Re: Possible Strategy?
 

I do not believe it is bad sportsmanship to take penalties for a net gain. Especially because this isn't something like an intentional tip - this is just picking up balls.

That said, it's a pretty bad strategic decision. Three points is not enough to justify the risks. Miss one ball and it's not worth it. If you're desperate for something to do in that time, and you have already exhausted both the co-op and your alliance bridge, I'd start preparing for your first moves in the teleoperated period.

Re: Possible Strategy?
 

What about if you know your opponent can score both balls from their alliance bridge reliably? Then it's a net-potential-gain :D (In the sense that 9 points < 12 points, plus any you happen to score to lessen the swing.)

Just making up crazy situations.

In my opinion breaking rules does not automatically equate to bad sportsmanship.

Re: Possible Strategy?
 

I'm working on the math, and this is what I have (With auton points):

With out taking balls (Opponents score from alliance bridge in auto):
Opponents: +12 (2 on top)
You: +0 (no advantage)
Net gain: -12

With taking balls:
Opponents: +9 (Technical foul)
You: +12 (2 on top)
Net gain: 3

Taking balls (miss shot):
Opponents: +9 (Technical foul)
You: +6 (1 on top)
Net gain: -3
However, you then have an open balls on your side that you can put up in teleop, effectively making it a wash.

Taking balls (miss both shots):
Opponents: +9 (Technical foul)
You: +0 (no advantage)
Net gain: -9
However, you then have 2 open balls on your side that you can put up in teleop, making it a net gain of -3.

It seems to me that even if you miss the shots, you still end up on the better end of things than if you get their alliance balls than if you let them sit.
It may not be a game changing move, but it may be something worth considering.

Re: Possible Strategy?
 

It would be a wash if the time constraint wasn't too great. There's a ball on your side you have to score to make the move a wash, which takes several seconds away. So I would say it's a net negative move.

It's hard to quantify the other moves you could make as a third robot when your partners are scoring and moving to the bridges, but I'm tempted to say that getting in position to block the return would probably be the greatest benefit. If you win the Co-Op bridge, you have at least an 18 point lead you'll want to stretch as long as you can.

It just seems like more trouble than it's worth for only three possible extra points. Denying six points in teleop to the opponents is also somewhat nice though, but I think it's too close to be worth it.

Re: Possible Strategy?
 

I'd agree that it's definitely a steep move. Were I coaching, I wouldn't even consider doing this unless the opponent had a consistent autonomous that put in 2, then went to the alliance bridge, and put in 2 more. Other than that, it is a pretty risky move and it's easy for it to backfire. So were I to use this tactic, it would be VERY sparingly and only under special circumstances.

Re: Possible Strategy?
 

I am sure that if this strategy comes to pass, there will soon be an escalating series of consequences just like there was for grasping/grappling the bridge to balance. Eventually [T15] and/or [T17] comes into play.

Re: Possible Strategy?
 

Yea its also bad sportsmanship to flip over other robots. But it has been done I think in order for teams to win they will try anything they can even if its bad sportsmanship.

Re: Possible Strategy?
 

There's a huge difference between attempting to damage or incapacitate another team's robot and committing a foul because you believe it will benefit the score. The latter is widely practiced in several sports and is generally not considered unsportsmanlike, just as I would not consider this strategy unsportsmanlike or un-GP. I still don't think it's worth the risk, though.