Unofficial Chaos
 

Unfortunately Battlecry left quite a nasty taste in my mouth for myself, my teamates, and our alliance partners. Now there is nothing that I can say or do that will go back and change what happened yesterday, the rulings, the arguements, or anything. I just want our feelings to be known just so teams can understand why we were so upset yesterday after the DQ, and so that future competition planners can take from this to provide an experience that may be less contraversial and more fun...

Many of you may have heard about the happenings at Ralley in the Valley a couple of months ago. For those who don't, there was a contraversial ruling on tipping against team 121 which they were forced to remove the wedge from their robot because they tipped another robot while fighting for the top of the ramp. As you know, tipping on the ramp was a frequent occurance over the course of the offical FIRST season, and was considered completely legal unless it was extremely blatent. (Which usually came when teams with arms put them up at an angle that would make it impossible for a team not to tip). Well, the referee's at Ralley had decided to make a statement on the move by forcing 121 to remove the wedge from the robot for the finals. Unfortunately the ruling caused for many teams to leave Ralley upset, and caused alot of contraversy.

One of the teams at Ralley who was involved in the whole tipping/pinning fiasco as 190, the hosts of Battlecry. In an effort to try to avoid the same contraversy that Ralley had fallen victim to, they changed the rules to further clarify tipping. These rules were extremely strict when it came to wedgebots and were implimented both online with a few extra clarifications being made at a meeting earlier in the day. In the quarterfinals, 121 tipped 190 on top of the ramp, and got DQ'ed further eliminating them and my team from the competition.

Our beef lies with this. The whole day due to the rules that were set forth, both team 121 and 126, who were pretty much the only two wedgebots at the competion, had felt like thier "hands were tied" for the whole competition as we were not able to use our robots for what they were designed to do, due to the fact that we had to be extra careful not to break the tipping rule. And just so teams understand, contrary to popular belief, our robots WERE NOT designed for the soul purpose of tipping other robots over! We built a wedgebot because of our belief that teams would use any means necessary to anchor themselves to the top HDPE surface, so we had every right to take any means necessary to create a design to remove those robots as well as any other strong robots from the top of the ramp. At various points during the day, the fear of being DQ'ed had cost us rounds due to the fact that we could not just drive up to push a team up and off the top of the ramp due to the fact that we were afraid of being DQ'ed for something that until Battlecry was a completely legal maneuver. Furthermore, 121 had been warned early in the day for tipping in autonomous mode...something that they had no control over, and that if they did it again, they would be DQ'ed. In quarterfinal match 1, we were tipped in autonomous mode by a non-wedgebot, no warning given to them. Also couple this with the fact that after the DQ to 121 for tipping, in a later round in a play that looked exactly the same minus the wedge, 176 tipped 157 and did not get DQ'ed. As you can see, due to the fact that we were wedgebots, it was almost as if we were singled out...at least that is what our feeling was. That is what we were all upset about.

Like I said, what happened yesterday, I cannot change. I can just warn teams who are to run competitions in the upcomming year that this is a very fine-line call that could cause alot of problems if it is not dealt with correctly. It is my feeling at least that organizers should be very careful when tinkering with the rules that FIRST had adhered to all year long, as everytime there has been a deviation from what FIRST's standard call was, there has been major problems.

In closing, I do want to congratulate the competition staff for what otherwise was a very well run competition due to all the hard work and effort. And I appologize to those staff members who may have been upset when teams flipped out at them, as I know you all were just doing your job...a very difficult one at that.

Thank You,
Andy Grady

p.s. Brandon, please do not delete this post...lock it if you must, but please privately talk to me before doing anything more than that.

Concerning wedges and the sort:

I remember hearing somewhere (either philly or over a webcast) that wedges that were used to hold position on top of the ramp were fine. But wedges that were used to attack up the ramp with were much more likely to be DQ'd. I think it was at philly, and a few teams that had wedges then went up the ramp backwards, with a square end, and then defended their position with the wedge. This seems like a very fair basis to judge calls.

Just letting you know.

And about 121 getting warned for tipping an auto mode, that's stupid. There's no way they intended it, and if the refs had watched, thats what their auto mode did all the time, whether there was another robot there or not.

What I really wanna know is, ok 121 was DQed so why wasn't 176? What was different that made t ok? The refs got themselves into that problem and they should have stuck to what they were doing. If they had made a bad call to 121, they have to keep doing to make if far. I feel exaclty how you do Andy.

