Anyone think that anyone will get near 1000pts @ Nat's

[archiver]

Posted by Joel G at 03/26/2001 11:34 AM EST


Student on team #442, Knight Riders, from Lee High School and NASA/ BOEING/ MEVATEC.



Here's a question I have. Yesterday FIRST made a mistake and put down that one match had a score of 1189 pts. This got me thinking about the possibilities of a team at Nationals scoring anywhere near 1000pts. anyone think it really can be done. I know if work the math you can get well over 1000 pts but do you think it can be done at nationals and do you think it will be done in the Finals or in the qualification matches. The reason I ask this is because from what I've heard that the team(s) that get the highest score award will get a chance to meet the president in the White House and also the Chairman Award Winners.

[archiver]

Posted by Ellery at 03/26/2001 12:00 PM EST


Engineer on team #191, X-CATS, from Joseph C. Wilson High School, Rochester NY and Xerox Corporation.


In Reply to: Anyone think that anyone will get near 1000pts @ Nat's
Posted by Joel G on 03/26/2001 11:34 AM EST:



With the right combination of teams it may be possible but from what I've see so far. Besides being able to perform all the functions - the alliance needs to break the time multiplier barrier to accomplish this.

As for the White house thing where did you hear that from? or is it another rumor?

Ellery

[archiver]

Posted by Joel G at 03/26/2001 2:01 PM EST


Student on team #442, Knight Riders, from Lee High School and NASA/ BOEING/ MEVATEC.


In Reply to: Anything is possible...
Posted by Ellery on 03/26/2001 12:00 PM EST:



: With the right combination of teams it may be possible but from what I've see so far. Besides being able to perform all the functions - the alliance needs to break the time multiplier barrier to accomplish this.

: As for the White house thing where did you hear that from? or is it another rumor?

: Ellery

I remember someone telling me this pretty recently but I'm not sure so please don't spread it I might be wrong

[archiver]

Posted by Matt Leese at 03/26/2001 12:10 PM EST


Other on team #73, Tigerbolt, from Edison Technical HS and Alstom & Fiber Technologies & RIT.


In Reply to: Anyone think that anyone will get near 1000pts @ Nat's
Posted by Joel G on 03/26/2001 11:34 AM EST:



In the past (I'm not sure what year it ended but they did it in 1996 but not in 1998), the national champion team visited the White House. This doesn't always mean meeting the President (in 1996, only Al Gore was there). I don't know if they are reinstating that policy. I also don't believe the winners of the Chairman's Award went but someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Matt

[archiver]

Posted by Kevin Sevcik at 03/26/2001 12:12 PM EST


Other on team #57, Leopards, from BT Washington and the High School for Engineering Professions and Exxon, Kellog Brown & Root, Powell Electrical.


In Reply to: Anyone think that anyone will get near 1000pts @ Nat's
Posted by Joel G on 03/26/2001 11:34 AM EST:



I don't think teams really have a chance of even breaking the 800 pt. barrier. Really, you just have to look at the timing and math of the whole thing. The recent 710 was with 4 bots in the endzone, 2 big balls, and a full goal. I'm willing to bet that this is just about the limit of any alliance's scoring ability.
If the alliance is going for a 10x mult, then the only way to top 800 is to do the above, plus have a stretcher in the endzone. Since the stretcher bot can't do anything, this means that you'll need a bot that can pull the stretcher really fast and accurately, and still be able to score a big ball, all in under 40-45 secs. Or, you'll need a bot that can score two big balls at once. I think either of these occurances are highly unlikely. Especially considering how hard it seems to be to control the stretcher.
A second option here would be to fill up the other goal with smalls. The only problem here is that there are almost no teams that specialize in rapidly moving about smalls after regionals. Plus, the bot would have to put 8 or 9 smalls in within 30 secs. All in all, I think this is rather unlikely as well.
If the alliance is going for a 12x mult, then they have even less options due to the time constraints. The alliance would need 67 base points to score 800. Filling up a goal takes atleast 30 seconds (I've watched) so getting 7 in and scoring 2 big balls in under 30 seconds, plus getting the balancer into the endzone would be a VERY tight squeeze. I think the only real option here is 4 endzone, a stretcher, and 2 big balls. This MIGHT be possible, but again, I think the strecher makes it too difficult to pull off.

