30 Bonus Points Pre-Autonomous?

[Travis Hoffman]

Interesting development at Midwest - a robot started out on top of another robot before autonomous. 111 went 1 on 3 the entire match (kudos to little ol' 2041 for their incessant defense - my new favorite robot), but the Stang alliance ended up winning anyway. The bonus points counted, but the robot "tandem" was kept inside the home zone. I couldn't tell from the webcast - were they disabled? If so, what was the reasoning? Sounds like a fun YMTC....

[ChuckDickerson]

You are saying the robots were setup that way at the beginning of the match? One on top of the other? Any it counted? Darn, why didn't we ever think of that!

[Travis Hoffman]

You are saying the robots were setup that way at the beginning of the match? One on top of the other? Any it counted? Darn, why didn't we ever think of that!

Yes it counted, but I still want to know why the robots weren't allowed outside of their home zone. Maybe they didn't want to move?

[Lil' Lavery]

Yes it counted, but I still want to know why the robots weren't allowed outside of their home zone. Maybe they didn't want to move? Maybe due to S01? Who knows?

I think they chose to just sit there to guarantee the 30 point bonus.

[Ricky Q.]

Rumor has it Raul came up with this strategy.

[Starke]

That is an awesome strategy. I have thought about that tatic, but never decided to implement it. Great job Wildstang and alliance! :yikes:

[Lil' Lavery]

Rumor has it Raul came up with this strategy.

The idea was probably bounced around by a bunch of teams, and was even discussed on Delphi. Raul might have been the first one with the stones to actually use it though :rolleyes:

[MariaChristineK]

kudos on the brilliant strategy! Our team never even thought of that! However, one reason they may not have left home zone was because it was too risky driving a robot around with another on top...I know I have seen robots that would be "safe" doing that!

[Travis Hoffman]

The idea was probably bounced around by a bunch of teams, and was even discussed on Delphi. Raul might have been the first one with the stones to actually use it though :rolleyes:

But who among us has the intestinal fortitude to actually stack one robot on top of another on top of another??? :ahh: Takes the right kind of alliance (and opponent). I'd love to see that conglomeration move outside the home zone.

[ChuckDickerson]

Since I didn't see it I assume the robot on the bottom didn't violate the starting size (28" x 38" x X") restriction? Anyone grab a picture that they can post?

[Travis Hoffman]

Since I didn't see it I assume the robot on the bottom didn't violate the starting size (28" x 38" x X") restriction? Anyone grab a picture that they can post?

No pictures, but that is correct - all robots have to fulfill the starting dimension requirements.

[teenmisfit]

This is absolutely crazy... u get points for people placing a robot on top of another robot before the match starts? isnt the point of the bonuses for robots to get themselves up? I totally do not approve of this rule and am astonished it was allowed by FIRST

[slickguy2007]

I smell an update coming....:rolleyes:

[Pavan Dave]

This is absolutely crazy... u get points for people placing a robot on top of another robot before the match starts? isnt the point of the bonuses for robots to get themselves up? I totally do not approve of this rule and am astonished it was allowed by FIRST

I agree with you here. The only time I would not mind this is if one of the robots was "piggy backing" another robot the whole match. Like a scorer secured to another bot so that the team still had a chance scoring. I think that is what the ultimate test would be. But think about how good those teams have to coordinate the effort.

[Travis Hoffman]

7.3.3.1 Starting Conditions



<G26>

Starting positions - At the beginning of a match, the three alliance ROBOTS must be placed

entirely inside their HOME ZONE. It is the responsibility of the head referee to verify that this

rule is satisfied prior to the start of the match. The match will not be started until all robots
are in the starting position.

<G28> Starting size - At the beginning of a match, each ROBOT must not exceed the maximum
volume specified in Section 8. The ROBOT'S maximum starting height is proportional to its
maximum weight. It is the responsibility of the head referee to verify that this rule is satisfied prior to the start of the match. The head referee may call for an inspector's recertification of
the ROBOT size and weight prior to the start of any match.