But isn't that the sole purpose of any wedge design?

The purpose of a wedge is to gain a mechanical advantage; in this case, over a competing robot.

While the tipping of another robot is incidental to the use of a wedge at its purest function, it's clearly an obvious concern. Teams that added such devices to their robots are aware of that concern and accept the consequences.

Disqualifications and questions of intent are the consequences. Such rulings may not be fair, consistent, or correct, but those are the breaks. That's what you signed up for when you added a wedge to your robot, and you also agreed that the referee's decision was final. You don't deserve an explanation, answers, or a second-chance.

I can't say that I sympathize with the frustration you may feel because winning the competition -- heck, winning a round -- isn't important to me. I do grow tired of these complaints, though, because, again, it always seems to me that the only people that ever complain are the people who're directly affected.

It's just a game, folks. Enjoy it when you play this time around and learn for when you play it the next time around. If you'd like me to compile a list of some causes that affect people beside yourselves, so that you may better direct your energy toward making someone's life better, I'd be happy to do that for you.

According to posts made on ChiefDelphi forums..

Every game has an unfair advantage; every match, a rightful winner; every team, a right to be angered. The best advice I can offer is this: although true as that may be, it's the way you handle the games, matches, and teams that earns you respect in this program, not the number of medals around your neck or trophies in your case.

This is how I saw it... 121 ran up the ramp and got the other team off(nice job) then as the team was on the other side of the ramp 121 ran down the ramp straight into them and kept going until the robot flipped... That's how I saw it...

Guys this is turning into the typical post season event referee bashing thread. It seems the referees are bashed after pretty much every post season event.

FIRST is a game. It is not life. If the calls go against you, you will live. I promise all of you, nobody is gonna suddenly keel over and die due to a referee or even driver error. If you do there's gotta be someone there in the crowd who knows CPR. So why not cut the referees some slack and talk about the positive stuff that happened at Battlecry? All this thread is gonna do is cause fights about things that can't be changed.

My Intent...
 

The intent of this thread was not to referee bash. It was not to bash any of the hard working members of team 190 either. Battlecry was an excelent competition which fell victim to contraversy. When you have contraversial plays, contraversial calls, contraversial reactions, the result can be a very negative thing for a competition. You are right, this is just a game, this isn't about winning or losing. But when I see things like what happened yesterday, with everyone getting all upset, booing, and so forth, there are no winners...and what should have been seen as one of the best competitions of the year, left an empty feeling for some people. The purpose of this thread was not to create more contraversy, or continue it. The purpose of this thread is to try to prepare those who will be organizing competitions this year for what could be a growing and very headachy problem.

For the sake of FIRST and everyone's sanity, I ask anyone who replys to this thread not to referee bash, team bash, or individual bash. Lets try our best to be constructive about this, or else this thread is just going to be locked anyway.

Also, if my original post came off as if it were bashing the refs, 190, or anyone else...please accept my appology.

Thank you,
Andy Grady

Yeah but as I see it. Anyway you cut it, slice, or dice it, a wedge's purpose is to get underneath a robot. I have no probelms against them though I am just pointing out the obvious.

To continue on this, rule GM2 gives the referees god-like power in FIRST. If you don't like it, no matter what your team or robot is, then that's too bad. Weather it's fair or not, the referees are in charge. When you participate in any FIRST event, official or unofficial, you are agreeing to play by all the rules in the book. So what the ref says, goes.

::points to rule GM28 and the Battlecry SITREPs for more on the above and tipping. don't want to type it all out again::

I don't know anything about 121 being warned about the tip in auto-mode, but if it's true, the refs may be right about this. I don't think there's a rule that protects actions in autonomous mode, and DQ1 seems to make it even more favorable to the refs on this one. <edit>Check out DA7 as well.</edit>

The reason 176 wasn't DQed was because they barely moved. 157 was being the agressive one in that confrontation to get the 25 points. Yes, 176 they did have some movement, but no where near enough to tip 157 on it's own. Rule GM27 says that pushing is expected, and it really wasn't much of a push anyway. Besides, I don't think 157 was angry with that situation anyway.

