![]() |
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
|
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
|
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
|
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
|
Re: Withholding Allowance
They found a loophole and exploited it... I will certainly not say that this was illegal. However, I certainly think this is against the spirit of what FIRST intended. Especially if parts were transitioned from the practice bot to the competition bot.
|
Re: Withholding Allowance
One of the things I like best about the FRC competition is watching the teams look around to see what works and trying to better their robots during the heat of competition. I think it is pretty common to see the better teams build complete mechanisms off the robot during the competition and add them as the rules allow. Maybe we need to eliminate bag & tag. Maybe we need to split FRC up into different divisions or classes. I would hate to see the rules get so restrictive that you only can run the one robot you brought in the bag without modification.
|
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
While legal, I think that what 900 has done has provided us a peak through the looking glass. In the arms race that to a large extent is FRC, the disparity between teams will only continue to grow if events like this are allowed to continue. Many teams in FRC build practice robots, and for good reason. But the vast majority, apparently 900 excluded, most likely operate on the understanding that the practice robot will remain a test-bed that stays at home while the competition robot goes away to play. I commend 900 for identifying a way to gain a competitive advantage, however I am of the opinion that this one in particular pushes the bounds of being within the spirit of the rules. |
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
|
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
If you build it within the six weeks, intend to use it at competition, and don't intend to use it before competition, you can put it in the bag. The only difference between this and a team bagging spare parts, is the number of parts involved and how they happen to be assembled. The spirit of the rule allows spare parts - does the spirit of the rule really outline what form the parts are in? But really, bag day is ridiculous. Let's be done with this nonsense and just allow build up to and through competition already. |
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
Edit: never-mind, miss understood that update |
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
"declare" what parts you'll be using and bring them in with you. Nothing against, for example, getting a completely COTS part off of a practice robot in the trailer and bringing just the COTS part into the arena after unload. What the rule change ends up prohibiting is teams going "well I'm using 5 lbs of withholding right now, and 25 lbs when Major Mechanism A breaks on Saturday afternoon and I can just go get another one." |
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
|
Re: Withholding Allowance
Quote:
|
Re: Withholding Allowance
The question here, as I see it comes down to the following:
Is it more of advantage to bag your practice bot and have a bunch of spare parts at a competition, or is it a bigger advantage to be able to drive and test with your practice bot? I think its pretty easy to make the argument that it is a bigger advantage to use a practice bot as a way to allow drivers to practice and programmers to tune in code after bag day. If this was not the case, we would've seen these a lot more of these robots bagged, and used exactly as they were in Palmetto, as assembled spare parts. A week 0.5 event causes this assumption to be thrown out, as there is no time to either practice or code with the practice bot after bag day, so there is literally NO reason to not throw it in a bag to use as "spare parts". This advantage only comes up because of the inherent disadvantage of participating in a regional so close to bag day. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 22:25. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi