Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

First, I know who you'd talk to. The head ref and/or the scorers. The problem is, you need the drive team to talk to the head ref. The pre-college members of the drive team. And you'd most likely need it to happen in the match.

You could try finding a GDC member, but that's going to be difficult to find them, difficult to convince them that it happened, and then they get to convince the head ref/scorer to fix the scores.

Second, especially regarding evidence: The head ref will not review evidence per [T13]. You need to raise doubt in his mind that he's been calling this correctly, and possibly get him to contact GDC members present for clarification.

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

Guys are the rankings weird for you too? http://www2.usfirst.org/2012comp/eve.../rankings.html

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

Yes, all entries are duplicated. It wasn't like that earlier in the afternoon.

Awards are still empty.

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

I wish they posted the score for the last 1114 match does anyone know who won that match? It was the last match of the day.

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

1114 lost that match after not moving for much of the match. I forget if there was a coop or not

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

(emphasis mine)

By definition the bridge is not balanced because another robot is touching it. Yet there are two robots, one from each alliance, that are fully supported by the bridge.

I'm wondering if it was being called wrong all season long, and it's correct now.

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

I didn't see these matches this morning, so I'm not quite sure what happened. I'm assuming there were two robots trying to get on the bridge, and they slid down and one of their bumpers stopped them both from rolling further. It sounds to me like you're saying there were three robots involved?

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

This occurred at CT also and involved Team 118 (and whom ever else was in the match i don't remember the teams).

Team 118 went up to the ref's immediately after the match and pointed out the error. That they had received a co-op point when they shouldn't have. Later in the day the referees stopped by the pit and 118 was told "merry Christmas" its too hard to go back and fix.

This is the only reason 118 was 2nd and 177 was third. (didn't end up mattering at all since we were pretty sure 2168 was going to pick 118 and we'd end up picking second no matter what).

I never went back and figured out if it affected anyone else in the top eight (i wouldn't be surprised if it did).

Hopefully if the points were incorrectly awarded you have better luck.

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

I have no idea - I was only commenting on what I read here. If it was just 2 robots, one touching the carpet, then coop points should not be awarded.

I note that only on Archimedes are there odd coop points - and there's quite a few of them. It appears that the fields are not doing things in the same way.

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

We witnessed a similar situation after Match 129. Immediately after the match, we noticed that both alliances received a single coopetition point despite that one of the robots attempting to balance was obviously touching the ground. We approached the head ref following the match, and the response our student representative was given was that he was going to converse with the Chief Referee about it.

After getting back to the hotel, we noticed that the score for match 129 was no longer posted, the standings seem to be duplicated, and the single coopetition point was removed from all teams in match 129.

We plan to bring the remaining matches in question to the head ref's attention tomorrow morning, as this currently affects whether 2826 or 3481 is the number 1 seed on Archimedes.

I’m sure the referees will do their best to sort out this confusion and get the bridge points awarded properly.

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

We've been having some coms issues plaguing us. After our last match today, we found our gyro was shorting out. This was causing multiple issues with the digital sidecar.

Hoping for the best tomorrow. Our accuracy and speed has been consistent with our past performances, unfortunately the controls issues slowed us down a bit.

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

Interesting, a team who was not involved in the match went to the head referee to dispute the call. Judging from the rules all rulings are final once the head referree gives the okay to clear robots and nothing can be changed. Even with video and photographic proof. It should be interesting to see how this plays out tomorrow.

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

I don't think this is true - considering how fast field resets are this year, it would essentially prevent any changes from being made. The rules even call for questions to be asked after said "okay"...
[T13] indeed bans viewing of "recorded replays", but actually says nothing about photos. Do you know if either was presented?

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

[T13] states that all head referee rulings are final. However, it gives no timeline. If all rulings were absolutely final, carved in stone, no review, as soon as the all-clear sounded, then there would be no real point to [T14].

So: [T13] says, all head referee rulings are final, no recorded replays will be reviewed.
[T14], however, gives teams the right to a clarification of calls made on the field and a procedure to get the clarification. Much of the time, this clarification results from a team's misinterpretation of the rule in question. Some of the time, however, the referee is actually mistaken or wrong. He can get input from outside sources, including the GDC (which includes the Chief Referee and Volunteer of the Year, Dr. Aidan Browne) per [G13]. When the input comes in on a call that is asked about, the head referee has to make a call--either he was right, or he was wrong and what he will do about it. Note that in this case, the Head Ref indicated that he would in fact consult with the Chief Referee.

If the head referee rules that he is right, see [T13]. If the head referee rules that a mistake was made, then he will say, "I made a mistake. We will do X to fix it." Now see [T13] again. That will be the final ruling.


In the case of a team not involved in the match asking for clarification, [T14] does not specify that the team has to be involved in the match. It just says, "If a team needs clarification,". Obviously, the team in question needed clarification, and [T14] not restricting this to teams involved in the match, they addressed the Head Referee as per protocol.


I think everything in this one was within the rules and the Head Referee's authority, and we'll see what happens with the other matches tomorrow morning.

Re: Archimedes 2012!
 

I know for a fact the will not take photo evidence. At one of our events we had a balanced bridge not counted as balanced and the refs refused to review photo's.