Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   2 v 3 in Dallas (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=135295)

JamesTerm 02-03-2015 16:56

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bduddy (Post 1452172)
I don't. Art is only tangentially if at all related to STEM. Trying to include it in the acronym takes away from the whole purpose of advocating for STEM education.

I don't think there's anything wrong at all with teaching art, but don't try to lump it in where it doesn't belong.

Art is the original mover...
Watch this around 16:40...

Agree or disagree, but you gotta have some respect for Adam Savage.

I see and admire artwork in robots built each year... and appreciate teams taking the time for that.

Greg Needel 02-03-2015 17:10

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by JVN (Post 1452319)
Greg,
Thanks for clarifying. I was the one who signaled Kevin about 2613 being "in the landfill" but as you know things were loud down there, so I did not realize he misheard me, and did not realize what he said in his interaction with the referees. I stand by my statement that we did not advocate in any way for 2613 to be disabled or removed.

I've edited my post, and do not want to skew facts in any way.

However, I do not appreciate your implication that we did that intentionally.
If you have any other concerns about the facts from our alliance's perspective, please PM me. We value unbiased viewpoints of these events.

I'm sure all 6 teams would have preferred to play those matches 3v3. We're excited for the rest of our competition season. :)


You are correct that intent is hard to view, I just interpreted what I saw on the field. I should have been more careful and worded my response with much more care. I think that 148 is a great team (with a great robot) and I am sure you guys will have a very successful season regardless of this setback.

I just wish that everyone officiating the events remembered that these events are about celebrating the student accomplishments. While the rules need to exist in order to maintain the integrity of the game, it felt like things were being interpreted to an excessive standpoint at this event. I hope that FIRST/the GDC takes a hard look at Dallas and fixes the wording (and blue boxes) for future events.

Karthik 02-03-2015 17:15

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Needel (Post 1452307)
the facts are the facts and skewing them is not productive.

Neither is adding hearsay and speculation, being touted as facts, by person not involved with the situation at all. I think it would be appropriate to let the teams and volunteers involved do the talking.

I want to commend 148 for handling this unfortunate situation with both professionalism and class. They didn't even need to comment here, but they took the time to clarify exactly what happened and help sort the facts from rumours. This was very impressive to me, especially at a time when it would be very easy for emotions to boil over. Looking back at the official statements made by JVN on behalf of the team, it makes clear to me why they've developed the reputation as being the most professional team in FIRST.

Thanks to everyone who was directly involved and impacted by this situation for taking the time to help the rest of us understand this weekend. All six teams who played in the finals should be commended here. It's no wonder that four of them are known as being some the best teams in all of FIRST. I've a part of my fair share of controversial matches, on both the winning and losing side, and I understand just how not fun it can be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Needel (Post 1452340)
I just wish that everyone officiating the events remembered that these events are about celebrating the student accomplishments. While the rules need to exist in order to maintain the integrity of the game, it felt like things were being interpreted to an excessive standpoint at this event. I hope that FIRST/the GDC takes a hard look at Dallas and fixes the wording (and blue boxes) for future events.

This (especially the bolded statement) is something that I hope we can all agree on.

Michael Corsetto 02-03-2015 17:25

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Needel (Post 1452340)
I just wish that everyone officiating the events remembered that these events are about celebrating the student accomplishments. While the rules need to exist in order to maintain the integrity of the game, it felt like things were being interpreted to an excessive standpoint at this event. I hope that FIRST/the GDC takes a hard look at Dallas and fixes the wording (and blue boxes) for future events.

Greg,

I am in the same boat with you on this one. See my post in the Dallas 2015 thread.

However, I do not believe more effective wording and blue boxes will fix the issue. In a game that I believed to be fairly "error-proof" from a referee perspective, the lack of a "Teams FIRST" mentality still results in decisions that negatively impact the teams and students involved.

It is a larger issue than just better rules. A culture shift like this has to start from the top.

