2x multiplier removal secnario [Archive]

Specialagentjim

02-02-2004, 21:28

Okay, scenarios I just realized.

Lets say one blue alliance caps a red alliance goal by shoving the 2x ball all the way down into the bottom of the goal. Now, as per the updates, any ball thrown into the goal that sits ABOVE the 2x ball is legal (correct me if im wrong). Now, red alliance moves to uncap that goal, a legal process. There is NO way for the red alliance to uncap said goal without removing those small balls in the process. Is it therefore at this point illegal to uncap this goal?

Interesting scenario... If I've overlooked something, by all means correct me. I don't have access to the Q & A question posting system, so if no one can come up with an answer, can someone with an account ask FIRST? Thanks!

EDIT: okay, update, I just found this on Q & A:
Section: 4.4.3 Status: Answered Date Answered: 1/28/2004
Q: Earlier answer indicated small balls above 2x ball are still doubled. If 2x ball is removed by opponent and small balls thus descored, is the penalty value the doubled small ball value?

A: In this very special circumstance, a small ball may fall out in the removal of a large ball. That is the risk faced by all competitors. As long as the descored ball was not touched by the opposing robot, there would be no penalty flag thrown provided you do not violate any other rule.
So, are those balls descored then? Is this a legal way to descore an opponent?

I dont know about everyone else, but I see from this a system in which teams will shove the 2x down, then later remove the 2x to descore an opponent. Thoughts on the subject?

Mike M.

02-02-2004, 21:40

a few of us on our team were discussing this very topic sunday the way we looked at as long as the descored small balls don't touch your machine this sounds like a legal way to descore balls.

Aignam

02-02-2004, 21:42

I had this exact thought earlier in the season, and proposed the scenario to my team during a brainstorming session.

Me: What if you shove a 2x ball WAYYY into your opponents goal, they score small balls ontop of it, and you unscore the 2x ball, *accidentally* removing small balls from your opponents goal.
Everyone: Then there'd be another update!

It seems to me, however, that this might be the only way to legally descore a small ball. I think it is both gracious and professional, despite the array of claims that you will get on this thread otherwise, in due time. It's a smart strategy, and a robot that can exert enough force to get the ball all the way into the goal and then exert enough force to get it all the way out, along with some small balls and the pressure from the goalposts, is well-deserving of recognition.

Specialagentjim

02-02-2004, 21:44

It definetly doesnt follow the intent that robots should not be able to descore, but its definetly an issue.

JVN

02-02-2004, 21:44

a few of us on our team were discussing this very topic sunday the way we looked at as long as the descored small balls don't touch your machine this sounds like a legal way to descore balls.
Certainly not!

Guys... the intent of the FIRST rules is that "any small ball, once in a goal, shall remain scored".

If a robot intentionally, or unintentionally de-scores a small ball, it will be penalized.

Aignam

02-02-2004, 21:48

If a robot intentionally, or unintentionally de-scores a small ball, it will be penalized.
FIRST says otherwise. Read the update on the inital post.

Specialagentjim

02-02-2004, 21:48

Certainly not!

Guys... the intent of the FIRST rules is that "any small ball, once in a goal, shall remain scored".

If a robot intentionally, or unintentionally de-scores a small ball, it will be penalized.

but the issue arises, does that mean you can no longer uncap a goal? The object of your goal is to uncap a goal, not to descore an opponent. See where the fine line comes into play? How can you tell someone what THEIR intent was when its impossible to decipher.

Joel Glidden

03-02-2004, 07:24

<G21> While a ROBOT is holding a LARGE Ball, that ball will be considered an extension of the ROBOT.

If the large ball is part of your robot when your robot is holding it, then it would be pretty tough to remove one from the bottom of a goal without touching the small balls above it.

Jeremy L

03-02-2004, 09:16

Arefin Bari

03-02-2004, 10:47

its not really hard to cram the ball all the way down to the 4 ft. high goal... but i am not sure about the stationary goal... it might be hard to cram the 2x ball down to that stationary goal...

