Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Rules/Strategy (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Some thoughts on rules, refs, and ranking (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=114802)

bduddy 15-03-2013 00:32

Re: Some thoughts on rules, refs, and ranking
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Siri (Post 1247619)
That particular problem was in no way limited to NYC, though it was uncommonly bad there. (Actually, the G25 interpretations also weren't NYC-limited.) As to the others, I suspect the 'turn off your dashboard' will be unannounced, but it'd be nice if they could publicly standardize disc placement and feeder station procedure.

As for G25, I've put in a Q&A, Q577. I suspect it'll take some follow-ups to edge anything but "Reasonably Astute Observer" out of the GDC. (Entirely unfair, as Head Refs are more than reasonably astute and they obviously disagree about this.)

Does G25 have the potential to apply (at the referees' discretion) to all types of 2-on-1 defense, or is the intent limited to field-centric blocks? Could intentionally impeding 1 robot with 2 defenders qualify as blockading if no other match flow is stopped?

Of course we all already know that the GDC will give the least useful answer possible. Thanks for the effort, though. I wonder how many of these incidents it will take before they learn the importance of writing proper rules?

Anupam Goli 18-03-2013 01:45

Re: Some thoughts on rules, refs, and ranking
 
Being on the short end of the stick when it came to rankings really didn't sit well with me this time at Peachtree, but I don't see how else the ranking system itself can be changed. It was more the random alliance pairings during qualifications and some terrible scouting in my opinion that caused the eliminations at Peachtree to look like they did. 2 of the alliance captains in the had purely defensive robots with a 1 point dumper, where as teams like 1319 and 3489, who were some of the top offensive bots were sitting as low as 15th in rankings.

On a separate note, I cannot be happier about the job the referees did at Peachtree. Every call down to the little stuff in the rules were made. The head ref was very confident in her understanding of the rules. Thanks for calling all fouls with no leniency.

Mr. Pockets 18-03-2013 02:20

Re: Some thoughts on rules, refs, and ranking
 
Just attended the Detroit district. Refs seemed pretty good about the rules and in general seemed to err on the side of leniency in borderline cases (which honestly felt right. Winning by penalty is always a little less fulfilling)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ablatner (Post 1245781)
I do think that the pyramid penalties are really tough. The point of them is to protect climbers, but the penalties end up punishing a lot more and deciding matches.

At least they're not instant DQs anymore. That was what happened back in 2010 (Breakaway) if you touched an opposing robot's tower near the end. It led to some pretty messy wins.

HumblePie 18-03-2013 11:34

Re: Some thoughts on rules, refs, and ranking
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wing (Post 1249463)
Being on the short end of the stick when it came to rankings really didn't sit well with me this time at Peachtree, but I don't see how else the ranking system itself can be changed. It was more the random alliance pairings during qualifications and some terrible scouting in my opinion that caused the eliminations at Peachtree to look like they did. 2 of the alliance captains in the had purely defensive robots with a 1 point dumper, where as teams like 1319 and 3489, who were some of the top offensive bots were sitting as low as 15th in rankings.

On a separate note, I cannot be happier about the job the referees did at Peachtree. Every call down to the little stuff in the rules were made. The head ref was very confident in her understanding of the rules. Thanks for calling all fouls with no leniency.

Thanks for the shout out, we do have a really good robot this year, and a drive team that matured before our very eyes. We did manage to reach as high as a #4 ranking before running into the buzzsaw known as 624 (Cryptonite) in the final match. We had the unfortunate luck of playing with only one top-8 seed (#6) and against five of them (#1,2,3,5,8), including you guys. Just the luck of the draw, and a consequence of a large field.

With regard to the number of "upsets" seen this year in eliminations this year, I agree that scouting and the depth of the field have the most to do with it. If a regional has 24 strong scorers, then the top seed will usually prevail. If the top seeds don't choose their partners well, or don't have good choices available with their second pick, you'll see what has happened so far. In this years game (to date) it seems that 3 good robots can outscore 2 great robots and a less capable third. Our 3 capable scorers went 6-1 in the tournament, and averaged 107 points/game in those matches. In comparison, the top seeded alliance scored 95 and 97 points in their q'final matches before the "gremlins" reared their ugly heads in the semifinals. "Upset" or not? You be the judge.

bduddy 20-03-2013 19:44

Re: Some thoughts on rules, refs, and ranking
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bduddy (Post 1248413)
Of course we all already know that the GDC will give the least useful answer possible. Thanks for the effort, though. I wonder how many of these incidents it will take before they learn the importance of writing proper rules?

I should somewhat retract my criticism of the GDC, they gave a reasonable answer:

Quote:

A. We cannot comment absolutely on hypothetical situations. Generally, impeding a single ROBOT without blocking all traffic across the FIELD is not considered a violation of [G25].
Hopefully this should shut down some of the more strained interpretations of this rule that have been going around lately.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 20:18.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi