UTC Regionals Team 126 GaelForce

[rjbarra]

It was an honor to have been aligned with Gael Force. We set out to build an elegant Robot but I think we were out done by Gael Force. I think either of our teams could have built a Robot that smashed Robots but we choose to build Robots that well engineered and did not go out and destroy other robots. Your team was awesome in the stands, the pit and on the field. See you in Atlanta.

Original Team 20 Rocketeers

JBARRA

[BoyWithCape195]

So your saying that in a football, soccer, or basketball game there should be no defensive players and all offensive?

[EvanG]

It is disappointing to me that you are likely implying that my old team 177, and their alliance were intentionally designed and built to ram and destroy. If this is what you truly think, you put to waste the 6 hard weeks they spent at the same time you did, to develop a sturdy machine that accomplished the game's goals how they felt the game would be played.

It is safe to say that every team out there put their all into accomplishing this game. 177 has for years been revamping their drive train to the point where if you ask around, it is something we're known for. This year, we put a ball collector and 3-point shooter on top of that to what I would like to believe are stunning results. Our students are taught from the start about building rigid designs because many years in the past we had a similar learning experience to what you guys have had when we took a brutal hit and spent our short times out just trying to fix a gear or piece that took hours in the shop to put together. I clearly hope that you learn from this in the future as we have and potentially incorporate it into your design rather than downplay the significance of other team designs.

It is immature to not have expected robot on robot interaction to be at its peak this year. From the very beginning, FIRST has pointed out they wanted to add a more sporty feel to the games and they have been slowly year after year. This year they even went so far as to say robots were going to be hitting robots, and that it was highly recommendable that you build bumpers. The rules even specify, "AIM HIGH is a highly interactive game," and "If two ROBOTs choose not to use bumpers, and they contact such that simultaneous contact occurs both in and out of the BUMPER ZONE, then this contact is considered within the BUMPER ZONE." As far as I recall, in previous years, this much freedom and encouragement to develop and use bumpers was not seen.

That's not to say that your teams did not develop stunning robots. To say the least they were fantastic in design and build. But a lack of bumpers clearly brought your frame to the test. Rather than having any robot to robot blows dissipated through a bumper and then through a larger piece of your frame, a blow without a bumper would clearly pressurize parts of a frame and as sturdy as metal is... look at cars that take hits from the side.

Overall, I would like to assume that you take FIRST as a learning experience and a worldly design class rather than a disappointment. Not everything is beauty, not everything is strength. Every robot must clearly find the right middle line where human interaction with that bot ultimately achieves the game's design. Which leads me to add human drivers not being behind the wheel of the robot, instead being a ways away must be able to dance with their robot and assume it will take the brunt of the weight they can inflict upon it. Therefore, it must take the brunt of pressure inflicted.

It was an honor to see my old team play against you, and you guys put up a great opposition that kept me on the edge of my seat for the entire length of the matches. It was great to see you play in your QP matches and I knew from the start you guys would be going far in eliminations. Best of luck in the future with all your endeavors and competitions.

Sorry for the lengthy post, sadly, I've noticed that many teams are starting to take the same assumption about FIRST. Hopefully, it covers all the bases on this arguement.

[Ben Piecuch]

Guys,

Let's not get into an offense vs. defense arguement here. Both teams 20 and 126 have very strong offensive robots, and were unfortunately the main targets for some very defensive robots at the UTC regional.

I'd like to think that the game design committee designs the games to be offensive minded, and to limit the amount of effective defense. For example, the 2005 game could be played with both an offensive and defensive robot. But, when you watch the national finals, there were 6 highly offensive robots out there, and you got a chance to see how the game was truely designed to be played.

I think we'll find the same thing with this years' game. During the regionals it'll be a great mix of offensive and defensive robots, and it'll be a crap-shot to see who comes out on top. But, by the time the national championship rolls around, I believe it'll be 6 of the best offensive robots out there. At least, that's what I'm hoping for.

Our offensive-minded robot took a great deal of beating, even with the FIRST designed bumpers. Bent frame tubes, bent support pieces, broken ball impellers... It's a rough game out there, and it's unfortunate that a non-ball scoring robot with a powerful drive train can win over some of the best shooters out there. (Please don't feel that I'm describing some specific robots. This is just a general observation...) Let's just see how this game matures over the next few weeks.