Other than all that though, I had a wonderful day. I was with friends the whole time, the food is always pretty good, and it was full of robot action (the elim. rounds took forever). I even got to meet Andy Baker. So it was a d@mn good time.

tipping at Battlecry
 

I applaud the BattleCry judges for making good calls all throughout the event. The rules were set out plain and simple before the competition and they were enforced accordingly. Great job Refs.!!!!

Cliff
222 Alum.

Alright, I would like to offer my views on this subject based on what I saw and heard, on a very different side of the table (literally) than most anybody else was. I was one of the BC4 staff members sitting behind the control/media tables, working on the real-time production of our closing video presentation.

Now, any team 190 member who is a BC staff member is staff. The event is run such that there is no biases towards any teams, even though that we as team 190 "run" the event; there are those staff members that are not on any team, even FIRST representatives -- and we are expected to have the same unbiased views as they would have.

As I was sitting behind the table watching this match, I cringed as I saw my team's robot pushed off and flipped. However, that was that.. just another match; I didn't think much of it. As I saw the refs gathering around the scoring table I overheard some of the things they were saying. They were discussing the flip and the rules as well, with a few BattleCry staff overlooking. I heard something such as, "well that means that the blue alliance will be DQed." I thought to myself, "wow, that means that the red alliance advances... and wow, this is gonna look bad for us." BattleCry staff members who are also on team 190 had no input whatsoever as to the final decision -- there were those who certainly disagreed with it too. I simply would like to point out that the decision was not biased against the fact that the flipped team was hosting the competition, and all referees had some input into the matter.

With that said, a few people came over to the mixing station to watch a replay of what had happened that match. I know the refs are always very nervous after making a call such as that, especially with the ability for replay, in the case that they are wrong. After watching, they were certain that the right call was made. Team 190 was on their crab wheels, trying to move sideways to avoid the wedge on the front of 121, whom just continued to drive until 190 was completely flipped.

As for the other flippings, I can't make any comment on most of them because I was too busy working on the final video cut, but I do know that for one of them, the flipped team was actually the agressor rather than just sitting there or trying to retreat. Again, as per the clarified tipping rules, the decisions were based on which team was the agressor, and the final decision is left to the referees.

This whole incident is quite unfortunate, but it was the right call; I am very sorry to discover that such veteran teams (in both FIRST, and BattleCry) would actually leave before the end of the day simply because of a call they did not agree with. That is very ungracious, in my opinion, and almost a kick in the face to all the event staff who volunteered so much time and effort to make the event a success -- everything from the award makers, video producers and editors, announcers, judges... just everyone. Especially when you are more than aware of the events that are to occur afterwards.

Anywho, I hope that everyone else managed to have a great time at the 4th annual BattleCry@WPI... more work than ever before went into this year's competition, and we feel that it ran extremely well. The addition of a live video production was more than we ever expected -- multiple angles, instant replays, interviews between the matches, some fun animations, and a final closing video brought a whole new excitement to the competition (well, at least we thought so :D )

The Gray area of wedgebots...
 

This whole mess @ BattleCry got me thinking about wedgebots. I'm sure that we can go round and round until we have carpel tunnel syndrome about why teams choose to build wedgebots but in my mind it certainly seems that, whether it is the intention to do so or not they are ideal for tipping. So one has to wonder I believe that FIRST does have a rule which prohibits teams for building a device on their robot dedicated solely to the purpose of flipping. Visa vi the Team 121 (yes I know that wasn't their number then) robot of the 1997 competition. So the question is where does this leave wedgebots?? Are the designed specifically to tip?? Maybe yes...maybe no. What are we left with in this debate then?? Well what I think this comes down to is a debate which mirrors the one that tries to determine whether Napster and the like are legal or not?? Proponents point to the fact that Napster and its contemporaries have legitimate uses. Opponents point to the fact that these services are predominately used to pirate music.

A few other observations about wedgebots. They're definitely quite reminiscent of more than a few BattleBots designs I've seen...I make no judgment on whether that is good or bad. Also it seems ironic to me that prior to the year 2001, a game designed specifically to eliminate any malicious activities within the game, I can't remember a wedge bot as such.

Lastly my posts, as it seems sadly like BattleCry, are usually not complete without some degree of controversy. I can't help thinking that a lot of what this is about is teams that are tired of getting picked on. I think there are a whole host of teams out there who probably watched their robots tumble helplessly down the ramp at the hands of 121/126. Rally and BattleCry perhaps they attempted to right these wrongs in the post season. I think what BattleCry 4 might have shown us is that perhaps this is not the right time. It seems to me one of the reasons that teams had such a problem with these calls is that the move 121 performed I've seen it called legal a 100 times before and now all of the sudden it isn't...and why? Because they are 121? Because they have a wedge? Because some teams got beat up on?