"Mike M.: a few of us on our team were discussing this very topic sunday the way we looked at as long as the descored small balls don't touch your machine this sounds like a legal way to descore balls. "

as somebody already pointed out in this thread that the 2x ball becomes your extension of the robot... that means that when you are pulling out the 2x ball from the goal and there are small balls inside of it... you are using your robot to take it out... meaning that you are descoring the small balls...

please correct me if i am wrong...

Karthik

03-02-2004, 11:20

as somebody already pointed out in this thread that the 2x ball becomes your extension of the robot... that means that when you are pulling out the 2x ball from the goal and there are small balls inside of it... you are using your robot to take it out... meaning that you are descoring the small balls...

please correct me if i am wrong...

---
<G21> While a ROBOT is holding a LARGE Ball, that ball will be considered an extension of the ROBOT.
---
Section: 4.4.3 Status: Answered Date Answered: 1/28/2004
"...As long as the descored ball was not touched by the opposing robot, there would be no penalty..."
---
It seems to me FIRST is making a distinction between a robot holding a ball and touching a ball. The question becomes, what defines holding? Using some common sense (as Dean has reminded us to do), the distinction seems clear in most cases. For instance if someone asked you if you were holding or touching a tennis ball, I think you'd be able to give them an easy answer. Apply this same reasoning to a robot and a big yellow ball.

Specialagentjim

03-02-2004, 11:28

umm...i have a quick technical note...has anybody actually tried cramming the ball down, putting balls on top of it, and then removing it? it's quite difficult for a human to do, let alone a robot (despite the intent.) just mentioning it...

i wonder if this will be the death of the thread... :confused:

This is also very true. Now this brings me back to another point of mine (those of you following my posts are probobly wondering where my stance is by now. I have none, I keep pointing out the other side because I don't think its clear). If the 2x is an extension of the robot, then when you move to uncap a goal, a legal operation, you're robot will interact with the small balls. As Jeremy pointed out, this is illegal. Now, however, you've made it illegal to uncap this goal. Dilemma again!

Joe Matt

03-02-2004, 11:36

We did some testing of the ball-smashed-in-goal theory, and found that depending on how far it in it is, it's hard to get out. But, in order for the ball to be put in, the robot would have to exert lots of force just to get it pushed in, which is more likely not to happen than trying to get the ball out. Simply put, the force to push a ball down will cause the bot to tip forward and loose stability. Now, for lifting, that can be avoided.

In conclusion, while possable to smash the ball into the goal and get it out, it's hard to get it out, and VERY hard to push it in with a robot.

Levaman

03-02-2004, 11:47

Okay, scenarios I just realized.

Lets say one blue alliance caps a red alliance goal by shoving the 2x ball all the way down into the bottom of the goal. Now, as per the updates, any ball thrown into the goal that sits ABOVE the 2x ball is legal (correct me if im wrong). Now, red alliance moves to uncap that goal, a legal process. There is NO way for the red alliance to uncap said goal without removing those small balls in the process. Is it therefore at this point illegal to uncap this goal?

Interesting scenario... If I've overlooked something, by all means correct me. I don't have access to the Q & A question posting system, so if no one can come up with an answer, can someone with an account ask FIRST? Thanks!

EDIT: okay, update, I just found this on Q & A:

So, are those balls descored then? Is this a legal way to descore an opponent?

I dont know about everyone else, but I see from this a system in which teams will shove the 2x down, then later remove the 2x to descore an opponent. Thoughts on the subject?

This is that one in a million scenario that IS going to occur no matter what. I think the best answer is the one that FIRST gave and at the disgression of the referee of the match as to whether or not penalties will me thrown.It's most likely the opinion of the referee that could make or break this strategy. That's my educated guess.