BEN

[1493kd]

Thoughts on my first experience as a mentor.. team 1493- Albany High School, Albany, New York

Hartford Regional

First of it was amazing to see all of the effort that went into every teams bots, pits, decor, the whole experience was amazing and has really motivated me to make our team even better next year.



Our team 1493 did the best we have ever done, so that was a nice accomplishment. We didn't meet our goal which was to be selected for the "tourney" (what ever it is called slips my mind this second) Thought that we most certainly were going to be selected. After making many changes to our bot by the last day we were very strong. Our defense was very good, with our low COG we were able to push almost any bot back, we could make it up the ramp with ease, and were good for an easy 10 pts in autonomous whenever we wanted. (Except the time they forgot to close the side doors all the way which caused us to get stuck.)

One thing that hurt us bad was our bad luck at drawing teammates for the qualifying rounds. One match we were the only bot on the field.

All in all I have to say that this was a great experience and some good publicity for our high school which is much needed.This year we have been on the news every night this year for violence, gang activities, guns in school, you name it. I'm sure team 20 can back this one up.

Once again thank everyone and good luck in nationals

[Devin L.]

i do believe that this game is very interactive. defense is a key part, but i don't think tipping robots over is what FIRST intended as "highly interactive". your own team member said in a thread titled "amazing robot plays" that

Re: Amazing robot plays

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

in the quarter finals team 177 flipped 2 bots and about 6 or 7 3 pointers before flipping ourselves :yikes:

i don't think that is something to be too proud of. We do not have bumpers on our robot, and your excessive ramming did not damage our drive frame. bumpers are beside the point. Team 177's defense obviously won them the regional, but i don't think flipping a robot/robots using the ramp them jamming them against the wall when they are down are considered highly interactive, gracious, or professional.

team 177 did build a robust drive train which proved to be powerful. their shooting wasn't that bad and they did beat us. we won the first match. during the second a motor controlling our rollers died, and we could not fix it in time for the third match so we ended up losing both the 2nd and 3rd match. we know now to protect our motors better and our machine will be all set to do just as good in Boston as we did in UTC.
hope to see you at nationals 177 ;)

[Jeff Rodriguez]

From my observations at regionals, the best alliances are the ones with three good, versatile shooters.
For instance the three robots that won UTC had strong drive trains and could each shoot a few balls.
The benefit of three shooters is in their offensive period. If all three robots can shoot, you can't defend all three. Block two of them and the third one shoots a few. Go block the third one and the one you left starts shooting.
All three of the shooters also had strong, effective drive trains. They weren't easily pushed out of the way, and could be very effective blocking.
The same thing happened at BAE. Three good shooters, with strong drivetrains.

It's not that robot are built to specifically play defense, it's that the robots are versatile. I mean, there is a 40 second period where your alliance has to play defense, so you might as well play it well. That's exactly what these robots did, and did well.

[Jeff K.]

It's not that robot are built to specifically play defense, it's that the robots are versatile. I mean, there is a 40 second period where your alliance has to play defense, so you might as well play it well. That's exactly what these robots did, and did well.

That's very true. I've been noticing that a lot of teams are talking about how much defense is being played this year in comparison to years before and sometimes even complaining about it by flaming a strong defensive team. Ogre is very true, there is a 40 second period where the defensive robots get to show their stuff. We should recognize them for their abilities to stop the best shooter, rather than flame them for being destructive or for how they "smashed Robots".
Our robot is very versatile and can play offense by dumping balls into the corner goals, and then go onto Defense and try to prevent the other alliance from scoring. This is as legal of a strategy as any other strategy and had led us to wins during the qualifying matches and ranked pretty high at BAE.
I'm not trying to say that this game is all about defense, because offense is what scores all the points, but defense is also an important part of the game. This year is a pretty hard hitting game. FIRST hinted at it by recommending bumpers and even showing how to build them in the manual this year.

That's just my 2 cents.

[Peter Matteson]

i do believe that this game is very interactive. defense is a key part, but i don't think tipping robots over is what FIRST intended as "highly interactive". your own team member said in a thread titled "amazing robot plays" that i don't think that is something to be too proud of.