Okay really Lastly this time. I have been trying hard to come up with what Woodie and Dean's reaction would have been if they had been there for these finals. It is the first time I remember in my FIRST experience with such widespread booing. In addition I happened to be sitting in front of one team and actually witnessed what looked like mentors stand up and shout "Yeah that's it take out 176." "Ya come on 69 get Aces." In addition the heckled the refs and booed through almost the entire match. If Woodie and Dean had been there...I fear we'd be condemned to a 2001 style game for the remainder of FIRST's existence :-/

My 2 cents and then some probably...

Justin

As someone who attended BattleCry 4 yesterday, I strongly opposed the referee's decision to DQ 121.

It seemed that 121 climbed onto the HDPE and in pushing 190 back onto the ramp, gained control of the top of the ramp. It looked like 190 tried to climb the ramp again or slide into a position to climb again and 121 moved forward to prevent them from returning. 121's robot got underneath 190's robot and 190 fell over. I would like to point out that 190's robot has a high center of gravity. This is not a criticism - it is merely an observation based upon watching earlier matches where their robot also tipped.

That said, this incident reflects a greater issue that has relevance beyond BattleCry. In my opinion, referees must consistently apply the rules of the competition. Warnings should be issued to all teams who use a strategy or display a behavior that the referees consider questionable. 176 and 157 were pushing each other. 121 and 190 were pushing each other. In only one match was an alliance disqualified from the competition.

The bottom line is that rules cannot be arbitrarily applied.

FIRST is a game, and it is a competition, but its consequences reach beyond the competition. FIRST teaches many life lessons. I heard one parent on team 121 say in explanation to a student, "Life isn't fair."

That is certainly the truth. However, we have a responsibility to ensure that in future competitions rules and regulations are applied equally to all teams. Imagine how the students of the disqualified alliance felt when they watched a similiar situation with 176 and 157 that, at the discretion of the referees, resulted in a drastically different outcome.

Now, I do not feel that this incident reflects upon team 190 or the way BattleCry4 was run in general. 190 is a veteran team that has displayed the highest integrity and has earned the respect of its fellow teams. I certainly have the greatest of respect for them. They organized and ran a professional and successful competition. I thank 190 and I thank the sponsors and volunteers who made BattleCry4 possible.

That is all.

Synthia

As a member of team 126, I think the call was perfectly legitimate. At first, I was upset, but after thinking about it reasonably, it makes sense...

It's true that we may have seen the same move called legal at regionals and nationals 100 times, but BattleCry was a different competition with some rule changes. Although some people may disagree with the rule, by attending BattleCry, we agreed to abide by it. Few people in the alliance deny that a rule was broken, but many argue that the rule was "illegitimate", "stupid", or "made up to help the host team". Personally, I don't believe that any of these things are true, but it doesn't matter even if they are because we agreed to the rule by competing. A rule can't be thrown out in the middle of a competition. That's when things would really start to get messy, if they weren't messy enough already. If the rule were to have been challenged, it should have been challenged before play began. I don't think that the refs or staff were out to get any particular team. They were just enforcing the rules.

I think that many of us have forgotten what is important in FIRST. It seems like it is becoming more and more about winning, especially for the veteran teams. I hope that something good will come out of the bad feelings that some people have about BattleCry in that teams will reassess what FIRST is all about. According to usfirst.org "FIRST redefines winning for these students. Teams are rewarded for excellence in design, demonstrated team spirit, gracious professionalism and maturity, and ability to overcome obstacles. Scoring the most points is a secondary goal. Winning means building partnerships that last."

Finally, I'd like to extend my thanks to team 190 and the BattleCry staff for hosting the competition, and apologize for behavior that did not fall under the category of gracious professionalism. Unfortunately, this probably even includes my own.

I'm proud to be a four-year member of team 126, but BattleCry 4 was a somewhat disappointing end to my career as a student member of the team.

