Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Since 4451 won the event and EI, they open up a wildcard which goes to 4547, the finalist alliance captain.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Stream is archived here http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/83827538
Unfortunately, I am unable to watch anything before the 3hr mark, perhaps it will work for others. The last 2 Finals matches are there (missing the epic F1).

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

From my perspective we were never shut down by anyone, we ran into some unexpected mechanical issues.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Does the moat count?

I think you have it backwards. Team 179 was a part of an alliance who's defense was really good. They were able to shut down a majority of shots the other teams had.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Any updates on the awards? TBA isn't updating anything on my end.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

looks like new "results" page setup....here is the awards section

http://frc-events.firstinspires.org/2016/SCMB/awards

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Yeah, you guys weren't "shut down" by anyone.. were you guys disrupted a bit by defenders? Yes, but not completely shut down. Congrats on winning the palmetto regional 179, 4451, and 1369! I'm excited to see 179 back at champs where they belong.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Yeah, sorry for the misconception. I was reading the thread in a rush at work.

I'll watch the live stream.. Just interested to see a defensive bot do some work.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Watch any of Alliance 1s matches and see how important defense is, 1369 minotaur were amazing at defense and a perfect final bot for our alliance

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I agree I'm surprised they lasted until Pick 24 what happened with them breaking down? What was the mechanical issues your team had?

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

They really toasted them! I was up high in the cheap seats and could smell them. :(

1296 had a great bot and 3824 appreciates the opportunity to play on their alliance.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

So its been a long day and now that were back at our hotel I will share some thoughts about the event. I was the drive coach for this event in place of Dan so I will try to hit most peoples questions.

Firstly, I want to thank our alliance partners 4451 and 1369 for being part of our alliance. We were expecting 4451 to be good and we were not disappointed and we couldn't have been luckier to get 1369 as our 3rd pick who came with a purpose built defense mechanism.

A couple of notes about the matches and conditions of the game:

• The balls were in decent condition throughout the event, and the field crew was good about replacing balls when significant damage was brought to there attention.
• Billfred did a great job with the defense selection process throughout the event. During qualifying our experience was smooth. The rules with selecting defenses during elimination matches are a little confusing as they do a new audience selection between rounds so your expected to have a representative choose your defenses, get your robot on the field, and be ready to start the match simultaneously which is difficult for everyone but the field crew understood and gave everyone enough time to tether and set up.
• The steel defense are brutal on your robot, much more so than the wood team versions.
• The ranking point for defeating the defenses every match of qualifying can't be overlooked.
• Defense is real and finding safe places to shoot or being able to shoot while being pushed will get more and more important as the events go on. The outer works was not a "safe" zone at this event.

For anyone interested in our robot specifically, we had a number of technical issues to work on throughout the event, mostly with our vision tracking, so we feel that there is lots of room for improvement throughout the season. There was a few things mechanically knocked lose by driving over the defenses. If you forgot to use locking fasteners or locktite ANYTHING this game will find it.

Overall we had a great time at Palmetto and were thrilled to have qualified for championships after missing out last year with the help of our amazing partners. Were looking forward to the rest of the season and seeing how the game develops.

Anyone with specific questions let me know and I will answer what I can.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

First of all, congrats on the win! Very cool robot and the hanging and auto every round really looked cool. Do you think the lack of safe zone was a lack of knowledge by the referees and a mistake? I was under the impression that having your bumpers over the defenses was the only requirement to qualify as "traversing" and while you were traversing you were safe. It will be a very different type of competition than I thought it would be if no one is safe while they shoot.

Thanks.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

That"s my question, too. Was it not a foul if you were shooting with your bumper in the outer works?

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

As long as your robot is in contact with the opponents courtyard you can shoot. Rule G39: ROBOTS are prohibited from launching BOULDERS unless they are in contact with the opponent’s TOWER or carpet in the opponent’s COURTYARD, and not in contact with any other carpet.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Agreed! Just watched the 179 reveal video and loved the wheeled shooter including a turret. We considered doing that this year but didn't think we could do that and still get under the low bar. The "Swamp Thing" managed to do it very effectively -- well done!