Devin,
That was inappropriately posted by one of our students who thought thatit was exciting to see. I didn't see how the first robot went over from where i was standing behind the driver's station, but 20 and our robot went over when we were pushing each other to keep keep them on our ramp. It looked like the angle on the ramp with how we connected rolled us both backward. It's hard to say that was intentional.

To everyone,
I would also like to point out that even though we are getting bashed on playing defense because we prevented 20 and 126 from scoring it appears that only Ogre and some members of 358 noticed that we scored a lot of points in Semi-final 1 here are the scores posted on FIRST's website http://www2.usfirst.org/2006comp/Events/CT/matches.html:

Semifinal 1-1
126-20-571 Score 67
177-176-1124 Score 65

Semifinal 1-2
126-20-571 Score 23
177-176-1124 Score 78

Semifinal 1-1
126-20-571 Score 32
177-176-1124 Score 89

It strikes me that these scores are reflective of a very offensive capable alliance that was more balanced. Our teams could quickly cross the field and score because they were designed to shoot in a way that was difficult to block. Focusing on just the defense does not tell the whole story.

With the exception of one individual from one of the teams of the 126-20-571 alliance who really offended my team we hold no ill will to your teams. We were very impressed by the slick and impressive design of 20 and their impressive shooter, as well as 126's super fast and accurate shooter. 571 has always been a gracious team that we enjoy seeing at many events.

I had to respond as I feel this thread and others are misrepresenting what happened because only half of the story was being told.

[Frenchie]

Quick reply : tipping robots over is not a valid defensive strategies, and nor is it something to be proud of : during GLR, some penalties were given for intentionally tipping over an opponent, and many thought 5 points penalty wasn't enough.

[Andy Grady]

i don't think that is something to be too proud of. We do not have bumpers on our robot, and your excessive ramming did not damage our drive frame. bumpers are beside the point. Team 177's defense obviously won them the regional, but i don't think flipping a robot/robots using the ramp them jamming them against the wall when they are down are considered highly interactive, gracious, or professional.


I just want to make an observation involving the situation and the Bobcat defense. Teams must understand that this game was designed for exactly the heavy defense that everyone was viewing yesterday. If the ramming was "excessive", the referees would have called a penalty...and they did on a couple of occasions yesterday. This game involves an incline...this incline is in a very important part of the playingfield. Furthermore, having a robot on top of the ramp gives you a bonus whether it is your robot OR your opponents robot. Strategically, if you can push your opponent up the ramp, hold them there until the end of the round, and get the 5 points from that, and take away the 5 they would have got from being on their own ramp...that is a MAJOR strategic swing. This is the exact strategy the Bobcats incorperated yesterday against the 126, 20, and 571 alliance. Due to the fact that the Bobcats had a strong drivetrain, they were able to push 20 up the ramp and the incline essentially knocked them right over. This is the risk you take by approaching a defensive maneuver in front of the ramp instead of comming in from the side of the robot to push them away from the ramp. In a game where you have .5 seconds to get an opening and try to shoot balls...you have to find a way to defend yourself from defenders...177, 176, and 1124 were good at doing that, and thats just how the ball drops.

You can't have things both ways folks...either we have a game like 2001 where we are all running around as a happy little family with no interactive defense, or we suck it up and play this game full tilt...heavy defense and all. I dont know about you, but I dont want to see another 4 v 0...I'll take those heavy crashes any day.

[Devin L.]

Devin,
That was inappropriately posted by one of our students who thought thatit was exciting to see. I didn't see how the first robot went over from where i was standing behind the driver's station, but 20 and our robot went over when we were pushing each other to keep keep them on our ramp. It looked like the angle on the ramp with how we connected rolled us both backward. It's hard to say that was intentional.

To everyone,
I would also like to point out that even though we are getting bashed on playing defense because we prevented 20 and 126 from scoring it appears that only Ogre and some members of 358 noticed that we scored a lot of points in Semi-final 1 here are the scores posted on FIRST's website http://www2.usfirst.org/2006comp/Events/CT/matches.html:

Semifinal 1-1
126-20-571 Score 67
177-176-1124 Score 65

Semifinal 1-2
126-20-571 Score 23
177-176-1124 Score 78

Semifinal 1-1
126-20-571 Score 32
177-176-1124 Score 89

It strikes me that these scores are reflective of a very offensive capable alliance that was more balanced. Our teams could quickly cross the field and score because they were designed to shoot in a way that was difficult to block. Focusing on just the defense does not tell the whole story.

