Nats Alliances

[Corey Balint]

Anyone wanna help out with this?
I need a few others to post the alliances for a division. Well just one other really.

I've got
Curie-Ben Gagne
Galileo-Alex Cormier
Archimedes-Me
We need Newton, so could someone help out with that? It would be much appreciated. Post here if you can please.

[Corey Balint]

Newton or Archimedes anyone?
I'll take whatever isn't taken.

[ScoutingNerd175]

Newton or Archimedes anyone?
I'll take whatever isn't taken.

I can do Archimedes, that is what I will be watching.

[Vikesrock]

I can post Newton

[Corey Balint]

I can do Archimedes, that is what I will be watching.

Thank you!
Just post it here, so everyone can have all the info. I know people had issues with finding out last year.

[Alex Cormier]

well nasa tv is showing gal as of last match so far. hopefully they stay with gal for the alliance pairings!

[JulieB]

well nasa tv is showing gal as of last match so far. hopefully they stay with gal for the alliance pairings!

Im hoping they will switch to Curie because the Webcast for Curie has NO sound.

[Alex Cormier]

Im hoping they will switch to Curie because the Webcast for Curie has NO sound.

But But But Gal has ZERO commercials. :p

looks like they will stick with gal! they have the alliance parings screen up!

[Sakura141]

But But But Gal has ZERO commercials. :p

looks like they will stick with gal! they have the alliance parings screen up!

NASA must hate Curie >.<

[JulieB]

But But But Gal has ZERO commercials. :p

looks like they will stick with gal! they have the alliance parings screen up!

Yeah the commercials are annoying I have seen ones about a billion times just day.

[Corey Balint]

If everyone could post them as soon as they can thatd be awesome!

[JulieB]

Yeah I think ALEX wins

[Spikey]

Picking Alliances from Archimedes

1. 494
2. 233
3. 1302
4. 386
5. 1824
6. 293
7. 85
8. 1516

1516 is currently mia for some reason, what are the rules on a missing picker?

edit they found 1516

[Corey Balint]

As soon as you got the whole lists, post them.

[Dan-o]

Curie's Alliances

#1 - 1732 - 67 - 48
#2 - 330 - 918 - 1270
#3 - 195 - 121 - 126
#4 - 1305 - 176 - 2166
#5 - 1114 - 469 - 1523
#6 - 2054 - 558 - 365
#7 - 1700 - 234 - 118
#8 - 2165 - 60 - 1087

Disclaimer: Some of the numbers are a bit fuzzy. If I have a digit off, please don't kill me.

Thanks for clarifying, This should be correct now.

[Alex Cormier]

Galileo

1. 1425, 25, 488
2. 173, 1902, 1319
3. 2272, 45, 217
4. 1126, 229, 191 :)
5. 1712, 2056, 703
6. 1595, 116, 93
7. 341, 56, 279
8. 65, 503, 79

[joshsmithers]

Galileo

1. 1425, 25, 488
2. 173, 1902, 1319
3. 2272, 45, 217
4. 1126, 229, 191
5. 1712, 2056, 703
6. 1595, 116, 93
7. 341, 56, 279
8. 65, 503, 79

Galileo looks like it will be a very competitive tournement.:ahh:

[ScoutingNerd175]

Archimedes
1. 494, 254, 997
2. 233, 71, 179
3. 1302, 27, 223
4. 386, 85, 107
5. 1824, 175, 1153
6. 293, 100, 2062
7. 1516, 364, 1501
8. 1533, 47, 768

subs
1912
2134
1086
1683
832
1662
120
329

[Jonathan Norris]

Any word on Curie?

Ahh the webcast is too blurry... 1732 picked 67 first thats about all i can see.


edit: this is what i got so far:
1. 1732 67
2. 330 910 (i think)
3. 195 121
4. 1305 176

just saw 1114 get 118 in the second round, dont know who they got first.

[Pat McCarthy]

Oh man, 118's acceptance was one for the books!

[Tetraman]

4. 1126, 229, 191 :)

If they win, FLR next year is going to be nuts. haha

Good luck all teams. Galileo looks highly competitive.