I havent outlined all the strategies to pull off a 800+ score, of course, but these are the only ones that I see as even remotely possible. Even so, I think the chances are pretty slim, and I think we've seen just about the highest score we ever will. Without the extra 10%, atleast.

[archiver]

Posted by Tom S. at 03/26/2001 4:03 PM EST


Student on team #177, The Bobcats, from South Windsor High School and International Fuel Cells.


In Reply to: Not even 800 (w/o 10% bonus)
Posted by Kevin Sevcik on 03/26/2001 12:12 PM EST:



What if a team was able to stick a ball in between the two balanced goals??

Just some food for thought.

Tom Schindler
Team 177

: I don't think teams really have a chance of even breaking the 800 pt. barrier. Really, you just have to look at the timing and math of the whole thing. The recent 710 was with 4 bots in the endzone, 2 big balls, and a full goal. I'm willing to bet that this is just about the limit of any alliance's scoring ability.
: If the alliance is going for a 10x mult, then the only way to top 800 is to do the above, plus have a stretcher in the endzone. Since the stretcher bot can't do anything, this means that you'll need a bot that can pull the stretcher really fast and accurately, and still be able to score a big ball, all in under 40-45 secs. Or, you'll need a bot that can score two big balls at once. I think either of these occurances are highly unlikely. Especially considering how hard it seems to be to control the stretcher.
: A second option here would be to fill up the other goal with smalls. The only problem here is that there are almost no teams that specialize in rapidly moving about smalls after regionals. Plus, the bot would have to put 8 or 9 smalls in within 30 secs. All in all, I think this is rather unlikely as well.
: If the alliance is going for a 12x mult, then they have even less options due to the time constraints. The alliance would need 67 base points to score 800. Filling up a goal takes atleast 30 seconds (I've watched) so getting 7 in and scoring 2 big balls in under 30 seconds, plus getting the balancer into the endzone would be a VERY tight squeeze. I think the only real option here is 4 endzone, a stretcher, and 2 big balls. This MIGHT be possible, but again, I think the strecher makes it too difficult to pull off.

: I havent outlined all the strategies to pull off a 800+ score, of course, but these are the only ones that I see as even remotely possible. Even so, I think the chances are pretty slim, and I think we've seen just about the highest score we ever will. Without the extra 10%, atleast.

[archiver]

Posted by Alan Federman at 03/26/2001 4:40 PM EST


Engineer on team #255, Odyssey, from Foothill HS, San Jose and NASA.


In Reply to: What about scoring 3 large balls??
Posted by Tom S. on 03/26/2001 4:03 PM EST:



The problem is how do you hold two goals balanced and have more than 2 big balls. Early on in our strategy sessions we analysed the possibilty of holding 2 goals
horizontally and loading 3 or 4 big balls across - but
there just is no way that a 130 lb robot can be built to hold em any way except vertical and move/balance em. I suppose it would be possible to build a verticle goal transporter who could do this and stay on the bridge - but you would need at least two fast big ball handlers that could get 3 or four balls loaded super-quick. I think that Darwin is working here - if it could be done someone would have done it already.

[archiver]

Posted by Jason Leslie at 03/26/2001 9:31 PM EST


Other on team #157, Aztechs, from Assabet Valley RTHS Alumni (Class of 1998) and .


In Reply to: Why stop at three big balls?
Posted by Alan Federman on 03/26/2001 4:40 PM EST:



: The problem is how do you hold two goals balanced and have more than 2 big balls. Early on in our strategy sessions we analysed the possibilty of holding 2 goals
: horizontally and loading 3 or 4 big balls across - but
: there just is no way that a 130 lb robot can be built to hold em any way except vertical and move/balance em. I suppose it would be possible to build a verticle goal transporter who could do this and stay on the bridge - but you would need at least two fast big ball handlers that could get 3 or four balls loaded super-quick. I think that Darwin is working here - if it could be done someone would have done it already.