With the exception of one individual from one of the teams of the 126-20-571 alliance who really offended my team we hold no ill will to your teams. We were very impressed by the slick and impressive design of 20 and their impressive shooter, as well as 126's super fast and accurate shooter. 571 has always been a gracious team that we enjoy seeing at many events.

I had to respond as I feel this thread and others are misrepresenting what happened because only half of the story was being told.

i do congratulate your team and alliance for a very good strategic win. I also hold no ill will to you or your alliance. we can only learn from our own mistakes and make our robot more competitive and stronger for such defensive strategies, as we will be a target for defensive robots. I should thank you for showing us what we really need to work on as it was our first comp. of the season. and i apologize for any remarks that may have offended your team/alliance.

[rjbarra]

So your saying that in a football, soccer, or basketball game there should be no defensive players and all offensive?
We love the CyberKnights

[rjbarra]

Thoughts on my first experience as a mentor.. team 1493- Albany High School, Albany, New York

Hartford Regional

First of it was amazing to see all of the effort that went into every teams bots, pits, decor, the whole experience was amazing and has really motivated me to make our team even better next year.



Our team 1493 did the best we have ever done, so that was a nice accomplishment. We didn't meet our goal which was to be selected for the "tourney" (what ever it is called slips my mind this second) Thought that we most certainly were going to be selected. After making many changes to our bot by the last day we were very strong. Our defense was very good, with our low COG we were able to push almost any bot back, we could make it up the ramp with ease, and were good for an easy 10 pts in autonomous whenever we wanted. (Except the time they forgot to close the side doors all the way which caused us to get stuck.)

One thing that hurt us bad was our bad luck at drawing teammates for the qualifying rounds. One match we were the only bot on the field.

All in all I have to say that this was a great experience and some good publicity for our high school which is much needed.This year we have been on the news every night this year for violence, gang activities, guns in school, you name it. I'm sure team 20 can back this one up.

Once again thank everyone and good luck in nationals



Team Albany, Great Job. We want to work with you next year. One thing is we want Albany to have an animation submitted. Our animation was better this year. We set goals to improve it every year. It is amazing with all the problems your school has faced that you even fielded a Robot.
Great Robot!

[BoyWithCape195]

We love the CyberKnights

Oh, haha, I wasn't aware of this. May I ask why?

[rjbarra]

Oh, haha, I wasn't aware of this. May I ask why?
Your mission was to play defense with not only power but incredible speed and maneuverability. A lot of our team members wanted to pick you. You carried yourself well in the pits, on the field
and in the stadium. Even though we are from NY this is our home tournament. We are already talking about coming back to UTC. If somebody picks us at UTC we will always accept. It is a great honor for us. There are a lot of years where our robot can not even get out of its own way. We are not like the Beast with a great robot every year. I think it will be years before we have a robot like this again. We wish you the best of luck.

[AcesPease]

Thoughts on my first experience as a mentor.. team 1493- Albany High School, Albany, New York

Our team 1493 did the best we have ever done, so that was a nice accomplishment. We didn't meet our goal which was to be selected for the "tourney" (what ever it is called slips my mind this second) Thought that we most certainly were going to be selected. After making many changes to our bot by the last day we were very strong. Our defense was very good, with our low COG we were able to push almost any bot back, we could make it up the ramp with ease, and were good for an easy 10 pts in autonomous whenever we wanted. (Except the time they forgot to close the side doors all the way which caused us to get stuck.)

Once again thank everyone and good luck in nationals

Our scouting had your robot ahead of the four robots that were picked after team 1124. You did yourselves proud during the qualification rounds.

A word of caution to teams picking alliances: At BAE we were picked before a better robot (team 133 BERT) and that alliance defeated us in the finals. In Hartford I think that 1124 was the best third robot, and our alliance eventually won. Choose the third robot very carefully.

Bill Pease
Team 176
2006 UTC New England Champions with 177 and 1124
2006 BAE Granite State Finalists with 319 and 562

[vVigglEs]

In Hartford I think that 1124 was the best third robot
I agree that 1124 was a steal for third round.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

I agree that 1124 was a steal for third round.
Note:1124 didnt start scoring in autonomous mode until the elimination rounds.