[nutron5skills]

Archimedes
1. 494 254 997
2. 233 71 179
3. 1302 27 223
4. 386 85 107
5. 1824 175 1153
6. 293 100 2062
7. 1516 264 1501
8. 1533 47 768

didn't see that it was already up there

[Spikey]

Archimedes
1. 494, 254, 997
2. 233, 71, 179
3. 1302, 27, 223
4. 386, 85, 107
5. 1824, 175, 1153
6. 293, 100, 2062
7. 1516, 364, 1501
8. 1533, 47, 768
Interesting, almost no inpicking among the top 8:ahh:

[BoyWithCape195]

Curie Alliances

1 1732, 67, 48

2 330, 910, 1270

3 195, 121, 126

4 1305, 176, 2166

5 1114, 469, 1523

6 2054, 558, 365

7 1700, 234, 118

8 2165, 60, 1087

[Corey Balint]

Curie Alliances

1 1732, 67, 48

2 330, 910, 1270

3 195, 121, 126

4 1305, 176, 2166

5 1114, 469, 1523

6 2054, 558, 365

7 1700, 234, 118

8 2165, 60, 1087


Archimedes
1. 494, 254, 997
2. 233, 71, 179
3. 1302, 27, 223
4. 386, 85, 107
5. 1824, 175, 1153
6. 293, 100, 2062
7. 1516, 364, 1501
8. 1533, 47, 768


Galileo

1. 1425, 25, 488
2. 173, 1902, 1319
3. 2272, 45, 217
4. 1126, 229, 191
5. 1712, 2056, 703
6. 1595, 116, 93
7. 341, 56, 279
8. 65, 503, 79

[Vikesrock]

Newton

2194-33-1503
1574-148-1102
1124-1592-1816
68-111-2068
247-1038-811
1311-1369-181
1511-537-39
190-987-177

Backups: 1657, 1089, 122, 2047

[Spider-Man]

Curie's Alliances

#1 - 1732 - 67 - 48
#2 - 338 - 918 - 1270
#3 - 195 - 121 - 126
#4 - 1305 - 176 - 2166
#5 - 1114 - 469 - 1523
#6 - 2054 - 558 - 365
#7 - 1706 - 234 - 118
#8 - 2165 - 60 - 1087

Disclaimer: Some of the numbers are a bit fuzzy. If I have a digit off, please don't kill me.
Yeah, change 338 => 330 and 1706 => 1700 and that's accurate I think.

[Corey Balint]

Newton

2194-33-1503
1574-148-1102
1124-1592-1816
68-111-2068
247-1038-811
1311-1369-181
1511-537-39
190-987-177

Curie Alliances

1 1732, 67, 48
2 330, 910, 1270
3 195, 121, 126
4 1305, 176, 2166
5 1114, 469, 1523
6 2054, 558, 365
7 1700, 234, 118
8 2165, 60, 1087


Archimedes
1. 494, 254, 997
2. 233, 71, 179
3. 1302, 27, 223
4. 386, 85, 107
5. 1824, 175, 1153
6. 293, 100, 2062
7. 1516, 364, 1501
8. 1533, 47, 768


Galileo

1. 1425, 25, 488
2. 173, 1902, 1319
3. 2272, 45, 217
4. 1126, 229, 191
5. 1712, 2056, 703
6. 1595, 116, 93
7. 341, 56, 279
8. 65, 503, 79

[ScoutingNerd175]

Interesting, almost no inpicking among the top 8:ahh:

Yep, only happened once. And the highest seed not picked was 14. Lots of people picking lower seeds.

[Jonathan Norris]

Curie Alliances

1 1732, 67, 48

2 330, 910, 1270

3 195, 121, 126

4 1305, 176, 2166

5 1114, 469, 1523

6 2054, 558, 365

7 1700, 234, 118

8 2165, 60, 1087

very interesting alliances, looks like alliance 3 is going all scoring (121 does have a single ramp), alliance 5 with two good ramps (1114, 469) and three scorers is going to be interesting. Watch-out for alliance 4, 1305 and 176 are very good scorers, and 2166 is a very good ramp with a solid drive.

[vhcook]

Oh man, 118's acceptance was one for the books!

What'd they say? The Curie webcast is a silent movie at the moment :(

[Vince lau]

Curie 4 vs 5 should be good
looks like 1305 is against 1114 again

[Jonathan Norris]

Curie 4 vs 5 should be good
looks like 1305 is against 1114 again

I am really starting to feel sorry for 1305 this year, they have faced 1114 alot... and as much as i love 1305, i think 1114 has the better alliance here and will probably move on.

