Re: IRI Finals Question
 

My buddy, who was there, is pretty sure they were actually disabled. He said their numbers turned red on the screen, which happened last time a robot was disabled. He also said that 2056's drivers seemed to try to drive their robot, and it wasn't moving.

He could be wrong though.

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

The reason we believe they were disabled was because both 1114's and 2056's numbers on the scoring screen were in red, which is what happens when they have been disabled (as we saw with team 51 in quarterfinals).

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

You don't get a yellow card for pinning though. The alliance got a yellow card. There MUST have been a G27 (ramming).

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

The yellow card was in finals one. The pinning was in finals two.

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

Lots of inaccurate information in this thread.

In the first match 330 was assessed a technical for driving on top of 469's drive base as they were up against the low goal. From our perspective this was completely accidental. As soon as 330 realized they couldn't back off from the pin, 1114 came over and pushed them free.

The second match 2056's strings flopped around and got entangled on 1114's claw (which was entirely inside the frame perimeter). There were no penalties called and the robots were disabled.

The penalty in the second match was because 469 and 330 got their wings/arms entangled. 330 was called for pinning since they couldn't get away.

It was a hard fought set of matches between two evenly matched alliances. We would have liked to see a clean outcome but it didn't work out that way.

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

Thanks for clarifying Cory. What was the reasoning for disabling 1114 and 2056?

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

Watching the archive videos peaked my interest. Tons of great matches and kudos to all the competitors and champions. Can somebody explain to me how the human player hard bounce off of 2056 that returned to the in bounder was construed as an actual possession/assist...throughout the event? No intent to be argumentative, just trying to understand why such interaction wasn't called as an assist throughout the regular season events I attended or watched. Sure would have made things easier:D

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

4334 did it on Curie.

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

I'm really surprised that no eagle-eyed person looking at the video noticed that both 1114 and 2056's status lights next to their number on the field were blinking (which indicate an e-stop or field disable). That should've been an easy one.

Some incredible matches. Wish I could've been there to see them in person.

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

One definition of POSESSION is motion caused by deformation of robot parts relative to the robot. Throwing the ball off the catapult deflected it in and then back out, meeting the definition of Assist

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

The robots were actually disabled by "red cards" that were removed after the match. That's why you saw their numbers turn red on the webcast even though neither ended up with one. It's just faster / easier that way.

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

Got it...so long as the catapult flexed downward and back I guess one of the definitions of assist is met. Well done 2056.

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

Here's a gif of the best human player of 2014 ever! Seriously, props man.
http://www.reddit.com/tb/2b6a4d

I didn't watch this live, but isn't reaching an appendage outside of the field a penalty?

Re: IRI Finals Question
 

Just from my point of view both seeing 330 play and watching finals 1 on youtube. They were backing up and jerking forward quickly in order to lift up the front of their robot and land it on 469's bumper, ideally stopping them from shooting.

This of course may have been totally accidental but I remember them doing it in qualification matches too if I'm not mistaken so the refs may have deemed it a repeated strategy.