If you did the above any sm balls that are touching the playing field would not count. Correct?

[archiver]

Posted by Kevin at 03/27/2001 1:11 PM EST


Coach on team #308, Walled Lake Monsters, from Walled Lake Schools and TRW Automotive Electronics.


In Reply to: Re: Why stop at three big balls?
Posted by Jason Leslie on 03/26/2001 9:31 PM EST:



That is correct, and I believe the bridge counts as the playing field in this instance.

: : The problem is how do you hold two goals balanced and have more than 2 big balls. Early on in our strategy sessions we analysed the possibilty of holding 2 goals
: : horizontally and loading 3 or 4 big balls across - but
: : there just is no way that a 130 lb robot can be built to hold em any way except vertical and move/balance em. I suppose it would be possible to build a verticle goal transporter who could do this and stay on the bridge - but you would need at least two fast big ball handlers that could get 3 or four balls loaded super-quick. I think that Darwin is working here - if it could be done someone would have done it already.


: If you did the above any sm balls that are touching the playing field would not count. Correct?

[archiver]

Posted by Kevin Sevcik at 03/26/2001 4:43 PM EST


Other on team #57, Leopards, from BT Washington and the High School for Engineering Professions and Exxon, Kellog Brown & Root, Powell Electrical.


In Reply to: What about scoring 3 large balls??
Posted by Tom S. on 03/26/2001 4:03 PM EST:



You'd have to score all 4 big balls to make up for the robot that's not in the endzone because it's holding the goals and big balls in place. There is a team that can do this. However, they would have to move the near goal to the players, go across the bridge, get 2 balls, grab the far goal, come back across the bridge, grab the near goal, and balance. Plus, 2 more big balls need to be scored in there somewhere. And all this in under a minute. That's a pretty tall order. Teams are barely squeaking in under the 1 minute limit as it is. So I don't think this plan would work either.

[archiver]

Posted by Roly Anderson at 03/26/2001 7:45 PM EST


Engineer on team #188, Blizzard, from Woburn Collegiate and Ontario Power Generation.


In Reply to: What about scoring 3 large balls??
Posted by Tom S. on 03/26/2001 4:03 PM EST:



At the Great Lakes Regional, team 188 the "BLIZZARD", from Canada, crossed the bridge and picked up 2 big balls in 22 seconds and held them "over our head",and these balls can be supported only the the goals. See our web site at . With two other big ball handlers, 4 large balls could be scored and 3 bots in the end zone. It is possible and do-able!


: What if a team was able to stick a ball in between the two balanced goals??

: Just some food for thought.

: Tom Schindler
: Team 177

: : I don't think teams really have a chance of even breaking the 800 pt. barrier. Really, you just have to look at the timing and math of the whole thing. The recent 710 was with 4 bots in the endzone, 2 big balls, and a full goal. I'm willing to bet that this is just about the limit of any alliance's scoring ability.
: : If the alliance is going for a 10x mult, then the only way to top 800 is to do the above, plus have a stretcher in the endzone. Since the stretcher bot can't do anything, this means that you'll need a bot that can pull the stretcher really fast and accurately, and still be able to score a big ball, all in under 40-45 secs. Or, you'll need a bot that can score two big balls at once. I think either of these occurances are highly unlikely. Especially considering how hard it seems to be to control the stretcher.
: : A second option here would be to fill up the other goal with smalls. The only problem here is that there are almost no teams that specialize in rapidly moving about smalls after regionals. Plus, the bot would have to put 8 or 9 smalls in within 30 secs. All in all, I think this is rather unlikely as well.
: : If the alliance is going for a 12x mult, then they have even less options due to the time constraints. The alliance would need 67 base points to score 800. Filling up a goal takes atleast 30 seconds (I've watched) so getting 7 in and scoring 2 big balls in under 30 seconds, plus getting the balancer into the endzone would be a VERY tight squeeze. I think the only real option here is 4 endzone, a stretcher, and 2 big balls. This MIGHT be possible, but again, I think the strecher makes it too difficult to pull off.