I believe both robots satisfied the above rules. This strategy has a lot of risk attached to it - you are basically removing 2 of your alliance robots from performing any *useful* activities for the bulk of the match.


I want to see an alliance make a robot 3-stack, just for the heck of it.

I predict Dave will celebrate this strategy. That's all he can do given the current rules, which are clear.

[AdamHeard]

I smell an update coming....:rolleyes:

Nah... this seems too big of a thing to be completely left out of the rules.

It is a a very risky strategy though. In the best case, you give up one robot in a match (the one on top, bottom still drives) in the worst case it becomes 1v3 (staying in home zone).

It's not such an exploitable strategy that it requires a rule change midway through the competition.

[BRosser314]

Seems like the work of Raul, nice going:D :D

[Mike Soukup]

Anyone grab a picture that they can post?
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/27756

[Dave Flowerday]

This strategy has a lot of risk attached to it - you are basically removing 2 of your alliance robots from performing any *useful* activities for the bulk of the match.
In this case, essentially the opposite is true - both robots in the "stack" were non-functional. This strategy allowed them to usefully contribute to the success of the alliance despite being broken.

[JaneYoung]

In this case, essentially the opposite is true - both robots in the "stack" were non-functional. This strategy allowed them to usefully contribute to the success of the alliance despite being broken.

YaY!

[The Lucas]

Very interesting strategy. It allows a broken/disabled robot to score 30 pts in some situations, which is more than many working robot alliances can score. However, it is very risky. All an opponent would have to do is push the robot tandam out of the endzone and the bonus points would be negated. Considering how precarious this robot stack is balanced, I don't think the bottom robot could drive around much to avoid defense without spilling its "cargo".

Props to Wildstang for pulling this strategy off, and with a 46 -10 win, they didn't even need the 30 bonus points.

EDIT: Even if the opposing robots did come after the "robot stack", anyone who has seen the 2003 "Stack Attack" game knows how good Wildstang and their crab drive is at defending stacks.

[Travis Hoffman]

All an opponent would have to do is push the robot tandam out of the endzone and the bonus points would be negated. Considering how precarious this robot stack is balanced, I don't think the bottom robot could drive around much to avoid defense without spilling its "cargo".



Meanies.

[raymaniac]

This kind of reminds me of Power Rangers.

You know how twords the end of every episode, they would all call their big robots and cobine them with eachother's robots, making one big super robot...

Now what if an aliance made all their bots so that they could combine like that and make a super-bot...

[ChuckDickerson]

I vote this as the most creative play of the season I have seen so far.

Now that a photo of the "stack" has been posted does anyone have a photo of 1755 and/or 1850 in their "normal" starting configuration? It is hard to tell from the photo what parts are part of which robot (on top).

1) I can only see one blue flag so I can't figure out where the other one is.

2) I am wondering if 1850 actually meets the minimum starting height requirement. It sort of looks like it may just be a box without an arm on top and thereby sort of looks like it is shorter than it is long. Hopefully this is just the way it looks in the photo and the PVC arm/gripper is part of 1850.

[CourtneyB]

great strat :)

[sanddrag]

What happens if the other alliance knocks down the stack? Do they get DQed?

[Alex Cormier]

What happens if the other alliance knocks down the stack? Do they get DQed?

i'd say it would be legal if the contact was within the lower robot's 'bumper zone'.

[teenmisfit]

7.3.3.1 Starting Conditions



<G26>

Starting positions - At the beginning of a match, the three alliance ROBOTS must be placed

entirely inside their HOME ZONE. It is the responsibility of the head referee to verify that this

rule is satisfied prior to the start of the match. The match will not be started until all robots
are in the starting position.

<G28> Starting size - At the beginning of a match, each ROBOT must not exceed the maximum
volume specified in Section 8. The ROBOT'S maximum starting height is proportional to its
maximum weight. It is the responsibility of the head referee to verify that this rule is satisfied prior to the start of the match. The head referee may call for an inspector's recertification of
the ROBOT size and weight prior to the start of any match.