Amy

As a member of team 121 I would like to try to convey as best I can what happened yesterday, and why my team was so worked up afterwards. Before I do that I would first like to say as this being my first time at battlecry I was very happy with the better part of the day and while I cannot speak for my team I would like to attend again next year. For the most part the staff at battlecry was excellent, especially the judges who I thought made the best attempt possible to make things right. I would also like to point out that I am not out to bash the refs. I think for the most part they where very professional and were not bias against any team.

Our largest beef is not on the dq itself, but that we felt like a target from right off the bat. Almost as soon as we came in the door the head ref approached our team and told us that he would be watching us, and if a robot on the field was flipped and we where involved at all he would dq us. I do realize that this is the rule but I do not feel it was necessary to single us out like that. Now as far as I know we were the only team to get this warning.

Now during our match against rage we accidentally flipped them in autonomous mode. We where not gunning for them we used the same autonomous program we always have. The head ref came up to us and gave us a warning and said if it happened again we would be dq. I was manipulating the mach and I felt that it was just an unfortunate clash of two robots on top of the ramp and one got flipped. There was nothing either team could do to stop it, it just happened, so to warn us I felt was unnecessary.

Now during the last match I can say for certain that we were not trying to flip 190 we where just trying to get on the ramp. Nor do I think that if it had been another team on the ramp it would have been any different. I think it was a tough call but when it comes down to it we DID flip them and whether we intended to or not the rules say if you flip a robot you get dq.

So as I have tried to point out I do not believe it was that one match with 190 that has left distaste at least in my mouth but rather the treatment we received from the head ref. I would like to point out again that the rest of the staff was great and other than that I had a great time and would like to attend again next year.

Quoted from a book I have:
Thus anything with a wedge on it will have to tip the robot to even have it be effective. Then again I am on a battlebots train of thought. If anyone can tell me how a wedge can be used without tipping a robot I would be glad to know.

What I think they should do is have a slope or an angle limit to avoid the wedges flipping...

Let's get past the controversy with the call on 121. I watched the match, and yes I was surprised and upset when the call was made. I don't agree with the call, but I do abide by it. I'm am not going to try and fight either way, because its in the past. Live and let live, you can't change anything.

I think as many have already mentioned, Battlecry 4 was alot of fun. It was my first off-season competition and I enjoyed it immensely. THere were alot of really good matches and I applaud W.P.I. for hosting such an event. It was a good chance to re-meet some FIRSTers that I haven't seen in a while, or have heard or talked to online but had never met. It was a good time, and I look forward to Battlecry 5, even if my team doesn't go.

I would just like to say on Behalf of Team 166...thanks to Teams 69~Hyper and 1100~Tomahawks for being such great Alliance partners!!! :D
And to my Team...i am so proud of you guys... at Battlecry1 we came home with the Purple Heart award and 4 years later at battlecry4 we leave as victors!!! :cool:
i would also like to thank teams 229~Division by Zero, 176~Aces High and 1099~IBYSE for being such great competition during the finals. :D
i would like to congratulate 151~the Wildcards for doing such a great job even though they only had 2 team members there due to it being graduation...i was proud to be able to be your Human player up until finals...sorry i could help you during finals though...it would have just been too much of a conflict of interest to be though.
And Lastly to team 190~WPI thank you for once again putting on a great off season competition. i hope to be able to come again next year! And to those WPI students who saw me going through the fountain after the awards...the waters fine!!!!! Im not sick or nothing!!!! :D
Rurouni~I hope to see your team at Battlecry 5 next year! if nothing else you would probably be welcome to stay at my house that weekend seeing as im Pam's sister. :rolleyes:

What you guys didn't think I was gonna post?;)

Listen everyone. This post may make you mad. But understand this: I'm trying to be as civil as possible. This is from my point of view and these are my words. I take full responsibility for them. With that disclaimer, here is my opinion:

Upon Arrival Out of the many people I have encountered at first events, the ones i normally talk to said this within the first minute of me talking to them:
"The new tipping rules are directed towards you"
My Reply: "I know :rolleyes: "

Driver Meeting
Tipping was the main topic. I had a few questions but before i had a chance to ask head ref some questions, he had left. My next meeting with him was in our pit. When he was walking towards our pit I knew in the pit of my stomach he was coming over to talk about us having a so called "wedge bot". He said all the same things regarding tipping as were said in the drivers meeting. Now was my chance to ask questions. Oh and let me remind you these answers were conveyed as rude as possible. This question stuck out in my mind:

Ricksta121:Is pinning allowed on the ramp since it is not a field border and is a scoring object.
head ref:Why would you want to pin on the ramp?
R121:Pinning an oppenent allows us to keep them there to prevent leaving either to make us lose the 50 qps for them being there or to go knock down a stack.
head ref:...The ramp is a field border it is pinning.