-Mike

waialua359 02-03-2015 18:04

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad (Post 1452300)
I think that this issue even merited a thread indicates what has been on many people's minds--that in this year's game it can be advantageous to have the third member of the alliance stay off the field. One clear example is the auto movement bonus. Going from a game that required full alliance participation to one that implicitly penalizes full participation is a step backwards.:(

I don't want to stray this thread off a tangent, but felt to comment that it is more advantageous to have all 3 members always on the field. We would no way have been as successful as we were, if one sat out.

JB987 02-03-2015 18:17

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Hopefully everybody will understand that the missing 3rd bot in some of the early elimination rounds for both alliances was the result of a calculated effort by both alliances to develop additional capability to grab center cans to boost stack values...not to make additional room for the major bots on the alliances. With a greatly shortened time frame after qualifications and no break after alliance selections there was simply no time before the elimination rounds to complete the modification our 3rd partners to grab cans.

Travis Schuh 02-03-2015 18:19

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by waialua359 (Post 1452383)
I don't want to stray this thread off a tangent, but felt to comment that it is more advantageous to have all 3 members always on the field. We would no way have been as successful as we were, if one sat out.

I was impressed with how many stacks your 2nd pick was able to put up, particularly considering that they were the last pick of the regional. From watching IE and Dallas, I would say your alliance was an outlier in how much the 2nd pick contributed. Just speaks to having good scouting.

Cory 02-03-2015 18:20

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by waialua359 (Post 1452383)
I don't want to stray this thread off a tangent, but felt to comment that it is more advantageous to have all 3 members always on the field. We would no way have been as successful as we were, if one sat out.

You may have been lucky enough to have 3 high level robots on your alliance but there is definitely an advantage to two high level teams having no 3rd robot occupying space on the field that would otherwise be clear, if the 3rd robot is not very competitive.

Kevin Sevcik 02-03-2015 18:29

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Needel (Post 1452340)
I just wish that everyone officiating the events remembered that these events are about celebrating the student accomplishments. While the rules need to exist in order to maintain the integrity of the game, it felt like things were being interpreted to an excessive standpoint at this event. I hope that FIRST/the GDC takes a hard look at Dallas and fixes the wording (and blue boxes) for future events.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto (Post 1452350)
However, I do not believe more effective wording and blue boxes will fix the issue. In a game that I believed to be fairly "error-proof" from a referee perspective, the lack of a "Teams FIRST" mentality still results in decisions that negatively impact the teams and students involved.

It is a larger issue than just better rules. A culture shift like this has to start from the top.

-Mike

Do you guys have some on-site knowledge or experience that leads you to think the officials at Dallas didn't care about the teams? Was there evil cackling coming from the volunteer room or something? Were refs taking visible glee in disabling robots whenever they had a chance? I think some FRC specific version of Hanlon's Razor should probably apply to suggestions that volunteers don't care about teams and/or are out to get them.

waialua359 02-03-2015 18:52

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Travis Schuh (Post 1452399)
I was impressed with how many stacks your 2nd pick was able to put up, particularly considering that they were the last pick of the regional. From watching IE and Dallas, I would say your alliance was an outlier in how much the 2nd pick contributed. Just speaks to having good scouting.

I texted the selection to both alliance captains prior to the pick. We only had our drive team and me as the lone scouter, who also had to strategize, coach, and coordinate the entire weekend. With that being said, the only list I had was looking straight up at the board. Even the MC was joking about which team I was going to text. Lucky pick. 😄

Koko Ed 02-03-2015 19:03

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik (Post 1452408)
Do you guys have some on-site knowledge or experience that leads you to think the officials at Dallas didn't care about the teams? Was there evil cackling coming from the volunteer room or something? Were refs taking visible glee in disabling robots whenever they had a chance? I think some FRC specific version of Hanlon's Razor should probably apply to suggestions that volunteers don't care about teams and/or are out to get them.

I knew alot of volunteers who passed up on assignments because of the toxic environment towards them last year. FIRST needs more volunteers this year, not to drive them away.

