rolleyes:

If you're seriously considering this, you may want to revisit your game analysis matrix. Something tells me you've jumbled a weighting factor somewhere. Just a hunch.