[Justin]

From my observations at regionals, the best alliances are the ones with three good, versatile shooters.
For instance the three robots that won UTC had strong drive trains and could each shoot a few balls.
The benefit of three shooters is in their offensive period. If all three robots can shoot, you can't defend all three. Block two of them and the third one shoots a few. Go block the third one and the one you left starts shooting.
All three of the shooters also had strong, effective drive trains. They weren't easily pushed out of the way, and could be very effective blocking.
The same thing happened at BAE. Three good shooters, with strong drivetrains.

It's not that robot are built to specifically play defense, it's that the robots are versatile. I mean, there is a 40 second period where your alliance has to play defense, so you might as well play it well. That's exactly what these robots did, and did well.

I have to disagree with this to some extent. I think that you need a versatile alliance. At UTC we witnessed an alliance made up of three amazing shooters but without little defensive capability. In the end they ended up getting d'ed up and fell to the 177 lead alliance. I think there is a lot going on in this year's game and if you can negate even one really good shooter well you might just keep yourself in the match. This is one of the things I like about this year's game it basically forces teams to play defense. If you don't play at least some up against an alliance of shooters you are going to get slaughtered. 177's strategy was exactly what it should have been and was very well executed. Moral of the story from my point of view is don't under estimate defense. Let's also be clear about the fact that 126's alliance was a very good alliance and we haven't heard the last of any of the teams on that alliance in 2006 not be a long shot.

Justin

[Greg Marra]

Note: 1124 didnt start scoring in autonomous mode until the elimination rounds.

I talked to 1124's mentors in the pits before our final qualification match (against 1124), and they showed me all of the improvements they had made to their robot after the matches ended yesterday. Between increasing the squeeze on their throwing and tweaking their autonomous mode (Thanks, Tom!) they had done a lot to improve their robot's functionality. 1124's scoring in auto proved to be extremely important, since it was what won us the autonomous modes in one of matches in the semifinals.

With the 1 to 8 then 8 to 1 alliance selection this year, the second pick is far more interesting than the first one. It's pretty easy to tell who the top notch bots are, but it takes a strong scouting team to figure out the best bots down 24 places. It's largely in thanks to our scouting and alliance selection teams that we were able to select such a strong alliance and compete so well in the eliminations.

[John Neun]

[QUOTE=Ben Piecuch]Guys,

Let's not get into an offense vs. defense argument here. Both teams 20 and 126 have very strong offensive robots, and were unfortunately the main targets for some very defensive robots at the UTC regional.

Thanks for the comments (in the whole post), Ben. As I just mentioned in another post, we had a GREAT experience in Hartford, and we hope to return. For the record, our robot had bumpers, sustained some pretty severe hits, and was nonetheless fully functional at the end of the contest. We get the idea of robust design. We also have no animus toward the winning alliance. Quite the contrary. You beat us fair and square, you outplayed us, and congratulations! I say that officially as chairman of our corporation: Congratulations to the winning alliance! Woody Flowers got a look at the structural effects of the defensive game on our robot and he said, "Too bad. You should be happy and proud of what you did in this competition." He was absolutely right, and we absolutely are, especially because this year we were given our own "Woody Flowers" in the person of Paul Kane. I appreciate the advise given previously in this thread, too. We'll do our best to improve our designs.

Of course we have room to improve, but I must also say that I have never been more proud of a machine or the way our students played our robot. Thank you all for the privilege of allowing us to be part of the competition and for allowing us to be on the field with all of you. What a wonderful bunch of people! I hope we can return to Hartford for many years to come.

[Peter Matteson]

He was absolutely right, and we absolutely are, especially because this year we were given our own "Woody Flowers" in the person of Paul Kane.

John,
You reminded me of something I had wanted to bring up. The Woody Flowers award went to a deserving individual. 15 years of FIRST and I could see in his face he still loved every minute of it. Paul was a very deserving mentor and had the unique opportunit y of having Woody hand him the award along the Dave the 2004 national Woody Flowers recipient.