: : I havent outlined all the strategies to pull off a 800+ score, of course, but these are the only ones that I see as even remotely possible. Even so, I think the chances are pretty slim, and I think we've seen just about the highest score we ever will. Without the extra 10%, atleast.

[archiver]

Posted by Kevin Sevcik at 03/26/2001 11:32 PM EST


Other on team #57, Leopards, from BT Washington and the High School for Engineering Professions and Exxon, Kellog Brown & Root, Powell Electrical.


In Reply to: Re: What about scoring 3 large balls??
Posted by Roly Anderson on 03/26/2001 7:45 PM EST:



Alright, this strategy is a bit more feasible, but I'm still doubting that it will work, though I'd love to be proven wrong. 22 seconds to pick up 2 big balls is pretty fast, but after that, you've still gotta go through the process of balancing the two goals and scoring the two other big balls. This strategy could just be possible with a perfect alliance, but I'm going to be a pessimist and assume that this perfect alliance has slim chances of showing up in the elims....

[archiver]

Posted by Andrew Harrison at 03/26/2001 9:41 PM EST


Student on team #349, The Robahamas, from International Academy and Ford/Bosch.


In Reply to: What about scoring 3 large balls??
Posted by Tom S. on 03/26/2001 4:03 PM EST:



Here is the stradegy and belive it or not we can accomplish it. However doing it in under a minute is the tricky part. Alright it starts out like this: our robot goes over the bridge with a another good big ball loading robot. While we are going over, another big ball loading robot goes under the bar such as team 469 and a multi functional (wedge/under bar/alright goal moving) robot such as team 67 moves the goal to the playerstation. The human players quickly fill the goal up with 12 balls while the three big ball robots get their balls(this is including us). At the same time the multi facit robot is going under the bar and moving the goal next to the bridge or this may be done by a big ball robot before they get their ball. We head back over the bridge with a big ball and balance it then slide our grippers down and pull the goal over the ramp and while we are doing this the multi functional robot is getting ready to wedge on the human side. Once their robot is under the ramp we push the goal near the end of the ramp(toward the field teams) and let go. We then move to the side of the ramp, opposite of the goal placed next to the ramp earlier. We then extend our arm over the ramp and hook onto the top of the goal and pull it down sideways onto the ramp. The wedge robot then removes itself and hurries into the end zone while the other 2 big ball robots are waiting with 2 big balls to put on the side of the now balanced goal. It works because the goal is balanced on its side poles and not it's base. If you want to see us do this you can see a picture of it on this site, this was before we put hooks on our grippers though so it works much better and faster now. This only works in theory and with the right alliance it has not yet been tried in competition. This is a very tricky stradegy, but in the end if comlpeted correctly and in under a minute you end up with 820 points. Also if there was some way you could get the fourth big ball on there, which is possible as three big balls fit on the side of a goal, that's 920 points. Also feel free to check out some of the other unique capabilities of our robot in the robot gallery, were the Robahamas team 349 however one of the pics says 348. We're especially proud of our suspension and bar hopping.

Just something to think about...

[archiver]

Posted by Kevin Sevcik at 03/26/2001 11:21 PM EST


Other on team #57, Leopards, from BT Washington and the High School for Engineering Professions and Exxon, Kellog Brown & Root, Powell Electrical.


In Reply to: It is possible my friends(820pts)
Posted by Andrew Harrison on 03/26/2001 9:41 PM EST:



While this strategy would works in theory, I seriously doubt it would ever work in competition, even given an alliance of robots that are perfect for pulling it off. Let me reiterate. It takes atleast 30 seconds to fill a goal with small balls. I've watched enough matches to know that this time barrier can't really be broken. Now, this means that, assuming your bot can get across the field and pick up a big ball in 30 seconds, you've got 30 more seconds to drop your ball, move the full goal into balance on the bridge, tip the other goal (and pray the bridge stays balanced), and run to the endzone. Personally, I think things would take a bit longer than the 30 seconds you'd have.