We've been operating under the above understanding, too -- if the "shooting" robot has backed away from the tower so that a bumper is over the ramp to the defenses, then for a defender to interfere with that robot should be a foul, at least from our understanding of G43.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Yes but the outerworks is not another carpet. If your robot is in your opponent's courtyard and your bumper is in the volume of the outerworks, you are supposed to be protected from opponent contact.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

That's what I was trying to say.. sorry if it was unclear :P

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

That's nice, but irrelevant to the question at hand. It is quite possible to be in a position to NOT violate G39, and still be under the protection of G43. G43 applies whenever your opponents' bumpers are within the Outer Works (read: Defenses and their ramps).

The question now becomes, were the referees assuming that using that area to shoot nullifies the traverse attempt? I could see that being the case, the way G43 is written. But I don't want to try to get into the refs' heads on that, so I'll stop there.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I watched a lot of Palmetto since we compete next week, I saw ZERO bots taking shots from outer works (with bumpers hanging) at Palmetto. So I don't think the opportunity and/or desirability came up. Could be teams in practice found that long range of shot unreliable is my guess. Almost all shots were taken from batter or back a several feet except for the one bot that nailed shots in auto from spy position. The prime shot zone was from halfway in courtyard to batter.

I too went in thinking that a cross and immediate shoot might be the way to go..but it may not be a realistic way to go. We'll certainly practice it and find out. Hope we get the vision thing down certainly would help. Lots to consider.

My feeling is the action is chaotic and relying on a ref to call fouls is a dubious endeavor. Even from a discrete quantitative visual scouting standpoint its nearly impossible to keep track so much going on.

Since we didn't get a ton of shot practice going in we'll have to find what works when we get there we have the entire field to choose from. Hope to find a few sweet spots.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

True. I didn't answer the previous question.

I think stopping and shooting would nullify the traverse attempt. Because to traverse means to move, pass, or go across. Say a robot is crossing a defense and stops with their bumpers hovering over the outerworks and then they shoot after they stop moving. Since they have stopped moving wouldn't it nullify it?

I'm not a 100% sure this is the best reasoning though.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Traversing is defined as having your robot's bumpers in the volume of the outerworks. That is in the rules and has been clarified in the Q&A and team updates. At least from my point of view that doesn't really seem debatable. If it is then we built the wrong robot...

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I see no rule violation crossing stopping (touching their courtyard) shooting then continuing the traversal. A traversal is not defined as a singular action without pause. I think "bumper hanging" shots will be allowed if you continue into the courtyard after. Would be most efficient scoring if a team can pull it off. Why go further and then backtrack in if you don't have to?

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

We assumed like everyone else that as long as your bumper was over the outer works you could not be touched, from our perspective that was not how the rule was being called, attached is a screen shot from the stream of quarterfinal 1 match 1 where it is very obvious we have are actually contacting a defense, and yet no penalty was called, ironically it was announced as an "even more impressive, penalty free match". When we questioned after the match we were told the referees couldn't see it.

I just want to make it clear, I am not trying to bad mouth the volunteers at the event, in fact this was the first event I have ever attended where every volunteer, and employee of the venue were extraordinarily pleasant. I just wanted to show what was meant above.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Yeah. If the Q&A clarifies it (I think I'm looking at the right questions).. then it should be legal unless they clarify/change it in the team updates.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

By the definition of traversing, it should be allowed even if the robot doesn't finish going over. There are no rules forcing a robot to traverse if it ever started traversing. There are only rules protecting robots that are in the act of traversing.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Yea that's what I thought teams can't rely on that call. Thanks for verifying it.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

This is the rule that makes it illegeal:

G40 A ROBOT may not cause a BOULDER to move from the NEUTRAL ZONE into the opponent’s
COURTYARD unless:
A. the ROBOT contacts the BOULDER within OUTER WORKS, and
B. the ROBOT completes its CROSSING (e.g. doesn’t completely back out of the OUTER
WORKS into the NEUTRAL ZONE)

They then define crossing:
CROSS an act performed by a ROBOT, such that it starts free of contact with an opponent
DEFENSE and completely in the NEUTRAL ZONE, traverses the DEFENSE such that
its BUMPERS go fully between the adjacent SHIELDS/GUARDRAIL, and ends up fully
contained by the opponent’s COURTYARD