[meredith]

I would like to thank Team 20 and 571 for doing a great job in the elimination rounds. Team 20- you had an amazing robot and were outstanding to work with! Team 571- your team always has a robust robot and you were also great to work with. If our motor didn't get damaged in the semis I think we would have had a shot, but unfortunately those are the breaks of FIRST. Good luck in your other regionals and see you in Atlanta.

[meredith]

I would also like to make a comment about lining up robots in autonomous mode. According to the rules, during elimination rounds the highest seed has the last chance to line up their robots accordingly. Before one of our elimination matches, all 6 teams were behind the lexan, and they were about to announce the teams, when we looked at the field our opponent left their alliance box and was repositioning their robot to hit us. Since we were about to be announced I did not have time to change our program and they hit us. I find this action violates a clearly stated rule. It also appears that this was done on purpose so we could not change our autonomous mode. This type of action does not seem to fit under the FIRST moto of gracious professionalism.

[1493kd]

rjbarra team 20 wrote-Team Albany, Great Job. We want to work with you next year. One thing is we want Albany to have an animation submitted. Our animation was better this year. We set goals to improve it every year. It is amazing with all the problems your school has faced that you even fielded a Robot.
Great Robot!

Thank you with more help from new teachers and mentors hopefully next year we will represent ourselves even better. Our new goals we have set for next year are to 1. make our pit area as nice as some of the other taems 2. Be a bigger force in the stands 3. make it past qualifying

[1493kd]

Bill Pease team 176 wrote-Our scouting had your robot ahead of the four robots that were picked after team 1124. You did yourselves proud during the qualification rounds.

A word of caution to teams picking alliances: At BAE we were picked before a better robot (team 133 BERT) and that alliance defeated us in the finals. In Hartford I think that 1124 was the best third robot, and our alliance eventually won. Choose the third robot very carefully.

Bill Pease
Team 176
2006 UTC New England Champions with 177 and 1124
2006 BAE Granite State Finalists with 319 and 562

Thank you I thought we did well ourselves. Your team did an outstanding job scouting from what I was told from our pit crew. I think strategy is very underrated in the competition.

Also I have seen many people discussing the offensive vs defensive bots.. I think that you need a well rounded team to be successful. Like they always say offense wins games defense wins championships.

One of our best moments was when we played against gaelforce in qualifying and were able to limit their offensive onslaught by pushing their bot back. Even though we lost the match..

[Zotas]

I would also like to make a comment about lining up robots in autonomous mode. According to the rules, during elimination rounds the highest seed has the last chance to line up their robots accordingly. Before one of our elimination matches, all 6 teams were behind the lexan, and they were about to announce the teams, when we looked at the field our opponent left their alliance box and was repositioning their robot to hit us. Since we were about to be announced I did not have time to change our program and they hit us. I find this action violates a clearly stated rule. It also appears that this was done on purpose so we could not change our autonomous mode. This type of action does not seem to fit under the FIRST moto of gracious professionalism.

I follow this forum regularly but I don't usually post. I've made an exception as this thread has really gotten under my skin.

I can assure everyone that the 177 alliance in no way violated any rules during the UTC regional. To say that our team intentionally violated rules to block your shooter in autonomous is reckless and I seriously hope that you do not represent the opinion of your team. The only time that you were blocked you was in SF1-2, and you didn't even run the same program that you ran in SF1-1, so you obviously changed something. We have the utmost respect for your team and it is unfortunate that you see the elimination in such poor light.

With respect to defense and pushing, we again did not intentionally tip anyone or violate any rules. We were pushed onto the ramp numerous times and even pined up there once by your alliance, team 20. We did not fall and were able to maneuver and re-enter the playing field, but that action by 20 was legal and in no way different than any defensive posture that we took. We apologize if either robot was damaged and I can assure you that was never our intention.

The FIRST world is not a perfect but the referees and judges did an amazing job given the circumstances as the field broke and they had to resort to manual scoring. They even went as far as having manual time keepers to assure that everything was fair. Great job!

Great job 20, 126 and 571. Can't wait to see you in Atlanta!

[CBelliss]

I had a great time at the UTC Regionals, as an oberver, and as the operator/shooter for Team 20. I was very happy when our mentor, Paul Kane won the Woody Flowers award, he started our team, and was very deserving of the award.

