Chief Delphi - Einstein 2014

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)

- Rules/Strategy (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)

- - Einstein 2014 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129188)

I don't have any other great method of getting the answers out of those involved in decisions around Einstein 2014, and I feel like if teams who played in the semifinals and specfically the finals match were willing to discuss their thoughts behind decisions made on the field in a public forum, it would be a great benefit to a lot of people. With the 2014 competition season over, I know I am left wit ha few questions.

To 1114:
When did you guys decide you were going to add on a goalie stick?

Why did you add it on (as in, was this specifically for "if we run into the Poofs on Einstein finals", or another reason)?

How were you controlling your robot during the hybrid period?

Was part of your goalie strategy that you get quick turnaround on cycles coming out of autonomous, or was that a secondary benefit?

To 254:
Why did you stick with the given autonomous strategy after the first match after seeing how close 1114 was getting to you guys?

What caused the misses in autonomous in F2? From my viewpoint I could have sworn 1114 made bumper on bumper contact with you, but I'm not sure.

I think I know the answer to this, but why not give a ball to every team in F3 since all robots were already in the white zone?

Why not accept a possible 15 point deduction on ignoring hot goal detection to avoid the 1114 menace?

Do you think you would you have made those shots in autonomous with or without the pick 469 attempted?

To 973:

Did you intentionally leave the goalie zone, or were you trying to see how far you could push the zone before breaking it, or was it just a glitch?

That's all I have for now. If anyone has more questions or wants to generate idle speculation before we get answers, I guess they can go in here.

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by PayneTrain (Post 1379973)

To 973:

Did you intentionally leave the goalie zone, or were you trying to see how far you could push the zone before breaking it, or was it just a glitch?

That's all I have for now. If anyone has more questions or wants to generate idle speculation before we get answers, I guess they can go in here.

Instead of directly answering the question, I will let you do some math.

Leaving the zone is 50 pts. In that match the red robots had 1 ball each, 2 total. So we were preventing 20 points at most .

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by PayneTrain (Post 1379973)

To 1114:
How were you controlling your robot during the hybrid period?

I'm not 1114, but http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=128639

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 1379988)

Instead of directly answering the question, I will let you do some math.

Leaving the zone is 50 pts. In that match the red robots had 1 ball each, 2 total. So we were preventing 20 points at most .

Quote:

G15
During AUTO,

a ROBOT starting in the white ZONE may not cross fully beyond the TRUSS
a ROBOT starting in its GOALIE ZONE must remain in contact with the carpet in its GOALIE ZONE.

Violation: FOUL. If contact with an opponent ROBOT, TECHNICAL FOUL.

Quote:

G23
If a ROBOT is in contact with carpet in its GOALIE ZONE, and for only one ROBOT per ALLIANCE at a time, there is no height restriction; however, any extension or combination of extensions above 5 ft. may not extend beyond a vertical cylinder with a 6 in. diameter (see examples in Figure 3-5).

Violation: FOUL. If continuous or repeated violations, TECHNICAL FOUL.

I count 90 foul points.

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 1379988)

Leaving the zone is 50 pts. In that match the red robots had 1 ball each, 2 total. So we were preventing 20 points at most .

This is exactly what our strategy team was thinking about after watching Einstein. We were wondering why Simbotics didn't come out of the zone a bit more or all the way out with their stick down and hit the Poofs to save at least 20 points of auton.

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nate Laverdure (Post 1379997)

I'm not 1114, but http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=128639

I've actually heard second-hand that they used a kinect.

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Endres (Post 1380006)

This is exactly what our strategy team was thinking about after watching Einstein. We were wondering why Simbotics didn't come out of the zone a bit more and hit the Poofs to save 20 points of auton.

In there case the math is different, but I'd wager they still didn't want to take a tech.

In our case it was obvious mistake and was not intentional.

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gregor (Post 1380004)

I count 90 foul points.

Even better.

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by joelg236 (Post 1380009)

I've actually heard second-hand that they used a kinect.

This is also what I saw from the stands. 1114 had a student standing to the side of the driver station in front of what looked like a Kinect.

Re: Einstein 2014

Since a couple people already mentioned it, I can confirm that 1114 used a Kinect. Four teams on Einstein (1114, 254, 469, 973) had some form of driver station input during "autonomous" mode.

