Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

Why the G13 change? It only makes 2 ball auto more dangerous and really how effective can throwing your one auto boulder at the other alliance be?

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

Exactly, I think at that point a view looking down at the roof of the dome wouldn't strategically viable... just a guess...

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

I imagine it would've looked similar to this:
https://youtu.be/oiMaHpT7bvg

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

Well it would appear that our periscope will now be modified to be 8'8". Benefits of using a pool slimmer pole is that it allows us to adjust height easily.

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

Agreed. I can't quite make out why this change was made, or how it really helps anything. The way I read it, both teams going for a center ball would receive a penalty. I don't think there have even been any center-line ball battles yet, so maybe this is a pre-emptive effort to stop something?

The only thing I guess that this could effect would be that teams that have 2 ball autos or 2 ball auto defensive strategies could now be at risk for yellow cards. If that is truly the intent, that really disappoints me because effective autonomous routines are some of the most inspirational things in FRC.

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

i believe the change is to call a second foul and give a crossing if a robot captures a midline ball and then contacts a robot with it during a midline crossing. The way it was worded before, a team did not get a second fall/crossing penalty if the contact with a robot was through a ball. It had to be robot to robot contact to get the extra penalties.

Transitive contact is when you contact something through something else... in this case...while holding a ball you contact an opposing robot while your robot is over the midline during auto.

IMO that is the reason for the change.

I wonder how well this would be called if both robots were going for the same ball and they both grabbed it in auto? If both robots were over the midline I assume both would get the same penalty. This would be very difficult to call for the referee.


Evan I think your explantion is better than mine...

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

All they did was fix a loophole. In order for G13 to trigger, your ROBOT still has to enter the midline zone. With the previous wording, if your robot entered the midline zone but only touched another robot through a boulder (and not your ROBOT), technically there were no add-on fouls or additional defense crossings awarded. That is now fixed.

It also incidentally makes boulder wars a lot riskier. Where previously you could maybe stomach taking the foul for a close call at the midline to stop a 2-ball auto, now you're risking a double foul and an automatic auto cross.

Edit: Sniped by Coach :-P

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

This is a good change.

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

I don't think boulder wars is the genesis of the G13 change. I am guessing this is more likely the problem:

Two opposing robots line up on each side of a boulder. At the start of Autonomous, One robot drives in the wrong direction, and hits the boulder, which then hits the other robot. The other robot was not going after the boulder, but was going for a cross. The other robot is now knocked off it's path and cannot complete the crossing.

Since the offending robot did not "touch" the other robot, there was not a G13 - Contact of opponent robot foul.

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

If refs see it this way I don't have a problem with the rule.

Unfortunately the rule could also be read that fouls can be called if both teams are touching a boulder that is on the middle line, even if neither bot enters the volume above the midline.

Also does a robot still have be in contact with the boulder for the "transitive" contact to be applied? I.E. is it a foul if a team's auto mode messes up and causes a boulder to roll/shoot/whatever in to an opposing alliance bot?

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

Assumedly so, as rolling/shooting/whatever would fall under G39

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

This is exactly the change Travis spoke about the very first time I saw him setting up your camera pole.
Whether 11'8" is an optimal solution, it is a solution none the less. I'd say objective achieved!

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

Why is no one talking about this?

How will the alliance colors be decided for playoff matches?

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

I believe this clause was leftover from Recycle Rush and just was not removed. This year alliance colors are being determined as they did prior to 2015. The red alliance is the higher seed provided seeds had held in the bracket.

For example, the winner of 1v8 will be red regardless of who wins the set and plays the winner of 4v5. The winner of that semifinal is red in the finals.

Likewise the winner of 2v7 is red in the semifinals against the winner of 3v6, and the winner of that semifinal is blue in the finals.

Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
 

If neither robot enters the volume of the midline, then G13 has not been broken, plain and simple. The revised description of the consequences for a violation does not effect the basic rule (breaking the mid-line volume).

I can't find the video of it, but I saw this happen at a week 1 event - a red robot drove across the midline and pushed a stationary blue robot several inches transitively through a boulder (no direct robot contact). Only 1 foul was called due to how the rule had been written. I was a ref in week 2, and we discussed this scenario prior. We decided since R13 did not mention transitive contact, we would enforce it the same way as was done in week 1. I'm glad to see the loophole closed, as it preserves the intent of the violation.