With regard to the competition and semifinals, I believe that the Bobcats and their alliance played a very strong defense. At the same time, I believe they were too aggressive, forcing our robot around even when we were in no position to affect the outcome of the match. At the end of the round we were way down in points, yet we were still forced up the opponents ramp by two robots, and tipped over. Effective defense yes, gracious professionalism, no. I believe it was uncalled for, and caused unnecessary damage to our robot. I recognize that it could have been an accident, and someone might have been carried away in the heat of competition.

I realize that this is a physical game, but there are limits. Anyways, congrats to the winners and all who participated. I am eagerly awaiting the national competition, where I hope to see as many great competive robots as the UTC regional.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

177's strategy was to play defense on 20. I assume this was under the impression that if 20 cant pick up balls, they cant score.

I did not see anything from the stands that would imply the Bobcats were playing unnecessarily hard. Either did the refs.

177 won the match fair and square. Sorry.

[Revolverx7]

I was the one of the drivers for team 358 and was amazed by the power of the Bobcats drivetrain. It was a well built machine and I had a particularly good time facing off with them in the finals. I was not dissapointed in the least to have gone up against them and came out #2. It was a powerfull alliance both in robot strenght and shooting ability. In my eyes it was a great alliance worthy of the gold.
Thanks for a great regional, and I hope to see you all in Atlanta.

[Devin L.]

I follow this forum regularly but I don't usually post. I've made an exception as this thread has really gotten under my skin.

I can assure everyone that the 177 alliance in no way violated any rules during the UTC regional. To say that our team intentionally violated rules to block your shooter in autonomous is reckless and I seriously hope that you do not represent the opinion of your team. The only time that you were blocked you was in SF1-2, and you didn't even run the same program that you ran in SF1-1, so you obviously changed something. We have the utmost respect for your team and it is unfortunate that you see the elimination in such poor light.

i would like to assure you that you did violate a rule. In the FIRST manual it says:
<T09> Prior to each match, teams shall indicate to the queuing manager their choice of available starting positions for that alliance. Once starting locations are selected, teams must place their robot in the selected location. Robots may not be repositioned in response to robot positions of the opposing alliance. During elimination rounds, teams may orient their robots within the selected locations once the robots are placed on the field. The higher seeded alliance will have the last opportunity to orient their robots within the selected locations.

during SF1-1 we saw your robot aimed diagonaly to intercept us. we decided to run the auto mode that had the robot stay in its starting box and shoot balls. during SF1-2 you lined the robot up so it was aimed directly at us. upon seeing this we selected the mode that has the robot drive out a few feet then shoot. all 6 teams then went behind their respective driver stations and the announcer was about to announce the teams when your team went back onto the field and angled your robot, which obviously meant that you violated rule T09 as you did not give us, the 1st seed, the final opportunity to reallign our robot in respect to your orrientation. im sorry for your confusion, but i just wanted to make sure that you understand that rule.

i can assure you that we will not let this rule slip by us next time as we will step forward and let the refs know that we need to reposition our robot in respect to our opponents. this is a very critical rule, as it could determin the outcome of the game. wining autonomous mode and gaining the 10pt bonus is a critical strategic manuever in this years game.

my two cents

congrats to teams 177, 176, and 1124, see you in atlanta!

[rjbarra]

I follow this forum regularly but I don't usually post. I've made an exception as this thread has really gotten under my skin.

I can assure everyone that the 177 alliance in no way violated any rules during the UTC regional. To say that our team intentionally violated rules to block your shooter in autonomous is reckless and I seriously hope that you do not represent the opinion of your team. The only time that you were blocked you was in SF1-2, and you didn't even run the same program that you ran in SF1-1, so you obviously changed something. We have the utmost respect for your team and it is unfortunate that you see the elimination in such poor light.

With respect to defense and pushing, we again did not intentionally tip anyone or violate any rules. We were pushed onto the ramp numerous times and even pined up there once by your alliance, team 20. We did not fall and were able to maneuver and re-enter the playing field, but that action by 20 was legal and in no way different than any defensive posture that we took. We apologize if either robot was damaged and I can assure you that was never our intention.

The FIRST world is not a perfect but the referees and judges did an amazing job given the circumstances as the field broke and they had to resort to manual scoring. They even went as far as having manual time keepers to assure that everything was fair. Great job!

Great job 20, 126 and 571. Can't wait to see you in Atlanta!