I believe both robots satisfied the above rules. This strategy has a lot of risk attached to it - you are basically removing 2 of your alliance robots from performing any *useful* activities for the bulk of the match.


I want to see an alliance make a robot 3-stack, just for the heck of it.

I predict Dave will celebrate this strategy. That's all he can do given the current rules, which are clear.











It is the refs job to see if this satisfies the robots are in proper starting position. My team is out there and they say the reffing is very "leniant". One of the matches against us today a ramp bot lifted 2 bots 4 inches. But the 2 robots lifted were clearly touching the wall and we saw this and the refs made no note of it and it was too late for us to complain. I do not beleive a head ref should allow this starting position because it does not follow the rule in scoring points in a game. The points are NOT scored in the 2:15min game period. they are scored prior to the match. We might as well walk on the field before a match and put up ringers on the rack.

[sanddrag]

We might as well walk on the field before a match and put up ringers on the rack.No, see, that would not be legal.

I like this. If I was on the opposing alliance I'd be happy to see this so I got more ranking (or are they called qualifying) points when I win.

[teenmisfit]

No, see, that would not be legal.

I like this. If I was on the opposing alliance I'd be happy to see this so I got more ranking (or are they called qualifying) points when I win.

so then y is scoring points by stacking bots before a match legal? is it not the same thing? or am i wrong? i fully understand how there is no rule saying you cant stack like this at the beginning (except the robot on top may not be in its starting dimensions being that high in the air and the refs have no way of seeing if it really fits in its sizing box) but i would question that this bot "scored" 30 points because for doing nothing.

[Travis Hoffman]

so then y is scoring points before a match legal? its the same thing? or am i wrong? i fully understand how there is no rule saying you cant stack like this at the beginning (except the robot on top may not be in its starting dimensions being that high in the air and the refs have no way of seeing if it really fits in its sizing box) but i would question that this bot "scored" 30 points. Mustnt the robot climb or be lifted by another robot to get points?

I don't believe the points are officially scored until the match is over.

Woo new YMTC.

[Biff]

Watched it happen on the webcast, The announcer let the crowd know that the rules had been checked and the pre match stack was indeed legal. Did my heart good as I had seen a 30 point stack get DSQ's due to an interfering tube and GLR. Glad to know there are teams that are thinking outside the box.

[BrianR]

Okay, I was there and talked to the head ref about this incident. He spent a good deal of time checking to see if this was legal, and he said the only rule that would challenge this position would be the bumper rule. The question is whether the bumper zone "travels with" the robot, or if stays on the ground. The reason that he allowed it was there is no infraction for climbing a ramp with bumpers, so he said that precendent lets this through.

By the way, both robots were E-Stopped the moment the drivers could touch the controls.

My only question is: what happens when someone runs into the lower robot? You are allowed to hit them, but if they are E-Stopped, it would then be with the intention to knock the top robot off. This would technically be "tipping", and would qualify for a penalty. Also, it poses a danger to your robot because you don't know how the robots will react to being pushed.

I send my congradulations to Raul and Wildstang for managing to pull this one off.

[DB_UPS]

Do you know if there is a video for this match on the web? A link would be nice! Nice strategy :D

[Dave Flowerday]

To those questioning the legality of this, the GDC has made it clear on the Q&A:

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1280

FRC1618
Section 7.3.3.1 dictates the starting conditions of the robot, but one question remains: Can a robot start on top of another robot, provided that both fit within their respective size restrictions?

GDC
There is no rule that would prohibit this.

[Billfred]

To those questioning the legality of this, the GDC has made it clear on the Q&A:

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1280
I was waiting for somebody to post a link to that Q&A. (That question was purely speculative--never, as far as I'm aware, in the history of FRC has that condition been possible.)