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Traversing to me and reading the rules means completing the action.. so if you don't end up in their courtyard fully IMO it won't count as a cross. So if you want 5 pts it seems you will have to cross fully (another 5 if you hit a HG in the process)

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

The way I read that rule is you cannot lob boulders into courtyard or act as a defense conduit... If a bot crosses pauses and completes the shot and continues to traverse then the boulder was properly introduced was it not? The robot in my scenario would not back up but continue on ant the boulder in their courtyard at shot time.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I was talking about specifically about scoring a high goal while your bumpers are resting in the outerworks. Finishing the cross doesn't mean anything since you only get points for going one way. This Q&A clarification helps reinforce the idea that you don't have to go over a defense to have the traversing benefit.

https://frc-qa.firstinspires.org/Que...the-outerworks

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Are you resting your bumpers during a cross then continuing in or backing into them for protection after a valid cross?

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

The scenario I was talking about was backing into them for protection after a complete cross and then shooting. That being said, G43's not being called will hurt a lot of teams who made the scenario a primary shooting method. Hopefully missed G43's are the rarity rather than the norm.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I hope so too. Cause that's our teams main strategy at lake superior for scoring boulders in the high goal.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

You might want to notify the ref that's you intention it "should" be protected. However I'm not sure in real action if it'll get called all the time as 179 showed (refs have a lot to keep them busy) . Ref may not have good line of sight to your bumpers. There is no instant reply either.

Better have a plan B...we think alike and are rooting for it to be true as its in the rules. But real live action may dictate otherwise.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

If you look at the examples in the blue boxes, particularly example B, there is no requirement for the robot to remain in contact with the Boulder throughout the Crossing.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

So Erich is it legal in your opinion like many of us envisioned to cross pause/shoot to then score both a HG and a successful cross in one action? (5 +5=10) then rinse repeat as long as we complete the crossing each time?

Cross...pause/shoot(bumper hang) ..continue into courtyard....exit...repeat

I have no delusions this is easy but do want to know if its an option to get those points/scoring moves efficiently as possible.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

We didn't press the issue as it didn't affect the outcome of a match.

I'm fairly confident as the events move on this will be watched more closely and called more often. There were very few attempts made at shooting from the outer-works this weekend and they can't catch everything.

Ref's did a great job keeping track of defense crossings which was way more important in my book.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Concur again congratulations awesome 0.5 event and a well deserved win.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

You're sure you want to risk giving your opponents points based on my opinion?

To tell the truth, I saw that one myself, too. I actually want to say that I saw a Q&A about the topic, but I can't find it now (Q&A is really annoying to search through--don't they teach spelling in schools anymore?).


If I was you, I'd double-check at the drivers' meeting.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I know you read the rules like I do and trust your judgement... I think its ok but that's just me, I'll have my drivers check



I think its legal based on attached rules Q532 and 900


Game Manual - Game » Game Rules » Defense Rules
Q532 Q. "A robot carrying a boulder crosses a defense into their opponents' courtyard. They then move back such that a part of its bumpers are within the opponent’s outer works while their robot is still in contact with the courtyard carpet. They attempt to line up a shot, but an opponent contacts them. Does the opponent incur a G43 penalty?"
FRC3322 on 2016-01-14 | 16 Followers
A. This situation does demonstrate a violation of G43. Per G43: "A ROBOT is considered traversing the opponent’s OUTER WORKS if any part of its BUMPERS are within the opponent’s OUTER WORKS." Even if you are shooting a BOULDER, you would be protected by G43 if your BUMPERS are within the OUTER WORKS. <-----Rangles scenario OK

Q900 Q. In Regards to Rule G-39 My question is I have seen teams at Week 0 events parking on the COURTYARD side of the OUTER WORKS and in contact with one of the OUTER WORKS ramps and shooting the BOULDER, in my opinion this violates rule G-39 because the OUTER WORKS or sitting on top of carpet and the OUTER WORKS are defined as having an infinitely tall volume. We just need a clarification as of how this rule will be enforced.
FRC0313 on 2016-02-23
A. G39 prohibits launching BOULDERS unless a ROBOT is: "in contact with the opponent’s TOWER or carpet in the opponent’s COURTYARD, and not in contact with any other carpet." A ROBOT which is contacting the carpet in the opponent's COURTYARD and also contacting the PLATFORM ramps (or any other non-carpet part of the OUTER WORKS) meets these criteria and therefore is not in violation of G39 <---My scenario seems OK but will clarify

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Is it either of these Q&A

Q532 in my judgement establishes that no matter what you are currently doing (lining up a shot in this case), if your bumpers are in Outer Works you in a protected traversal.

Q702 in my judgement establishes that Boulders entering the Courtyard (and possibly goal) and Crossings are independent events and in many cases the Boulder enters first. It builds upon the G40 Blue Box example B that robot must complete the Crossing after entering the Boulder, or at least not leave the Outer Works (abort the Crossing)

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

That would be them.

The big problem is that neither one refers to G40 directly. Still a good question to ask the head ref (ideally with reference to these two questions in hand).

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Small week 0.5 bug on our end... They're up now (:

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Perfect example James. This is exactly what I was talking about. The Q629 (https://frc-qa.firstinspires.org/Que...the-outerworks) seems like it very clearly defines what qualifies as traversing and therefor protected. I'm hopeful that as high goal scoring becomes more popular this is a more heavily stressed penalty. It seems like something that should be clearly visible to the ref in each corner of the courtyards.

It is a fairly specific reading of the rules that defines the safe zone and I can see how it could be missed. Is the training for the referees something FIRST releases to the public or something they keep in house?

Thanks for putting together this reply.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I haven't personally taken the training, but I'm managing 30 volunteers at North Dakota State University, and three of them are referees. I will say that the test for referees takes over 3 hours, and it is far from easy. I heard from one head referee that it was the hardest test he's ever taken, bar-none.

FIRST has taken many steps to improve the program, and a big focus seems to be volunteer training. Have faith that the referees have been thoroughly screened, and know the game well. I can't speak to how open the referee test is to the public.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I'm sure it's great. I was honestly just curious, and want to take a look at it. I was not attempting to be critical of any volunteers or refs.

Sorry if it came of that way.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I don't know about the referee test, but the inspector test is still far too easy. There are going to be scenarios that inspectors should be ready for and the test should point out pitfalls that teams usually overlook. Inspectors should be able to know from the test to look for certain things on robots that teams think is legal but is actually not. I still don't feel the test covers those scenarios well enough. Maybe I'm alone on this one, considering I don't see much discussion on it.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Our robot lost robot code for entire F3 match. We (team & FTA) could not find problem even after match. We suspect a loose wire somewhere. My recommendation is make sure all your wire connections are checked and double checked between matches. STRONGHOLD can be a rough/violent game at times

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

We struggled to make and maintain connection throughout the finals. I for one am no longer a fan of the new radio as it takes so long to boot and between now and Rocket City we will be trying to come up with some better ways to keep our wires in their connectors.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

You're not alone. imo the inspector test is far too easy; it's mostly parroting the rules.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Launching the boulder while your bumpers are in the outerworks, then failing to complete the cross into the courtyard will result in a technical foul under G40B or G41 (depending on the exact order of activity), without regard to whether the defense is damaged.

As the courtyard is defined as infinitely tall, launching it towards the goals would cause it to pass through the courtyard.

(Usual disclaimer about this being an unofficial ruling)

Edit: Q912 posted.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Is there video of the eliminations posted anywhere? Apparently http://www.htcinc.net/portal/streams/robotics/ was only for watching in real time

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I was able to watch video from Ustream up until a few minutes ago. Had been watching the Friday and Saturday Qualification matches after the fact, but they are all removed now it appears :mad:.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Unfortunate..glad I watched live day 1 (most) and playoffs

"This Pro Broadcaster has chosen to remove this video from the ustream.tv site."

Wonder why?