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery (Post 1380020)

Since a couple people already mentioned it, I can confirm that 1114 used a Kinect. Four teams on Einstein (1114, 254, 469, 973) had some form of driver station input during "autonomous" mode.

And I'll second this confirmation as I discussed it with several of their students. They had a lot of very cool kinect options for that goal pole as well as for hot goal detection.

If any of you ever get a chance to have a really in depth view of that robot from a controls perspective I think you'll be very educated. Their students were able to effectively explain everything they did. Kudos to them.

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 1379988)

Instead of directly answering the question, I will let you do some math.

Leaving the zone is 50 pts. In that match the red robots had 1 ball each, 2 total. So we were preventing 20 points at most .

This is interesting because it is actually more complicated than that. You also have to factor in the cost of a missed auto ball.

One could consider this 'ungracious' or egregious (red card), but it's technically within the rules (just as famous examples of rule loopholes):

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scenario

Imagine if 1114, instead of having a goalie stick, used their autonomous to just drive out of the goalie zone?

254's autonomous drives -> waits in a relatively predictable position -> shoots (with 3 balls).

1114 take the 50pt foul but in doing so ram straight in to 254, knocking their robot off course before they shoot. Now the net loss is only 20 points AND all three balls are still on the field.

So Red would be winning (assuming all HOT) and Blue would have to still clear 3 auto balls. Huge advantage.

Have I missed something?

EDIT: I think Chris Endres beat me to it.

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 1379988)

Instead of directly answering the question, I will let you do some math.

Leaving the zone is 50 pts. In that match the red robots had 1 ball each, 2 total. So we were preventing 20 points at most .

As has already been stated, the actions you could have incurred could have ranged from 20-90 points on a 20 point ball. I couldn't remember if the robot that 973 was attempting a block on had either one ball or 2 until I saw the video.

There are incidences and specific scenarios where you could leave or almost leave the goalie zone in an attempt to thwart autonomous and it count as an actual net benefit provided you do not get a red card.

However, as always, it's a pleasure.

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by PayneTrain (Post 1380036)

His point is it would have been idiotic for 973 to intentionally leave the zone in order to prevent ~4x less points than they would have given the other alliance by doing so.

Re: Einstein 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by PayneTrain (Post 1379973)

I'd like to first say that 1114 having a goalie pole and hybrid auto mode was about as "shocking" to us a our having a low goal 3 ball (neither of us was at all shocked).

Sticking with the three ball auto was a calculated risk. We decided that the chance their actual pole would block the shots to be very low. The danger was all in the position of their claw. The claw came between our front ball and the low goal in F2, and was actually pinning our front intake down in F3 (intake came free in time to score the last ball).

We discussed not going hot before each match and decided that they would likely be able to legally put something (claw or robot) between us and the goal in time.

We also discussed running a two ball mode that lined up on the edge of the field and drove straight (shooting one ball on the run and one near the front of the low goal. This involved bringing 74 off the bench and having them run a 1 ball (these guys had an impressive 10/10 one ball auto in quals). I asked Adam (67) what he thought we should do. His advice was the "safer" choice, bring 74 in and everyone run from the side, still getting all the balls hot.

We thought about doing this, but the last minute change (bringing in a fresh team to Einstein) and giving our opponents the mental edge that'd forced us off of our bread and butter didn't seem like the right thing to do.

In the practice match on Einstein, we ran 2848's modified auto. It was programmed to run full speed into the goalie zone and deploy their brake plate. The idea being they could stop 1114, or slow them down, allowing us to gain position to fire the 3 balls into the hot goal.

It was just after sending Dan and my operator back to the field with this strategy that Adam turned to me and said "You guys are nuts. This is chaos. How do you know that they (2848) won't crash into you?! How do you know they won't both crash into you?!"

My response was that I trusted our (254) programming team, we'd run 2848's blocking auto on the field already. At this point my heart was about to pop and everyone near me (Jess B, Adam H., & Adam F) probably thought I was going to pass out.

In the end I don't know if we would have made the shots w/o 2848's block, I know we had made and missed once before without it, and that something had to happen to try and stop 1114 from gaining position on us in F3.