Legal or not (in fact or perception), it's still a gutsy move. I say kudos to all the teams on that alliance--when life gave them lemons, they made thirty points.

[EHaskins]

1103 happened to be on the opposing alliance to this. We lost 10-46.

Not a bad strategy.;)

[ChrisH]

A great way for non-running robots to contribute to thier alliance. Maybe a few robots will actually take the field that might have just sent a human player.

Of course if the other alliance can score 5 ringers you might just be adding to thier QPs by doing this.

[sonicx059]

That is an awesome strategy. I have thought about that tatic, but never decided to implement it. Great job Wildstang and alliance! :yikes:
At a match today a side got disqualified for doing that, i think.

[GaryVoshol]

At a match today a side got disqualified for doing that, i think.
You think? Maybe if you posted where and who, it could be checked. Else it's just speculation.

[teenmisfit]

It is legal to start like this but does the robot earn the points for doing it? Robots didnt score the points... People putting robots on the field did.

[Dave Flowerday]

Robots didnt score the points... People putting robots on the field did.
Take a look at rule <G56> - it explains how points for elevated robots are earned at the end of the match. It doesn't say anything about requiring a robot to be the one to do the work to elevate another robot. It also specifies that the points are scored at the end of the match as long as the conditions are met.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

It is legal to start like this but does the robot earn the points for doing it? Robots didnt score the points... People putting robots on the field did.

As long as the robots are in the home zone and elevated when the match ends it does not matter when (or how) they were elevated.

[acetech-st]

You can see Ace Tech - Team 1850 in action (alone) on YouTube from last week's Regional competition in Milwaukee.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddC511SUqbY

Steve
(Mentor team 1850)

[Cody Carey]

If the bottom robot had enough height... It would be totally legal to bungy the top one in place, right?

[The Lucas]

If the bottom robot had enough height... It would be totally legal to bungy the top one in place, right?

<R114> At the time of inspection, the ROBOT must be presented with all mechanisms (including all components of each mechanism) and configurations that will be used on the ROBOT during the entire competition event. It is acceptable, however, for a ROBOT to play matches with a subset of the mechanisms that were present during inspection. Only mechanisms that were present during the inspection may be added, removed or reconfigured between matches. If subsets of mechanisms are changed between matches, the reconfigured ROBOT must still meet all inspection criteria.

Since the bungy would essentially change configuration when you attach it at the beginning of every match, you could not possibly satisfy this rule. When the inspector tells you "Put your robot in its starting configuration and put it in the box.", what are you going to tell him? You can't put your robot in its starting configuration because it varies.

How this doesn't apply to static pegs you might put on the top of your bot that might support the outside frame of a bot that is on top of you (like 1850's arm).

[Cody Carey]

What about the teams that used bungies to hold their ramps up, and didn't present them at inspection?

Wouldn't it work to just present the bungies at the inspection table? And wouldn't it still meet the inspection criteria after any change, and thus be legal due to The part of the rule quoted below?

If subsets of mechanisms are changed between matches, the reconfigured ROBOT must still meet all inspection criteria.

[The Lucas]

What about the teams that used bungies to hold their ramps up, and didn't present them at inspection?

Wouldn't it work to just present the bungies at the inspection table? And wouldn't it still meet the inspection criteria after any change, and thus be legal due to The part of the rule quoted below?

If you are going to use bungies to hold up your ramps in some matches you do do have to declare that at inspection. I know many robots do not. The difference is that the bungies that hold up your ramps are always in the same configuration (same shape, attaches in the same way) when they are on your robot. The bungies for attaching to another bot are always a different shape attached in a different way. You cant possibly show all of an infinite number of ways of attaching to other bots.

And again, how would you put it in the box in its starting configuration?

[JamesBrown]

If you are going to use bungies to hold up your ramps in some matches you do do have to declare that at inspection. I know many robots do not. The difference is that the bungies that hold up your ramps are always in the same configuration (same shape, attaches in the same way) when they are on your robot. The bungies for attaching to another bot are always a different shape attached in a different way. You cant possible show all of an infinite number of ways of attaching to other bots.