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

20-50 cents per viewer hour is a likely reason.

https://www.ustream.tv/platform/plans/pro-broadcasting

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Really hope the RPC or someone else can get a hand of the footage from the sponsor but I doubt it.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

The 775s are great (a bot as small and fast as ours is near impossible w/o 775s and VPs everywhere), you just have to monitor them. We missed a failure scenario in software (unintentional/untested stalls in autonomous). It will never happen again!

The volunteer staff and teams at Palmetto were great this weekend. We looooved the facility and made a lot of new friends. Southern hospitality is alive and well at Palmetto! Thanks for a great time!

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

We found out that we burned out our 550 on stop build day, we'll have to add a replacement at competition.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I was on the road driving to So. Cal when the Elim's were taking place.
Does anyone have a link to the video's of the Elim's. TBA does not have links and it appears Twitch doesn't either.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I found the mobile uStream links seem to work. The video isn't parsed.

Quarter finals through finals 1: http://m.ustream.tv/recorded/83822183

Finals 2 and 3: http://m.ustream.tv/recorded/83827538

David

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

So you're telling me crossing completely, backing up so your bumpers are over the outer works (to gain protection) and shooting is, in your mind, illegal unless we then proceed to cross back from the courtyard? Neither G40 nor G41 are relevant as a boulder is not moving into the courtyard from the neutral zone (and as far as I can tell there are no rules regarding carrying the ball back).

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I don't know if anyone mentioned this in the thread but the fabric hanging from the low bar kept getting holes punched in it. They kept patching the holes with duct tape but it didn't hold on very well. We got snagged on it a number of times. Finally in the QF matches one of our arms snagged on it and ripped off an intake motor.

I hope they replace the fabric with something that can take the abuse a little better.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Hey Andrew, I think Gus was talking about failing to complete a cross, so the "crossing completely" you mention never happened in his scenario. I think it comes down to this:

Start cross, shoot, finish cross = okay.
Start cross, finish cross, backup to shoot = okay.
Start cross, shoot, back up and never finish cross = not okay.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

^This, I'll have the kids verify in SD

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

and now answered:

So it is not necessary to cross and then back into the outer works to be protected, but it appears you do have to follow-through. This should help, because if you're still on your inward traversal, a robot blocking you on the courtyard side is more clearly interfering with your travelsal (G43). On an outward traversal, it would not be so clear, and perhaps the referees have been informed that this is not a G43 violation. Now to see if it'll get called that way consistently, or if the referees were too overtasked to see these.

No, simply that:

• Launching before completing the crossing is legal.
• Perhaps backing up into the outer works does not merit much protection from a robot on the courtyard side of you.

What is illegal is incompletely crossing from the neutral zone side, launching, then backing out to the neutral zone without ever completely entering the courtyard on that boulder cycle (G43). Someone had implied that this was unnecessary if the defense were already damaged.

Edit: here it is:
The point is if you are in a CROSS, carrying a boulder, and launch it, it does mean something - if you don't complete the cross, you've committed a technical foul. If you're in a traversal outwards, I agree that it is unnecessary to continue that traversal.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I was never referring to that scenario. I was only talking about crossing into the courtyard completely and then backing up to take a shot.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

It should provide the exact same amount of protection according to the rules. Are you just pointing out that the refs might not see it if you back up into the outer works rather than shoot as you go through? I think this rule is a critical part of the game and everyone involved needs to understand how closely it's going to be enforced.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

The rule is:

The key point here is that if robot BlueA is in the red courtyard and begins a traversal of the outer works (towards the neutral zone), activity by robot RedD (located in the red courtyard) that does not involve grappling or pinning is less than certain to be considered as interfering with the presumed traversal towards the neutral zone. Most of the "uncalled G43 violations" I've read about (and both of the ones I've seen on video) are or seem to be this scenario. Perhaps it is not a G43 violation.

Now that I've expressed it clearly, I'm going to post it to Q&A (assuming I don't find it there already).

Edit: Q532 seems to cover this pretty clearly. These non-calls were missed, not intentional.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Not trying to justify the lack of calls, just give an alternative perspective.

*Note: I did not see any of the videos in question where there was a potential G43 penalty that was not called

Firstly, please remember that the Ref's are human, and are volunteering their time. Sometimes people make mistakes

This year is a complicated year for the Ref's and there is a lot that each ref needs to watch and that visibility might be poor. Remember that the students are the volunteers customer, that means that both the students on *your* alliance AND the students on the *other* alliance. If you back up so that your bumpers are just barely in the outer works and it's not obvious then a ref might miss it.