Kevin Kolodziej

03-02-2004, 12:21

Joe Matt

03-02-2004, 12:31

It seems to be a total contradiction on FIRST's part, but then again, they did say "as long as no other rules are violated" or something to that effect. Descoring with the large ball in the robot's possession will violate the descoring and/or goaltending rules, so those should apply, therefore making this move illegal.

Have your human players actually tried shooting into a goal that has a large ball stuffed in it?? Try the ball at different heigh levels and see what happens....

We have and found that it depends on who far the ball is in it. The higher up it is, the harder it is to enter the goal, not only because of the bounce of the big ball, but you can't use the PVC as a slowing device like you can if the ball is in deeper. Here's what I've seen:

-ball thrown straight down don't go in.
-the PVC slows down the balls to let the score
-the gap between the PVC and ball can stop the small balls

The best type of throwing motion is a basketball throw with a big arch that'll hit the PVC, and that will slow down the balls.

tkwetzel

03-02-2004, 12:33

Will smalls balls stay in a goal that has a large ball smashed in it. It would seem that the PVC would bend far enough that the gaps between the poles would be larger than the small balls. Therefore you would not be able to score small balls on top of a large ball. Has anyone tried putting small balls on top of a large ball already in a goal? If so, please comment on how it worked out.

Ben Mitchell

03-02-2004, 16:05

I think it's an interesting idea, and I don't think anyone has the real authority to make a ruling on it except FIRST - since it does fall in a VERY grey area of the rules.

I personally would like a definitive answer, since it will determine how many teams with large ball capabilities play the game.

Here's another question - if the enemy team throws balls at your robot while you do this, would it be considered "goaltending" and give a -10 point deduction per ball that hits you?

This is precisely the reason why FIRST should make things spelled out and black and white.

Joe Ross

03-02-2004, 16:08

Here's another question - if the enemy team throws balls at your robot while you do this, would it be considered "goaltending" and give a -10 point deduction per ball that hits you?

Yes, that scenario has already been answered by FIRST.

Q: While trying to put a 2X ball on opponent’s goal, will this be considered goal tending ?

A: Yes, if it interferes with a thrown ball with the potential to go in the goal (referee's judgement). See the definition of GOAL TENDING.

Ben Mitchell

03-02-2004, 17:01

Heh, so I guess it is safe to assume salvo after salvo of ball being intentionally thrown at your robot while you are capping or uncapping a goal.

Arefin Bari

03-02-2004, 20:25

Have your human players actually tried shooting into a goal that has a large ball stuffed in it?? Try the ball at different heigh levels and see what happens....

yes we did. when you have the 2x ball all the down in the stationary goal its hard to get small balls inside the goal since all the pvcs spread out. when you have the 2x ball in the mobile goal still its hard to get the ball in... unless your human player has a very good aim of hitting the pvc pipes first and then let it go in the goal...

KenWittlief

03-02-2004, 20:41

I think this whole thread is arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin

cramming the 2X ball down into the goal just aint gonna happen

besides, if you cram it in your opponents goal, why would you want to take it back out again?

Ben Mitchell

03-02-2004, 21:59

blindguyinanorg

03-02-2004, 22:19

blindguyinanorg

03-02-2004, 22:20

sorry i didnt know 7 was so big HAHAH

Specialagentjim

03-02-2004, 22:25

Okay, to recap this, let me explain two different scenarios that are based on the situation I see.

1.) FIRST keeps the ruling they have. Red alliance shoves ball down Blue Goal. At the end of the match, Red alliance uncaps blue goal, descoring all the small balls. Legal way to descore.
FIRST Intent: Unacceptable

2.) FIRST updates the rule to make it illegal to remove small balls from the goals even through uncapping. Red alliance jams 2x multiplier to bottom of goal. Now they have a guarenteed 2x because blue may not uncap that goal anymore.

The only possible scenario I see, which is insanely hard to referee, would be to count any small ball that went into the goal to be counted, and if it is removed by action of uncapping, it will still be counted towards final score. This raises another problem, but is less major. (The problem of, for every ball removed, theres space for another one yadda yadda yadda...). My dilemma continues.