Listen you did a great job. You were able to adjust and defeat a powerhouses alliance. What a tournment! That was amazing! I bet you the rest of the country is shaking in their shoes. Have great season. Don't worry about anything and play your game! We will be playing our game.

[MChapman]

i would like to assure you that you did violate a rule. In the FIRST manual it says:
<T09> Prior to each match, teams shall indicate to the queuing manager their choice of available starting positions for that alliance. Once starting locations are selected, teams must place their robot in the selected location. Robots may not be repositioned in response to robot positions of the opposing alliance. During elimination rounds, teams may orient their robots within the selected locations once the robots are placed on the field. The higher seeded alliance will have the last opportunity to orient their robots within the selected locations.

during SF1-1 we saw your robot aimed diagonaly to intercept us. we decided to run the auto mode that had the robot stay in its starting box and shoot balls. during SF1-2 you lined the robot up so it was aimed directly at us. upon seeing this we selected the mode that has the robot drive out a few feet then shoot. all 6 teams then went behind their respective driver stations and the announcer was about to announce the teams when your team went back onto the field and angled your robot, which obviously meant that you violated rule T09 as you did not give us, the 1st seed, the final opportunity to reallign our robot in respect to your orrientation. im sorry for your confusion, but i just wanted to make sure that you understand that rule.

i can assure you that we will not let this rule slip by us next time as we will step forward and let the refs know that we need to reposition our robot in respect to our opponents. this is a very critical rule, as it could determin the outcome of the game. wining autonomous mode and gaining the 10pt bonus is a critical strategic manuever in this years game.

my two cents

congrats to teams 177, 176, and 1124, see you in atlanta!

I found many posts in the last few days arguing about rule violations and team 177's alliance allegedly trying to hit 126 alliance. My two cents I dont think it is worth fighting over after the fact. If you saw this as a problem at the regional why didnt you ask the refs if they were aware of this rule so you could have repositioned your robot?? Instead you wait till afterward to argue about it. Where is our Gracious Professionalism that we talk so much about?? FIRST is not about complaining about what each team does for strategy or how we position our robot. Defense is a key strategy in this game and like mentioned before that is why we have bumpers, and are not allowed to hit above the bumper zone. If any of our alliance robots hit the other alliance i'm sure we were sure not to hit above the bumper zone because we would have had penalties. I have faith that the refs are professionals an know what they are doing. So, as a friendly FIRST person why dont we drop all these alligations against these teams. This is not why we are in FIRST. We are here to have fun an enjoy science and technology.

[MWTrek]

Amen,
This issue is no longer whether rules were violated. It is (as Mel had said above me) how the teams handle the loss. Over the past few years there have been rules which are not totally clear. Most teams (including 176) feel that they may have lost a competition due to ref or field error at one point or another. There is absolutely nothing you do about what happened. If anything you are just making it worse.
Just recently we had someone sign up as a member to our forum and spam it saying that we suck. This is not what FIRST is about. Keep in mind when arguing about the rules that no matter how much you complain nothing will happen. Keep in mind FIRST's motto "Gracious Professionalism".
I am not saying it is not ok to argue your point, just please keep it professional. Remember your grandmother could be watching :)

[BobC]

Your mission was to play defense with not only power but incredible speed and maneuverability. A lot of our team members wanted to pick you. You carried yourself well in the pits, on the field
and in the stadium. Even though we are from NY this is our home tournament. We are already talking about coming back to UTC. If somebody picks us at UTC we will always accept. It is a great honor for us. There are a lot of years where our robot can not even get out of its own way. We are not like the Beast with a great robot every year. I think it will be years before we have a robot like this again. We wish you the best of luck.
How do you know their mission was just to play defense? Even it was and they picked two good offensive robots that was very good strategy. Team 177 I think proved where scouting is very important. Team 176 finish fourth overall in average points. When 177 was picked by a higher ranked team they declined the invite join them. Team 177 had their mission in mind and stuck to it. It seems to me it was the right decision,

[Freddy Schurr]

OK, everyone, lets be calm about it and chill for a bit.

Moderators, I asked that you closed this thread.

[rjbarra]

OK, everyone, lets be calm about it and chill for a bit.

Moderators, I asked that you closed this thread.
Closed this thread. Lets move on.