My assessment is that if you are planning to shoot from the outerworks so to take advantage of it's protected zone status, you should make it obvious to the refs that you are in the outerworks.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I concur I think teams expecting a ref to see the nuanced move of entering the courtyard and backing into "protection" are dreaming. The only way I see this working consistently is when crossing before you leave the platform (slight pause) you shoot HG because of the initial "protection" of the obvious crossing action.

This applies also to bots expecting the ref to see "solo" sally door bumps or drawbridge taps...don't count on it. They missed many obvious crossings "no sensors" let alone "tricky" solo ones.

Don't count on getting calls or credit. That's a failed assumption in a game as complex as this from a reffing standpoint (and scouting standpoint)

I think the refs will as time goes on get the basics down...the rest though is dreaming.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I disagree entirely. Although the onus is on the teams to clearly have their bumpers in the OUTER WORKS, the refs should be paying attention regardless. Remember, CROSSING is only one direction (Neutral Zone to Courtyard) but TRAVERSING is either direction. The protection clause applies to TRAVERSING. Regardless of if I have a ball and intend to shoot or not, the refs should be watching for when my bumpers cross into the OUTER WORKS, because I may be intending to TRAVERSE back to the Neutral Zone, not necessarily shoot.

I agree it is a tough game to ref, and refs will miss things, but it's also their job to enforce the rules as best as possible. If I do my best to make it obvious that my robot bumpers are in the OUTER WORKS, I should expect be protected from interference, regardless of when/how/from what direction I approach the OUTER WORKS.

*Disclaimer: My team is not shooting at all, and has a mechanism to open the Sally Port from the neutral zone so as not to rely on the "tap" method.*

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

How do you expect a ref to pay that close attention to your bot with 5 others on field?

Basically the rule is in place so the other alliance cannot just defend entrances to to "easier" defenses all day and also so they cant trap a bot in a defense... the "shooting protection" is a secondary construct of the rule in the first place...relying on "bumper hang shooting protection" calls is dreaming. To many other things refs have a primary responsibility to track...like basic crossings.

These are volunteers and are human with a tough game to call.

They let slide many things in Palmetto..probably due to audience game play flow. Just like in NFL holding happens many times a game..gets called a few times. Too many "flags' creates audience fatigue.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Shooter protection calls were the standard in 2012 and 2013. Why should this year be any different? I have heard from those close to the GDC that it was a very intentional construct of the rules to provide shooting protection in the outerworks.

Actually, a well-driven defensive robot could still block the entrance to easier defenses. As long as they are not touching an opposing robot in the outerworks they can still prevent access.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Well if that's so I stand corrected, I just see it as an unlikely call though except maybe at highest levels with sharp shooting form 16 feet bots as the norm.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

It shouldn't be. But just be aware that if it's not obvious or a ref didn't see it, they will likely err on the side of not issuing a penalty. So if you want to take advantage of the protection zone, make it obvious that you are in the protection zone.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

I would also have to disagree. A member of 159 posted a picture earlier in the thread that actually sparked most of the conversation. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/at...2&d=1456635860)

This is a missed call. I'm not blaming anyone and realize this is a nuanced rule, but it should be made a point of emphasis in the next few weeks by FIRST if the calls continue to be overlooked. The potential for penalties is highest around the outerworks and secret passage, these zones will need to be watched closely.

Thanks GeeTwo for asking/finding the Q/A for this. (https://frc-qa.firstinspires.org/Que...ot-is-still-in)

Again, unclear situations are going to be common, but with a ref standing almost in line with the outerworks, it should be fairly easy for them to call it in cases like the above photo. I also believe that if it does start getting called with frequency the defender will have to play more cautious and that should lead to offense having a bigger window to sit in to shoot.