KenWittlief

03-02-2004, 22:39

I smell a lawyer! :c)

JVN

03-02-2004, 22:55

Hey look this year your score is based on the loosing teams score. if your robot is good enought to cram and remove a cramed ball the obviose solution is the direct the ability toward increasing your score.
Read the rules.
This year's scoring is based on wins and losses.
Loser's score is only important if there is a tie.

Defense is a perfectly viable strategy.
This is a good defensive move, if legal (which I think it isn't).

Read, learn... THEN post an opinion.

JVN

Specialagentjim

03-02-2004, 23:08

Read the rules.
This year's scoring is based on wins and losses.
Loser's score is only important if there is a tie.

Defense is a perfectly viable strategy.
This is a good defensive move, if legal (which I think it isn't).

Read, learn... THEN post an opinion.

JVN

Neither of my situations should be legal. Catch 22.

...and ken, thats my dad you smell.

tkwetzel

03-02-2004, 23:54

The way I see this is that FIRST has said you may uncap a goal and any balls on top are incidental as long as your robot does not touch them. If the robot grabs the 2x ball (instead of simply pushing it out) then the large ball will be part of the robot and in contact with the small balls, therefore ensuing a penalty. So the small balls that come out of the goal without being touched by your robot will not count towards the score. All in all, I think FIRST says you may remove a 2x ball that has small balls on top of it as long as you do not touch those small balls. But how many balls can you really have on top of the large ball? The PVC will bend out of the way.

Rick

04-02-2004, 01:57

I'm not worried about this "scenerio" one bit. This whole thread is a big "what if". im not critizing the posters but the idea is a bit out there. I liked the idea of the rules being intrepeted by the intent of the rules.

Small balls get in a goal, they stay there.
put a big ball on top of your goal get 2x small balls
Hang off the top bar get points

so some people try to think of ways to get around the rules (ie. skepticizing the rules like a lawyer). Dean himself said that he didn't want this. So now we have to find LEGAL ways to descore.

theres plenty of ways to stop scoring this year. They are very obvious to me and within the rules. But if everyone wants to argue about how to get around the rules and still get penalized thats fine with me. Just don't approach my drive team starting with "first we're gonna jam that 2x ball hard in the oppenents goal"

Aignam

04-02-2004, 05:04

Just don't approach my drive team starting with "first we're gonna jam that 2x ball hard in the oppenents goal"
Then what?

This is getting ridiculous. I think FIRST should clarify the difference between grabbing a 2x and touching a 2x in order to push it out of a goal. They seem to be contradicting themselves, and that isn't a good thing. Let's see how many unfortunate teams go to their first regional with an illegal robot because things weren't spelled out black and white.

JVN

04-02-2004, 09:12

Then what?

This is getting ridiculous. I think FIRST should clarify the difference between grabbing a 2x and touching a 2x in order to push it out of a goal. They seem to be contradicting themselves, and that isn't a good thing. Let's see how many unfortunate teams go to their first regional with an illegal robot because things weren't spelled out black and white.
Expect an official clarification from FIRST within the next update or two.

JVN

Specialagentjim

04-02-2004, 11:56

I'm not worried about this "scenerio" one bit. This whole thread is a big "what if". im not critizing the posters but the idea is a bit out there. I liked the idea of the rules being intrepeted by the intent of the rules.
[/i]

My issue is not that I'm trying to do this as a strategy, far from it. I'm afriad of being faced with this situation during a match and being forced to make a split second decision on my own reactions. If another team descores me, will a penalty be imposed on them or not? It's crucial for me as a driver to know this as it will determine how I continue playing (i.e. do I score a couple of points for the opposing alliance if their lacking or not?). You can't just say "This isn't the intent and you shouldn't do it". Most of us on this forum play by the rules, but there are those that don't. I, as a driver, need to have every strategy and point combination possible in the back of my mind at all times.