Greg Needel 02-03-2015 21:51

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik (Post 1452408)
Do you guys have some on-site knowledge or experience that leads you to think the officials at Dallas didn't care about the teams? Was there evil cackling coming from the volunteer room or something? Were refs taking visible glee in disabling robots whenever they had a chance? I think some FRC specific version of Hanlon's Razor should probably apply to suggestions that volunteers don't care about teams and/or are out to get them.

Actually I do think that the majority of volunteers (including refs) care about the teams, my problem comes from the way that some of the rules are interpreted and enforced at events. It is really all about the difference between the word of the rule and the intent of the rule.

Take G7 for example.

Quote:

G7 When placed on the FIELD for a MATCH, each ROBOT must be:
A. in compliance with all ROBOT rules, i.e. it has passed Inspection. For exceptions regarding Practice MATCHES, see Section 5.2 – Practice MATCHES.
B. fully supported by the floor, SCORING PLATFORM, and/or SCORING PLATFORM ramps on their ALLIANCE’S side of the FIELD, and
C. completely outside of their AUTO ZONE and LANDFILL ZONE.

VIOLATION: If fix is a quick remedy, the MATCH won’t start until all requirements are met. If it is not a quick remedy the offending ROBOT will be DISABLED and at the discretion of the Head REFEREE must be re-Inspected.
What was the definition of "quick remedy" used at Dallas? To me just simply adjusting the arms of a robot or bending a piece of metal back should be allowed. While on the other hand if you forget to permanently deploy your code or forget to charge your pneumatics would take to long. If you polled the audience I would bet 99.9% of people would have granted both alliances an extra minute to make their bots on field legal.

That's what I mean by putting the students first. Looking at each situation objectively and always asking "How will the students interpret my decision" and "how will my decision inspire students to keep achieving and pushing themselves" People who volunteer for FIRST are wonderful but sometimes it is easy to forget in that specific moment why we all spend so much time supporting this organization.

TexanMagician 02-03-2015 22:23

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Having been on the sidelines, I overheard the conversations of several students on both alliances.

I heard cries of frustration and anger from the students on 118 and 624 when 148 and 987 were not allowed to enter the field and disabled respectively in the semifinals.

I heard the same students feel excitement but disappointment at the same time when they won the 3rd finals match, wishing for an "actual" match, win or lose. Immediately afterwards, I saw students from 148 and 987 congratulate the winning alliance, and even assuring them their win was 100% deserved.

Never before have I seen students on any robotics team act so professionally, and it is quite a stark contrast with the behaviors of many of the adults both at the event and on the forums of Chief Delphi and the chat of the livestream.

It is quite unfortunate that many people chose to discredit the winning alliance with the fact that 987 was disabled. From my point of view, both alliances looked incredibly strong. The second seed had pulled off wins against the first seed in both the last semifinal and the first final, with all robots functioning. According to the announcer, Team 118 had even broken something on their robot and was running around with three wheels for the finals. It is unfair to the winners to write them off as victorious simply because 987 was disabled in the last match - 2613, a hidden part of their strategy, was also disabled. As shown in the second final, both 148 and 987 are incredible machines, and I am sure they will pull an even more dominating performance in Las Vegas.

alicen 02-03-2015 23:14

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Needel (Post 1452511)
Actually I do think that the majority of volunteers (including refs) care about the teams, my problem comes from the way that some of the rules are interpreted and enforced at events. It is really all about the difference between the word of the rule and the intent of the rule.

This.

As a ref this year, and for last year, making calls can be hard. You want to make them fairly, but you also want the kids to enjoy their experience. I don't have a team anymore to actively "care" about, however that doesn't mean I don't care about teams in general.

At the events I ref at we always err in favor of the team. Can't tell if they tripped slightly out of the driver's station? No foul. Need to adjust robot slightly to be within rules? Yes, we want everyone to be able to compete.

tcjinaz 02-03-2015 23:54

Re: 2 v 3 in Dallas
 
We're missing the real world message that needs to be delivered. If your product is outside the customer's specifications, you might not hear about it from them until the purchase order is cut. To your competition.

Regards,
Tim


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 19:22.

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