[Tottanka]

In Newton alliance 2 is going far...1574, 148, 1102 massive hanging and an awesome hybrid for 2 12'

[xzvrw2]

watch out for Galilieo #2 alliance.
173 1902 1319
that is going to be crazy

here is my opinion for galilieo:

1. 1425, 25, 488
2. 173, 1902, 1319
3. 2272, 45, 217
4. 1126, 229, 191
5. 1712, 2056, 703
6. 1595, 116, 93
7. 341, 56, 279
8. 65, 503, 79

1<8 (3 matches) 2>7
4<5 3>6

5<8 2>3

2>8 (3 matches)




Arch:
1. 494, 254, 997
2. 233, 71, 179
3. 1302, 27, 223
4. 386, 85, 107
5. 1824, 175, 1153
6. 293, 100, 2062
7. 1516, 364, 1501
8. 1533, 47, 768

1>8 2>7 (3 matches)
4>5 (3 matches) 3<6 (3 matches)

1>4 2>6

1>2


Newton:
2194-33-1503
1574-148-1102
1124-1592-1816
68-111-2068
247-1038-811
1311-1369-181
1511-537-39
190-987-177

1>8 (3 matches...last match is a scare..comes down to penalties) 2>7 (3 matches)
4<5 (3 matches) 3>6 (3 matches)

1<5 2<5

5>2

Curie:
1 1732, 67, 48
2 330, 910, 1270
3 195, 121, 126
4 1305, 176, 2166
5 1114, 469, 1523
6 2054, 558, 365
7 1700, 234, 118
8 2165, 60, 1087

1>8 2>7
4>5 (3 huge matches!!!!!!!!!) 3>6

1<4 2>3

4>2


Einstein:
Arch:494, 254, 997
Galilieo:173, 1902, 1319
Curie:1305, 176, 2166
Newton:247-1038-811

i dont know who plays who here.
but my guess is that galilieo is going to win it all them or arch

[lukevanoort]

My prediction for Einstein:
Curie 1114, 469, 1523
Archimedes 233, 71, 179
Newton 190, 987, 177
Galileo 1425, 25, 488

Curie wins.

[Dan-o]

In a year or two, I can see someone developing a good March Madness type bracket interface for people to fill out brackets on. That way all of us sitting at home can get a little competitive with our picks.

[Guy Davidson]

I'll beg to differ, especially because some of your predictions can't happen. For example, the 1v8 winner plays the 4v5 winner, hence you cannot have 1 over 6 in the semi finals.

Galileo:
1. 1425, 25, 488
2. 173, 1902, 1319
3. 2272, 45, 217
4. 1126, 229, 191
5. 1712, 2056, 703
6. 1595, 116, 93
7. 341, 56, 279
8. 65, 503, 79

1 over 8 in 3, 2 over 7
3 over 6, 5 over 4

1 over 5 in 3 hard ones, 3 over 2

1 over 3 in 3.

Archi:
1. 494, 254, 997
2. 233, 71, 179
3. 1302, 27, 223
4. 386, 85, 107
5. 1824, 175, 1153
6. 293, 100, 2062
7. 1516, 364, 1501
8. 1533, 47, 768

1 over 8, 2 over 7
6 over 3, 5 over 4.

1 over 5, 2 over 6

1 over 2

Newton:
1. 2194-33-1503
2. 1574-148-1102
3. 1124-1592-1816
4. 68-111-2068
5. 247-1038-811
6. 1311-1369-181
7. 1511-537-39
8. 190-987-177

8 over 1 in 3, 2 over 7
3 over 6, 4 over 5

4 over 8, 2 over 3

4 over 2

Curie:
1 1732, 67, 48
2 330, 910, 1270
3 195, 121, 126
4 1305, 176, 2166
5 1114, 469, 1523
6 2054, 558, 365
7 1700, 234, 118
8 2165, 60, 1087

1 over 8, 2 over 7
3 over 6, 5 over 4

5 over 1, 3 over 2

5 over 3.