And again, how would you put it in the box in its starting configuration?

What if you could prove that even when fully streched in any direction the bungees did not extend out side of the starting configuration?

[The Lucas]

What if you could prove that even when fully streched in any direction the bungees did not extend out side of the starting configuration?

How do you intend to prove this?

[Cody Carey]

I honestly don't think it would be a problem.

Push comes to shove, and you take it over to the inspection table and show them the bungees with your alliance partner's robot tied onto yours.

They would probably even take an explanation and demonstration that the bungees would never exit the envelope when securing another robot's base..

There should be no reason for you to have to demonstrate that there is no possible way for the bungees to exit the starting envelope, because they are allowed to.

[The Lucas]

I honestly don't think it would be a problem.

Push comes to shove, and you take it over to the inspection table and show them the bungees with your alliance partner's robot tied onto yours.

They would probably even take an explanation and demonstration that the bungees would never exit the envelope when securing another robot's base..

There should be no reason for you to have to demonstrate that there is no possible way for the bungees to exit the starting envelope, because they are allowed to.

You still haven't answered how you are getting it into the box (no every robot in the event can't go in with you).

I am on record as liking this strategy. If you want to put tread on top of your bot or even build a claw that grabs your partner during the match I am fine with that. However, I consider bungies (or wire ties) illegal for reasons I have stated. I would not pass you unless you produced some rule or Q&A answer that showed otherwise.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

. The bungies for attaching to another bot are always a different shape attached in a different way. You cant possibly show all of an infinite number of ways of attaching to other bots.

And again, how would you put it in the box in its starting configuration?

You do not need to.

Consider a robot that has ramps that will deplot outside the 'box'. They must start inside the 'box' at the start of the match. Bungees are the same. If you were to wrap a bungee around another robot, then it is up to the head referee to measure to make sure you are still within the 'box'.

[The Lucas]

You do not need to.

Consider a robot that has ramps that will deplot outside the 'box'. They must start inside the 'box' at the start of the match. Bungees are the same. If you were to wrap a bungee around another robot, then it is up to the head referee to measure to make sure you are still within the 'box'.

The robot deploys the ramps under its own power during the match. If the robot can attach the bungie under its own power during the match and not present an entanglement hazard to opposing robots then it could be legal. Humans attaching bungies before the match is different.

[boy_scout72688]

I was the scorekeeper for the Detroit Regional. We were asked the same question and our reply (refs and myslef) was "according to the rules, there is no rule against it, however it must fit inside of the requird starting demensions, and if you move the robot, it will be disabled and disqualified for unsafe manor on the field and could result in a penelty." That was are call. But I do agree, that is totally retarted and definatly not like FIRST at all.


James

[Adamskiy]

retarted Irony? :p (just kidding)

I'm of the opinion that alliances should be allowed to stack/lean/whatever their robots however they want before a match starts, as long as each individual robot is of course compliant all size/weight/configuration restrictions. Because, for example, what if you start out with one robot sitting next to and touching another (I can't imagine a reason for this, but this is just for argument's sake)....together, they're outside of the width restriction....so would a referee disallow this? I doubt it. It's really not any different when placing one robot on top of another, except for that it's a method of scoring this year.

[Daniel Brim]

A great way for non-running robots to contribute to thier alliance. Maybe a few robots will actually take the field that might have just sent a human player.

Of course if the other alliance can score 5 ringers you might just be adding to thier QPs by doing this.And your own.

I love this strategy. It's innovative and lets others contribute. It just proves that there is no box for some FIRST teams :)

[acetech-st]

Don't look now, but Team 1850 (ACE Tech - Chicago, IL) just helped win the Midwest Regional!:ahh:!

http://www2.usfirst.org/2007comp/events/IL/awards.html

Does anyone need a ride to Atlanta?

-S