Edit: I think I misread the reply I was quoting. I do agree with making it obvious to the refs, I thought you said you didn't see any cases where it should have be called. Not that you hadn't seen any of the videos where it should have been called. Most of my reply still makes some sense though. So I'll leave it up.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

There are always 5 other robots (since 2005) that the refs have to pay attention to. My point was mainly that regardless of what a robot is doing, the OUTER WORKS is a protected zone. If my robot is near my opponents' OUTER WORKS, I expect the referees to be paying attention to it. Whether I'm shooting or traversing or just wandering aimlessly, being near the OUTER WORKS should invite the referees attention, just like any other FIRST game with protected zones. We haven't really had any in the last 2 years, but they used to be pretty common. 2011-2013 each had at least two different "protected" areas per alliance (loading zones and scoring zones).

Refs are human, for sure, but the OUTER WORKS protection is such a key part of the game mechanic this year that a robot anywhere near there should invite some attention from at least one ref, period. Perhaps FIRST needs to consider putting some kind of stripe on the edges of the plastic dividers so the refs can more easily see where the OUTER WORKS starts.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Visibility is much less than in previous years take last 2 or most games ...basically open courts much easier to see protected zones with static features.

This year is so complex "bump hang" is probably really low on any priority list of ref calls. They are not in the middle of the game on every defense. They like both drive teams will have limited visibility and lots of action to take into account.

I agree they "should" call it but also see the difficulty in doing so. No instant replay.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Good enforcement of this rule will be the difference between a good game that is remember for it's great bots, games, and moments & a game that is remember for it's bad refereeing, punishment bots got and boring games.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

There are at least 6 refs stationed along the side of the field, so they should have a MUCH better vantage point than the drivers to see the OUTER WORKS. If Refs are having trouble determining if robot are within protected zones, that's a much bigger deal than just whether or not you'll get the call when shooting.

I 100% agree it's on the teams to make it obvious they're within the OUTER WORKS, but a robot within the zone is within the zone, period. If a ref can't see that, it's an issue, shooter or not. There's no "priority" for a call. A robot with bumpers in the zone is TRAVERSING by definition of the rules, regardless of whether or not it's traversing (moving) in a colloquial sense. If refs can't see that occurance, that's a much larger problem than just for shooters trying to shoot from a protected region. Several robots will want to move into the protection of the OUTER WORKS before deploying or moving mechanisms to help them get across the obstacles.

For what it's worth, determining protection should be easier this year than in the past, since the refs aren't trying to determine robot contact with a patch or a tape line on the floor with the perspective of looking halfway across the field with parallax. There should be at least two refs with a direct line of sight down the planes which determine the start of the outer works.

Time will tell. Palmetto was a very early event, I expect as more refs experience and give feedback on the game, FIRST head refs will improve the guidance to their teams on best operating procedures and how to call things.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Hello everyone, now that I've had some time to wind down and catch up on my duties post Palmetto I wanted to extend a thank you to everyone who attended or watched the event. Our team had its own challenges at the competition, but we had a blast with everyone we had a chance to speak with. I'd also like to send another thanks to the members of MARS and Garnet Squadron (and other teams I may have missed) for staying after the event and helping us with packing away FIRST's playing field and accessories to be sent off to the next event.

With the new teams at the event we got to see and experience mechanisms we had never attempted to build before. I, personally, was astonished by what some of the teams were able to develop during the short build season. We will be spending our off season learning how to develop those mechanisms with the students so we can be better prepared for games which may benefit from them in the future. Always be prepared!

Congratulations to the winning alliance this year! I look forward to seeing how well you guys perform at St. Louis!

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

We are working on getting all of the videos up now, but we have a few of them up already on our Youtube channel.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...Pal8yzftONmTGB

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Spectrum beat you to it.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...Oh94iIlh7W81y7

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Those still are only long cuts of 7-20 rounds. Alex is cutting them into single match videos.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Ah okay, that would be much better.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

90% of the matches have been added to the WatchFIRSTnow archive.

We're currently having trouble with the Vimeo embedded player removing the full screen button. Working on that one.

- Bochek

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5
 

Red Station 3 was notorious to have a lot of issues...

Which station were you in?

Field connection issues plagued us as well. Mostly while we were at station Red 3.
Hot glue gun is a simple fix for keeping wires connected.

Re: Palmetto Regional Week 0.5