Balancing Rules in Los Angeles?
 

Posted by Fred Agnir at 03/19/2001 11:58 AM EST


Coach on team #126, Gael Force, from Clinton HS and Nypro Inc..



A couple of things happened in SoCal that left us in the stands scratching our heads.

One time, with bridge balanced, a black ball came to rest such that it was touching the bridge and the floor. Now, the ball wasn't supporting the bridge, but I found it odd that the referee simply stepped up and kicked the black ball out of the way. I think a closer inspection and explanation was warranted.

Another time, with two goal balanced, a robot (Team #60?) had its arm layed on the bridge, *and* was touching a goal *while* the robot was on the floor. A referee moved the arm,, and the bridge clearly moved. After some huddling and with no explanation offered, the referees posted a score that included an accepted 4X multiplier. This one seemed incorrect to me.

Input anyone?

Fred

Re: Balancing Rules in Los Angeles?
 

Posted by Jason Morrella at 03/19/2001 12:56 PM EST


Coach on team #254, Cheesy Poofs, from Bellarmine College Prep & others and NASA Ames/Cypress Semiconductor/Unity Care.


In Reply to: Balancing Rules in Los Angeles?
Posted by Fred Agnir on 03/19/2001 11:58 AM EST:



Yes Fred - you are correct. This was an incorrect call made by the referees. Once a decision is made & announced, it is final - but you are correct - a bridge is NOT balanced if ANY part of a robot is touching ANY part of the bridge and/or goals AND the field. The refs have some tough calls too make sometimes and don't have instant access to the right answers - but the refs in SoCal did an incredible job and that was the only incorrect call they made in about 120 matches.

: Another time, with two goal balanced, a robot (Team #60?) had its arm layed on the bridge, *and* was touching a goal *while* the robot was on the floor. A referee moved the arm,, and the bridge clearly moved. After some huddling and with no explanation offered, the referees posted a score that included an accepted 4X multiplier. This one seemed incorrect to me.

: Input anyone?

: Fred