In Einstein:
Galileo: 1425, 25, 488
Newton: 68, 111, 2068
Archimedes: 494, 254, 997
Curie: 1114, 469, 1523

From here on I really have no idea. I'm a bit afraid of how many favorites (higher seeded) alliance I'm picking to win, but let's see how it plays out.

[Tottanka]

Einstein:

Curie : 1114 - 469 - 1523
Galileo: 1425 - 25 - 488
Newton: 1574 - 148 - 1102
Archimedes: 233 - 71 - 179

and from here on its all up to strategy

[Joe Johnson]

Did anyone WATCH the picks on Curie? Was there some sort of crazy haze in the air or something?

I am not taking anything away from the teams drafted but seriously, how did 1114 get 469 on the 5th pick? Did #5 seed, 1114 get drafted and turn them down?

I don't understand it.

Joe J.

[Corey Balint]

Did anyone WATCH the picks on Curie? Was there some sort of crazy haze in the air or something?

I am not taking anything away from the teams drafted but seriously, how did 1114 get 469 on the 5th pick? Did #5 seed, 1114 get drafted and turn them down?

I don't understand it.

Joe J.

469 has not been doing very well this weekend.
1114 has been only above average, not at their normal level.
Curie feed was lost dugin alliance selections, so I dont know what happened besides that.

[xzvrw2]

1114 must have turned people down....its 1114 even if they are not at their best...they are still freaking awesome.

[SSMike]

Einstein:
Galileo:1126, 229, 191
Curie:1114, 469, 1523
Newton:68-111-2068
Arch:494, 254, 997

Winner: Rochester Robotics Rebels (Sorry I had to say it), 1126, 229, 1126(Galileo)

Probably totally wrong but we'll see:)

[VEN]

I was hoping 1305 would pick 1114 and then a rampbot...

[Ian Curtis]

Is it just me, or are these matches turning out to be really close? Matches I would expect a blow out, I'm seeing the higher seed only eek out a win, or lose. Weird, but very exciting none the less.

[Corey Balint]

25 is out.

[xzvrw2]

25 is out.

YES THEY AER!!!

[VEN]

:( 1305 176 2166

[Psychoflood]

25 went down suprisingly fast o.o

[Bongle]

1114 has been only above average, not at their normal level.
In all honesty, I think 1114 is simply not as dominant a design as they were last year. At each of their regionals, they were good, yes, but they weren't as unstoppably good as they were last year. Last year, their autonomous was 90%+ accurate, they were unmoveable when in shooting positions, they were very easy to human-load, they were fast. This year, they are good at everything, but the margin that they are better than other people isn't quite as large.

Maybe part of it is that when the triplets were all together, tactics-development proceeded at three times the rate. 1503/1680 might try something with their robot, and say "hey, this worked for us", and so their tactics would evolve quickly.

On the tactics note, they certainly matter a lot more at nats where people can conceivably fill the rack in a match. At most regionals, you could be satisisfied with just putting up tubes as fast as your alliance could do it, but here it looks to be ludicrously important to block off your opponents early.

[Barry Bonzack]

2165 and their alliance is out. What a great rookie year from a team in smalltown Bartlesville Oklahoma!

[tkwetzel]

Go 116!!!

They advanced to the semi-finals with 93 and 1595 knocking off 45, 217, and 2272!

[Adam McLeod]

I think the difference isn't in the design of the robot, it's in the game. This just isn't a game where you can shoot tons of balls into a goal, rather it's a game with a limited number of scoring opportunities and a common goal. Last year's game was one where a dominant robot almost never lost (25 is another example), this year's game is one where a dominant robot like 1114 (yes I still think they're dominant) has to work a bit harder to win their two regionals. Note that they still won those two regionals...

In all honesty, I think 1114 is simply not as dominant a design as they were last year. At each of their regionals, they were good, yes, but they weren't as unstoppably good as they were last year. Last year, their autonomous was 90%+ accurate, they were unmoveable when in shooting positions, they were very easy to human-load, they were fast. This year, they are good at everything, but the margin that they are better than other people isn't quite as large.

Maybe part of it is that when the triplets were all together, tactics-development proceeded at three times the rate. 1503/1680 might try something with their robot, and say "hey, this worked for us", and so their tactics would evolve quickly.