From playing in a regional, nats and 2 offseasons. Pinning on the ramp has been a-ok since it is not a field border. Anyways I asked other specific examples and other questions on tipping in general such as: accidents, auto-mode, etc. All answers again very rude. He left us with this:
"If a robot gets on top of you and you move a millimeter, I'm going to dq you"

A little while after our teams little q and a session, I talked to 126(wedgebot) and wanted to know if they had been talked to by the head ref. When i learned they hadn't been talked to I realized something. As one of the drivers I had to be UBER-careful while driving. Nice way to start the day huh?

Matches BeginI and our outher driver are very careful in driving and have only one incident when a robot was tipped. Watching RAGE go over and the Head Ref POINTING AT IT angrily and then after the match telling us a dq if it happens again, it all clicked in my head. I knew this ref had something against our robot.

Upon telling other teamates and teams about this "dq in auto" rule they were furious. Automonous is just that, the robot does its thing and you have no control over it. But wait we do! We could hit the red E-stop but then be penalized for 30 secdonds into the match. Everyone I talked to agreed and said this is getting way too out of hand....

The call...When the call was made I was not suprised. I was angry but not suprised. This ref had waited all day to make his dq against us and now he had his chance. I was not upset about the call, JUST THE WAY HE TREATED OUR TEAM WITH EXTREME PREDJUDICE FROM THE DRIVERS MEETING ON. The tip was unintentional but intent didnt matter since the rules were tinkered against us.

After the callMy team and I happened to talk to someone after the call. At first the majority of us were mad about the call. But we realized the rule was against us and wedges in general and could not change it. We then tried explaining our disgust with that head ref. Heres a little convo me and ken had.

R121: That ref was rude to us since he singled us out in our pit this morning and told us he was going to dq us.
someone: He is equally rude to everyone.
R121: WHAT! shouldnt that be grounds to not have him ref if this many people had thier event ruined from the begining becasue of this one man?
someone:....

I also told that someone: If that ref is here next year I wont be. He ruined my battlecry.

My conclusion
BC4 was my last compition as a driver. I could have handled losing, but just not like that. And I blame the predjudice against my teams robot in rules and in reffing as the cause. I can't say this is not ref bashing because it is. I've been flamed on the boards for not following gracious professionalism. Between Ralley and now I really truly have tried. But when an official ruins the day for an entire team, I cannot keep quiet. I really tried everyone, I really did. I have never been more opinionated about something so serious on these boards.

Also the way the other alliance on teams 96 and 782 acted was uncalled for. In QF1 they cheered so loud when 126 flipped in auto, i could hear their drive team across the field. And when a member from the alliance yelled "I love wedgebots" I almost lost it.

Oh Adam Y. the wedge is there to take away a pushing force, act as a fender, and dethrone opponenets on top of the ramp.

I hope your finally happy head ref, you got your dq.

I'm going to venture a guess here and argue that the "new" (read: clarified interpretation of the) tipping rules weren't directed at you so much as they there to protect you -- and battlecry, for that matter, from the exact sort of behavior you're showing anyway. The point wasn't to single you out, but to give everyone a better understanding of how existing rules would be interpretted. Yet afterward, you are still here whining. Whatever.

Quote:

Driver Meeting Tipping was the main topic. I had a few questions but before i had a chance to ask head ref some questions, he had left. My next meeting with him was in our pit. When he was walking towards our pit I knew in the pit of my stomach he was coming over to talk about us having a so called "wedge bot". He said all the same things regarding tipping as were said in the drivers meeting.

That the referee was aware of your team's history, your boastful signature proclaiming the number of robots tipped, and your affinity for making a scene, is a bad thing? Again, I seem to recall so many teams and team members calling, hell, screaming for referees that knew what was going on.

Now that you've run into that ref., it's not such a great thing anymore? Isn't that a double-standard? Or, will you point to other threads here and note, uselessly, that you never supported such a call to action?

You write that you're willing to accept the consequences of your actions, but it's crystal clear that you're not. You are experiencing the consequences of your actions in every event you attend with all of the extra scrutiny you receive.