[archiver]

Posted by Raul at 03/27/2001 8:59 AM EST


Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.


In Reply to: Possible if the timers are travelling at .9c
Posted by Kevin Sevcik on 03/26/2001 11:21 PM EST:



Hey Kevin,

Regarding your comment that it take 30 seconds to fill a goal: Have you seen the video of the 710 match? (It is on our site below) We had 11 small balls in the goal in 19 seconds (1:41 on the clock)! We also had it across the bridge with 1:34 on the clock.

Raul

: While this strategy would works in theory, I seriously doubt it would ever work in competition, even given an alliance of robots that are perfect for pulling it off. Let me reiterate. It takes atleast 30 seconds to fill a goal with small balls. I've watched enough matches to know that this time barrier can't really be broken.

[archiver]

Posted by Kevin at 03/27/2001 1:03 PM EST


Coach on team #308, Walled Lake Monsters, from Walled Lake Schools and TRW Automotive Electronics.


In Reply to: Re: Possible if the timers are travelling at .9c
Posted by Raul on 03/27/2001 8:59 AM EST:



We can consistently be across the bridge with a fully loaded goal in under 30 seconds.

Perhaps you haven't been watching the right matches.

: Hey Kevin,

: Regarding your comment that it take 30 seconds to fill a goal: Have you seen the video of the 710 match? (It is on our site below) We had 11 small balls in the goal in 19 seconds (1:41 on the clock)! We also had it across the bridge with 1:34 on the clock.

: Raul

: : While this strategy would works in theory, I seriously doubt it would ever work in competition, even given an alliance of robots that are perfect for pulling it off. Let me reiterate. It takes atleast 30 seconds to fill a goal with small balls. I've watched enough matches to know that this time barrier can't really be broken.

[archiver]

Posted by Alan Federman at 03/26/2001 4:09 PM EST


Engineer on team #255, Odyssey, from Foothill HS, San Jose and NASA.


In Reply to: Not even 800 (w/o 10% bonus)
Posted by Kevin Sevcik on 03/26/2001 12:12 PM EST:



I have to agree with Joel - really hard to get over 610 or 620. Very few teams can balance two goals from off the bridge and get in the endzone. I think somone could design a robot that could pull the stretcher and
score a ball but doing this in 45 seconds?? Not likely. I have been examining scenarios of how one or two robots together could handle the stretcher and make across quickly enough to allow big ball scoring.
(This to allow a 2 goal stay on the bridge robot alliance to beat 700.) 60 points in under 30? I just can't see 2 big balls 2 goals balanced 4 robots in the endzone in under 30.

I think a team that can score 600 everytime is more likely than a team that scores 700 once in a while.

The other factor to consider is practice - the scores go up as the teams get more.

[archiver]

Posted by Jake at 03/27/2001 3:27 PM EST


Student on team #365, Miracle Workerz, from Avon Grove High School and DuPont Engineering.


In Reply to: Re: Not even 800 (w/o 10% bonus)
Posted by Alan Federman on 03/26/2001 4:09 PM EST:



It sounds to me that some of you believe that a robot on the strecher cannot do anything. On the contrary! A robot on the strecher cannot move itself around the floor, but it can do anything else it wishes. And moving the strecher isn't that big of a deal, especially for Li'l MOE, who can move it around like a rag doll with a 130lb robot on it. If there was a big ball 'bot on the strecher, and was pulled into the end zone behind the far goal, the 'bot on the strecher could lift a big ball off the floor and score it in the far-end goal. I have run some numbers on some senarios that would do this, and this is what I have come up with:

Senario 1-
Robots required:
A. Over/Under the bar, w/ big ball capability
B. Over the bridge, w/ strecher
C. Over/Under the bridge, w/ big ball capability
D. Off the bridge ballancer

Tasks:
(Robot A) runs under bar and awaits Robot B to cross with Robot C on strecher. Resets the bridge either by driving over, or with an arm. Once bridge is back down, readies a bid ball to be scored when Robot D aligns the 2 goals for ballancing.

(Robot B) Latches onto strecher and pulls it over to end zone, leaves strecher and Robot C behind the far goal. Once Robot C scores the big ball, Robot B moves the goal to the side so Robot D can get into position to balance both goals.

(Robot C) Starts on strecher, scores big ball once in position.

(Robot D) Latches onto close goal, brings to alliance station to fill 10 small balls. Moves to far side with full goal, pushes the aligned goals onto the bridge for balance.


Score (w/o 10% for big balls)
1) Time remaining on clock: 1:01
Robots in end zone: 4
Small Balls: 11
Big Balls: 2
Strecher: 1

Score 1) 810 points

2) Time remaining on clock: 31 seconds
Robots in end zone: 4
Small Balls: 11
Big Balls: 2
Strecher: 1

Score 2) 648 points

What do these numbers say? It says that if you can pull everything off within 59 seconds, it is an impressive score, but if not, there are easier ways of getting 648 points.

~ Captain Jake
The Miracle Workerz
Team 365
Go Li'l MOE!

[archiver]

Posted by Karl at 03/26/2001 12:51 PM EST


Student on team #442, Knight Riders, from Lee High and NASA Marshall SpaceFlight Center.


In Reply to: Anyone think that anyone will get near 1000pts @ Nat's
Posted by Joel G on 03/26/2001 11:34 AM EST:



We here on team #442 plan on scoring 1716 in the seed matches and 1560 in the qualifiers and finals.

[archiver]

Posted by Joel G at 03/26/2001 2:04 PM EST


Student on team #442, Knight Riders, from Lee High School and NASA/ BOEING/ MEVATEC.


In Reply to: Yes
Posted by Karl on 03/26/2001 12:51 PM EST:



: We here on team #442 plan on scoring 1716 in the seed matches and 1560 in the qualifiers and finals.
Karl, I think you've been drinking something(lol)
but were on the same team and I hope we can at least pull off a 600 pt. match before we leave Orlando.

[archiver]

Posted by Kevin Sevcik at 03/26/2001 2:04 PM EST


Other on team #57, Leopards, from BT Washington and the High School for Engineering Professions and Exxon, Kellog Brown & Root, Powell Electrical.


In Reply to: Yes
Posted by Karl on 03/26/2001 12:51 PM EST:



Anybody remember those pit announcements from a couple of years back? I know it's a bad joke, but still. Also, shouldn't this particular post be in the Rumor Mill?

[archiver]

Posted by Karl at 03/26/2001 3:46 PM EST


Student on team #442, Knight Riders, from Lee High and NASA Marshall SpaceFlight Center.


In Reply to: Team 442 needs Dilithium Crystals to fix its bot....
Posted by Kevin Sevcik on 03/26/2001 2:04 PM EST:



.

[archiver]

Posted by Al Skierkiewicz at 03/26/2001 6:56 PM EST


Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Wheeling High & Rolling Meadows High and Motorola.


In Reply to: Anyone think that anyone will get near 1000pts @ Nat's
Posted by Joel G on 03/26/2001 11:34 AM EST:



Answer to an old joke..."How do you get to Carnegie Hall?...Practice, practice,practice!"
We all have seen teams accomplish tasks in under 60 seconds so you know that is possible. With a 10x multiplier even a small ball takes on significance. If Beatty/Team Hammond #71, Motorola/Wildstang #111, Motorola/Gear Grinders #112, NASA/Rolls Royce/Cyber Blue #234, Oconomowoc OHS FIRST #269 had lost just 1 second each in performing their tasks, the score would have been 568 instead of 710. If each robot had stumbled going over the bridge and lost just 9 seconds each the score would have been 568. The difference between a very respectable high score (a 568 average would place any team in a seeding position) and a national record is just 5 seconds, about the time it takes to get 4 individuals to push 4 red buttons to stop the clock. All the robots at Midwest Regional were great (including the rookies) so a lot of the credit has to go to the drivers and human players and the strategy teams leading them on the field.
See you all next week,
Al