On the tactics note, they certainly matter a lot more at nats where people can conceivably fill the rack in a match. At most regionals, you could be satisisfied with just putting up tubes as fast as your alliance could do it, but here it looks to be ludicrously important to block off your opponents early.

[nutron5skills]

any divisions done yet?

P.S. I think 195, 121, 1276 are going to win their division (curie??) and 233, 71, 179 win arch

[ahecht]

Wow, upset in Newton. #8 alliance (190, 177, 987) just beat the #1 alliance (2194, 33, 1503) to move on to the semifinals.

[tkwetzel]

any divisions done yet?

They all just finished the quarter-finals. Time to move to the semis!

[Corey Balint]

Newton: 8 seed won. 4 seed. 2 seed. 3 seed
Galileo: 8 seed. 5 seed. 2 seed. 6 seed.
Archimedes: 1 seed. 2 seed. 4 seed. 3 seed
Curie: 1 seed. 5 seed. 2 seed. 3 seed.

[ahecht]

Newton: 8 seed won. 4 seed. 2 seed. 3 seed
Galileo: 8 seed. 5 seed. 2 seed. 6 seed.
Archimedes: 1 seed. 2 seed. 4 seed.
Curie: 1 seed. 5 seed. 2 seed. 3 seed.

Wow, Galileo had three upsets!

[PatrickN]

In all honesty, I think 1114 is simply not as dominant a design as they were last year. At each of their regionals, they were good, yes, but they weren't as unstoppably good as they were last year. Last year, their autonomous was 90%+ accurate, they were unmoveable when in shooting positions, they were very easy to human-load, they were fast. This year, they are good at everything, but the margin that they are better than other people isn't quite as large.

Maybe part of it is that when the triplets were all together, tactics-development proceeded at three times the rate. 1503/1680 might try something with their robot, and say "hey, this worked for us", and so their tactics would evolve quickly.

On the tactics note, they certainly matter a lot more at nats where people can conceivably fill the rack in a match. At most regionals, you could be satisisfied with just putting up tubes as fast as your alliance could do it, but here it looks to be ludicrously important to block off your opponents early.

If you look at their actual robot, I think it's more advanced than last year. Note that at their four competitions they've still been either the captain of the number one alliance or the first pick. Although they made it look easy I'm sure it was somewhat draining to make three robots. I think what you've described is mostly a result of the nature of the game and the fact that they have an enormous target on their backs everywhere they go.

[Bongle]

I really didn't expect whatever alliance 2056 ended up in to be a ramp-dependant alliance. I figured they'd just be scoring monsters.

If you look at their actual robot, I think it's more advanced than last year
Oh yeah, the robot is amazing. I still can't really figure out how it goes from normal->ramp mode. It's just a blur of motion, and BOOM: there's a ramp. But I guess it is probably the game as well this year: a well-picked alliance of 2 boxes-on-wheels and a ramp that quickly blocks off your scoring chances can be a big threat to a scoring-heavy alliance. Picking strategy this year is more important than last, where it was more or less all about the ball output.

[Ian Curtis]

Wow, upset in Newton. #8 alliance (190, 177, 987) just beat the #1 alliance (2194, 33, 1503) to move on to the semifinals.

That's only the second time since the introduction of seperate divisions that that has happened.

(If anyone's interested, the first time was on Galileo in 2005.)

EDIT:

Huh. Steve pointed out that it happened twice this year. So it's the second/third time. Why is this game so even?!

[Bongle]

Wow, I didn't expect 2056's alliance to be so ramp-dependant. They've double-ramped in every match I've watched.

Go canadian teams!

[xzvrw2]

That's only the second time since the introduction of seperate divisions that that has happened.

(If anyone's interested, the first time was on Galileo in 2005.)

8 beat one in galilieo this yeat

[Tottanka]

that makes it 3 =]

[Bongle]

Simbotics lost their arm http://www.student.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~ahare/emot-canada.gif

...and their semifinal :( :(

Let's go 2056!

[tkwetzel]

Any update on Galileo? I am stuck watching the results update on FIRST's website, and the Galileo results have not been updated after the quarter-finals. Anyone watching know what is up?

[Corey Balint]

Curie: 1 and 2 won

[xzvrw2]

its 1-1 for 65 vs 703

and i onobout theother one......def boring time out

galilieo vs newton

[Corey Balint]

Ill make one post of who won all the Semis so its easier for everyone insetad of just massive posting.