Why do people pay so much attention to your team? If you'd have kept your mouth shut over the past 6 months and you hadn't whined about how the referees were out to get you, how you shouldn't have been DQ'd, ever, and how you tipped over "X" number of robots, nobody would know you exist.

Face it and please stop being a whore for attention. You're giving FIRST and all the good things I work so hard for a bad name, and it makes me sick.

Accept the consequences and the responsibility for you and your team's behavior over the past several years. Know that every time you compete for a long time to come, your actions, your words, and your adamant denial of fault in everything is going to lead to extra scrutiny. Know that there are teams and individuals in FIRST who will not ever again choose 121 as alliance partners, nor seek their advice or help because of your actions. Know the precedent you've established and own up to that, first. Then you can worry about accepting the consequences for what you've posted here.

Quote:

I knew this ref had something against our robot.

It seems like, in his opinion, your team has consistently played maliciously throughout the 2003 season. Again, he is aware of that history and is aware of your predeliction toward making a scene. He warned you in advance, probably in an effort to avoid such a scene. It's only something personal, again, because you have to make it personal. Own up to what you've done, suck it up, and move on. Nobody's going to cry you a river because you're acting like a selfish, spoiled, undeserving brat.

The reality of the call at Battlecry, or in Houston, or anwhere else is completely irrelevant. It's the way that you handle such situations that really says the most about your team; particularly moreso than any trophy could ever say. You've handled this, and many, many other similar events in truly bad form, and until that changes, you'll continue to experience negative attention. Maybe, in your eyes, any attention is better than none at all, but that'd be a sad thing to think about.

You've been given the opportunity, fairly or not, to be a better person and a better team than you've ever demonstrated yourselves to be. I'm waiting for the day that you'll all take advantage of that opportunity and behave like adults and, maybe, finally understand that there are more important things to be gained from this program than trophies, bragging rights, or banners.

Some of you may have witnessed this...

At the midwest regional, my team ( 247 ) got into a pushing match with team 45. Our robot had an arm that could move roughly 190 degrees, but could also be used as a "wedge" if it were put down to the ground. Take a look at the videos of this match...is the best way to explain this. Our robot got under the tecnokats bot, and without flipping them over, sucessfully used a wedge design to our advantage. This is simple proof that there ARE ways of building a robot that can use a wedge without having to worry about flipping another robot.

I respect 121 as a team.
I respect the mentors on 121.
I respect the high school students on 121.

Every interaction I have EVER had with 121 has been positive.

I enjoy seeking their advice, getting their help, and giving them my help. I would choose 121 in a heartbeat as an alliance partner, and accept any invitation they would give me.

They work for the same things we all work for. We are all bound together by this competition. To judge them as a whole, based on some message board, is silly, and foolish.


John

I'm often foolish ;)

You've seen things that I haven't, and I respect (a lot) the decisions you've made based on those experiences. I hope that I am incorrect in my personal feelings about 121, and I do genuinely want to see that the negative impression I've received changes, or that it's wrong entirely.

But, right now, I need to see it.

Can't we all just get along?

Have you forgotten the "all decisions made by refs are final" rule? It doesnt much matter why a ref made a decision, or what the content of the decision was. What it comes down to is, what the refs say is the law of the land, like it or not.

It doesnt matter what flew, or didnt fly at other competitions. you cant say "Oh, well at a competition 4 years ago we had so and so and it was considered legal, why cant this?" This is essentially the same argument you are making.


And in favor of the mass majority of "wedge bots":

At SVR, we were having some severe flipping problems ourselves, and had been considering making a wedge just so that some of the force of our opponents would be deflected upwards, and keep us from being flipped. I think this was the intention most teams had when making a robot with a wedge, and should be regarded as a perfectly legal strategy.

/me agrees with Sean.

Cory

This thread goes for 4 more hours, and then it closes.
Hope you all get a chance to get your last word(s) in.

A referee's decision is the final word... until two hours later, when disgruntled teams come on these forums to show everyone that the ref 'had it out for them'.

It's a hard job to be referee. You go on personal opinion on a whim, and there is no turning back. If you are disgruntled that the ref had it out to get you from the beginning and so he gave you a bad call, all I can say is that you are probably wrong and should rethink this. Ask referees on this board about tough decisions... it isn't an easy job.