[Corey Balint]

Curie: 1 and 2 won
Newton: 8 and 3 won
Galileo: 2 and 8 won
Archimedes: 2 and 4 won

Timeouts and third matches....

[ScoutingNerd175]

Archimedes: 2 and 4 won


1 vs 4 was the first upset all afternoon on Archimedes, and it was a big one.

[Corey Balint]

Divisional Finals:
Newton
3. 1124-1592-1816
8. 190-987-177

Curie
1 1732, 67, 48
2 330, 910, 1270

Archimedes
2. 233, 71, 179
4. 386, 85, 107

Galileo
2. 173, 1902, 1319
8. 65, 503, 79

[Corey Balint]

Curie: 330, 910, 1270
Newton: 987, 190, 177
Galileo: 173, 1902, 1319
Archimedes: 233, 71, 179

[ScoutingNerd175]

Archimedes
2. 233, 71, 179
4. 386, 85, 107

Alliance 2 wins.

[dachickindapit]

Did anyone see what the field fault was in Final 2 of Curie? I was watching the webcast and didn't see anything wrong.

[Jake177]

Alliance 8 won Newton

[dachickindapit]

Alliance 2 just won Galileo

[Corey Balint]

Einstein
Curie: 330, 910, 1270
Newton: 987, 190, 177
Galileo: 173, 1902, 1319
Archimedes: 233, 71, 179

Three 2 seeds and an 8 seed.
Only one alliance has a team that has yet to win Nationals...
I don't know who plays who, we'll have to find that out later.

[Greg Ross]

Did anyone see what the field fault was in Final 2 of Curie? I was watching the webcast and didn't see anything wrong.My Enquiring mind wants to know too.

[ScoutingNerd175]

Newton: 177
Galileo: 173
Archimedes: 179
:yikes: Who will I cheer for? (I'd say that the streak of having a 17_ team on Einstein every year since '01 is still alive)

[Corey Balint]

I made a few calls, no one seems to know...if you have someone on those teams, ask them. I'm sure they were told.

[dachickindapit]

I made a few calls, no one seems to know...if you have someone on those teams, ask them. I'm sure they were told.

No one down there's answering their phones. Guess we'll just have to wait....

[Corey Balint]

No one down there's answering their phones. Guess we'll just have to wait....

I knew of one problem on Curie earlier this week. A team was controlling two robots one match, so that might have happened again.

[Bongle]

I don't know who plays who, we'll have to find that out later.

On the galileo field, I believe they said that Galileo plays Newton.
So it would be
173, 1902, 1319 (Galileo) vs 987, 190, 177 (Newton)
233, 71, 179 (Archimedes) vs 330, 910, 1270 (Curie)

[Alex Cormier]

possibly newton vs galileo and arc vs curie.

173, 1902, 1319 (Galileo) vs 987, 190, 177 (Newton)
233, 71, 179 (Archimedes) vs 330, 910, 1270 (Curie)

Newton vs Arc

my predictions.

[Corey Balint]

Sounds like it is
Newton vs. Galileo
Curie vs. Archimedes

Curie: 330, 910, 1270
vs
Archimedes: 233, 71, 179

Newton: 987, 190, 177
vs
Galileo: 173, 1902, 1319

Speculation though...this is what it was last year, they normally change it every year.

[joshsmithers]

possibly newton vs galileo and arc vs curie.

173, 1902, 1319 (Galileo) vs 987, 190, 177 (Newton)
233, 71, 179 (Archimedes) vs 330, 910, 1270 (Curie)

Newton vs Arc

my predictions.

hmmm. that Gal. alliance was looking pretty tough in their division finals.

I predict Galileo v. Archimedes

[Tottanka]

curie vs galileo and curie winning

[Barry Bonzack]

3 Floridian teams on Einstein! This should speak something for the Florida Regional; even the robot ranked at the bottom still has the capability to win Archimedes.

[ahecht]

I just noticed that all three teams on the Newton alliance have maroon colored shirts. Coincidence?

[Corey Balint]

I just noticed that all three teams on the Newton alliance have maroon colored shirts. Coincidence?

Haha, I thought of that one earlier too. As soon as I heard 177 was picked, it was the first thing I thought of. That and what an awesome alliance that is gonna make.

[nutron5skills]

My prediction

177. 190. 987 v 233, 71, 179 in the finals

233, 71, 179 wins the finals

[nutron5skills]

Galileo: 173, 1902, 1319 won the first one 54- 32

[MattLi]

I can help but someone has to tell me what channel NASA TV is for comcast. My computer has dialup and the webcast doesn't requires a little more that 40 kb/s. And for the life of me I can't find the channel.

[nutron5skills]

Archimedes: 233, 71, 179 won the first one 34-0
71 flipped over and 1270 DQ (red card) for flipping 71

this is the last one for me, good luck to everyone

[Corey Balint]

233 179 71 on to finals...
Amazing last second double ramp by 233 and 179. 179 almost flew off the edge and into the wall, but controlled it.

[joshsmithers]

yeah, that match was one of the most suspenseful i've seen today. the Arc alliance got a lucky break with that penalty and quick ramping. i think Hammond might do it again.

[Fuzzy]

190, 987, and 177 take the win

[kawelch]

Newton VS arc for Finals

[Tottanka]

Prediciton: It'a all pink (and i support Newton)

[lukevanoort]

Amazing last second double ramp by 233 and 179. 179 almost flew off the edge and into the wall, but controlled it.
Agreed, that was the most impressive ramping I've seen all year. I was sitting in front of my computer thinking they were about to lose, but then 233 ramped and 179 came flying out of nowhere and ramped, very impressive. Kudos to the drivers on both teams.

[Zyik]

One of those: go-go-go-go-wow! moments there.

[Tottanka]

Could have been far less dramatic unless 233 disturbed their own partner by pushing those tubes to their territory...


But hey, we like dramas don't we?

[kawelch]

Final #1 Arc Blue 50 - 34

[Alex Cormier]

everyone say that the tube on 71's ramp the play of the year?

[Corey Balint]

WOW.
190 987 177
WOW

[Fuzzy]

everyone say that the tube on 71's ramp the play of the year?

I second the notion. :P

[SU 39]

great play putting the tube on the ramp. i tried doing that at one of our regionals, but i coudltn get it to work.
good job team 190 and 987.
we were teamed with 987 at SVR and we eventualy lost to 190's alliacne in semifinals. they later went on to win SVR. congrats to all 3 teams in their alliance.

[Tottanka]

everyone say that the tube on 71's ramp the play of the year?

Nah...
play of the year is in Newton match 40...
i wont ruin it for you but you guys must see it...

[joshsmithers]

wait- it got real choppy for me and i couldn't see the last 20 seconds. What happened with the tube on 71? i saw that swamp thing couldn't get up, but what happened?

[BoyWithCape195]

From what was seen on the webcast, the tube was not keeping them from getting up. They got stuck going up the ramp before even hitting the tube.

[Alex Cormier]

From what was seen on the webcast, the tube was not keeping them from getting up. They got stuck going up the ramp before even hitting the tube.

If they went up on normal speed the tube would have made them bouce back off the ramp becuase 71 has a little shield at the edge of the ramp. So i would figure they were trying to go slow and aquire the tube and thus replace the tube with thier bot?

[Vikesrock]

Did anyone WATCH the picks on Curie? Was there some sort of crazy haze in the air or something?

I am not taking anything away from the teams drafted but seriously, how did 1114 get 469 on the 5th pick? Did #5 seed, 1114 get drafted and turn them down?

I don't understand it.

Joe J.

The picks for Curie are now up on SOAP. The #1 alliance captain 1732 asked both 1114 and 330 and were declined before selecting 67.

[nutron5skills]

any videos of the finals? i had to go somewhere

[Andy330]

Going back a ways... (I hate to leave a question unanswered if I don't have to)
Did anyone see what the field fault was in Final 2 of Curie? I was watching the webcast and didn't see anything wrong.

I just talked to one of the drivers from team 330. Apparently even they weren't told what the field fault was. Maybe we'll need to get one of the field refs to truly explain what happened.

But I have my own personal speculation. In "fake" finals match 2, team 910 rested the keeper right on top of the spider leg as autonomous mode expired, but didn't release it. One of the referees came out and removed the keeper before manual mode started. However, in the very next match ("real" finals match 2), 910 again rested a keeper in scoring position on the spider leg as autonomous mode expired, but again failed to release it. This time it was counted.

My thought is that maybe, in "fake" finals match 2, the refs misinterpreted the rules regarding the scoring of keepers in autonomous mode. They determined that they inadvertantly had given the other alliance an unfair advantage and decided to replay the match. I don't know. It's just a brainstorm.

[Travis Hoffman]

As far as Finals Match 2, I, too, have not heard the official ruling as to why the match was replayed, but <T17> certainly gives the referees the authority to initiate a replay, if a justifiable reason can be presented.

[shawger]

Did anyone see what the field fault was in Final 2 of Curie? I was watching the webcast and didn't see anything wrong.

There really wasn't one. Here's my understanding of what went on:
After the match (and after the final score was released) one out of four of the referees thought a blue tube hadn't been scored. They were unable to check their scoring PDAs because they apparently do not save the matches. They then decided to repeat the match based on that one opinion.

Keep in mind that no matter where the blue alliance's tube was, they would not have won that match.

[XaulZan11]

To clearify some things on Curie:

1732 did ask both 330 and 1114 to join us, although they both told us they would decline. We knew we had no chance if 330 and 1114 were together, so we had to split them up.

For the 2nd finals match that was replayed. After the score was announced that the red alliance (1732, 67, and 48) won the match, and putting on our robots for the 3rd match, they announced that it didn't count to a field problem. So, the head ref told us that one of the refs questioned the score on the screen. They thought that blue had scored more tubes on the bottom and when the PDA tranferred the information to the screen, the score got screwed up. So, since the PDAs don't store the information and they couldn't go back at the video, the whole match needed to be replayed.

I know that we lost the next match and it would seem that it wouldn't had mattered, but it was huge. We had a ton of momentium after winning the 2nd match and we were already to win the 3rd match when we found out that it didn't count. So, after finding out we had to beat such an amazing alliance three times in a row, the whole alliance's moral sank.

[Karthik]

Maybe part of it is that when the triplets were all together, tactics-development proceeded at three times the rate. 1503/1680 might try something with their robot, and say "hey, this worked for us", and so their tactics would evolve quickly.


Or maybe people shouldn't make assumptions about the inner workings of a team. Especially when it's so easy to come to us and ask. The situation you described is completely inaccurate in describing the 2005 & 2006 NiagaraFIRST collaborations.

[Travis Hoffman]

Going back a ways... (I hate to leave a question unanswered if I don't have to)

I just talked to one of the drivers from team 330. Apparently even they weren't told what the field fault was. Maybe we'll need to get one of the field refs to truly explain what happened.

But I have my own personal speculation. In "fake" finals match 2, team 910 rested the keeper right on top of the spider leg as autonomous mode expired, but didn't release it. One of the referees came out and removed the keeper before manual mode started. However, in the very next match ("real" finals match 2), 910 again rested a keeper in scoring position on the spider leg as autonomous mode expired, but again failed to release it. This time it was counted.

My thought is that maybe, in "fake" finals match 2, the refs misinterpreted the rules regarding the scoring of keepers in autonomous mode. They determined that they inadvertantly had given the other alliance an unfair advantage and decided to replay the match. I don't know. It's just a brainstorm.

http://www.soap.circuitrunners.com/2007/movies/cur/cur_fm2_BAD.wmv

I think it's clear from the video that 910's keeper is not scored according to any interpretation of the rules. I would expect to hear another reason as to why the match was replayed.

[pjamma]

The reason the match was replayed was because one of the referees thought that the score was wrong on the board a few minutes after the match.
"Field Reset"

[George A.]

Anyone know if the matches from Einstein will be posted anywhere?

[Andy330]

http://www.soap.circuitrunners.com/2007/movies/cur/cur_fm2_BAD.wmv

I think it's clear from the video that 910's keeper is not scored according to any interpretation of the rules. I would expect to hear another reason as to why the match was replayed.

Very true; I stand corrected. I guess I thought, the first time I watched it, that 910 had gotten the keeper past the stinger. Obviously that wasn't the case.

[Vikesrock]

Anyone know if the matches from Einstein will be posted anywhere?

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56907&highlight=einstein+videos

They are up at The Blue Alliance