Ask Andy Baker about his final DQ call last year at IRI. Andy is a very respectable, honest, and fair person, and he got stuck in a bad situation. The outcome? Andy called the game according to what the book said and what he thought was right. The call was against my former team. When we got home from IRI, the kids were mildly disgruntled about the call. Our mentor told us, "Andy Baker is an honest guy. The referee's decision was a tough one to make, and Andy called it the way he saw fit. There's nothing wrong with that. We'll just try again next year."

So before Brandon closes this thread, I urge you to take that advice, and just try again next year.

One final thought...
 

Just one final comment before this thread closes. I just want everyone to understand that I know that the referees have the most difficult job and were trying thier best to make the correct decision. According to the rules set forth by Battlecry staff at the begining of the day, the call that was made was correct. That is not what bothers me. What bothers me is the fact that from the begining of the day on, we all knew what was going to happen. After talking to 121 on various accounts during the day, it really did look like they were being picked on, and when it did happen, when you actually looked at the faces of the kids on the team, they were all in dismay, because they just felt the pressure the whole day, and knew it was comming. Then the result of the whole fiasco was just a complete mess, and it marred what really up until that point was an exciting and fun competition. The purpose of this thread was to warn competition organizers of the problems involving wedgebots, and to be very careful when changing any rules reguarding them, due to the fact that it can make teams feel singled out, or feel like they have been treated unfairly, which leads to the issues that fell on Battlecry.

Thank you Brandon for giving everyone the oportunity to vent out a little before closing this thread. Hopefully, if nothing else, people at the competition will understand the frustrations of the teams affected by the rulings and why we were all upset, even if our reactions should have been more gracious than they were.

Thank you,
Andy Grady

I think that one call is representative of the tough job that referees face, and I think Andy handled that admirably. Granted, my team did get the "benefit" from that call, but we really didn't want to win on that call any more than your alliance wanted to lose on it. Unfortunately, there are times when the referees have to make a decision that is difficult or unpopular. There are always going to be tough calls, and you just have to trust in your officials to do the right thing.

Andy really had a tough job on that one. He really made a good call in that situation. I just wanted to know what the ref that threw the flag in the first place was thinking? :D

I saw it and I agree with the call... But I don't care what happened that is going way too far... It's not your Battle Cry... He didn't "ruin" it for you... He called what he saw and I am glad he called it because it was a well thought out call... It wasn't easy to make even for me but after watching the replay I agreed...

take a step back and think a little...
 

Before Brandon close down this thread, I have a little request to make.

I would like to ask everyone, including the readers of this thread, to take a step back, inhale and exhale one big breath, and look at the bigger picture. I would like you to think: "Why am I doing this in the first place". (well, please don't actually reply to the question in this thread because there are countless similar ones in General)

What are you spending so much time in this program for? To argue with each other to the very end, and stare at each other in rage? No, I really don't think so, or at least I hope not.

Along with the spirit of Gracious Professionalism, FIRST and the rest of us are trying to teach kids that violence isn't a way to solve problems. Just look at how we've always been opposing to Battle Bot and how it's geared toward destroying of other machines. That is why refs have to worry about robots tipping each other over, especially with the ramp this year.

The game itself conveys messages to the participants and spectators, messages that demonstrate the ideals in FIRST. It does no good when all the spectators see are robots pushing each other over all the time. Similarly, it does no good when all the students see are them being DQed all the time. And it ESPECIALLY does no good, when we argue each other to death about what happened in the past, and only listening no one but yourself and those that agree with your opinion.

I wasn't at this event to witness all these. It tears me apart when I hear both side convinced they are right and the others are wrong. Makes me wonder… What have we, whether as mentors, or FIRST officials, or referees, or participants in the competition, done (or haven't done) that let this happen in the first place? What did we do wrong that made the spectators boo the call of the referees, and the students angry and left early at the event, and generally everyone else unhappy of what took place in last weekend? Why did an event that's supposed to be fun and inspiring to everyone turn into an arguing war on an online forum?

I don't suppose we will ever find the answer to those questions... Maybe we will never get those answers beyond the form of "it was horrible because such and such said this and that to me". Maybe we will be lucky and get a few silent answers in the form of "maybe it was my bad because I wasn't considerate enough". Maybe. I don't really want to hear those answers posted in this thread, or any other thread. I just want everyone to hear their own answers inside their heart, and actually believe the answer is genuine.

Mean while, I ask that FIRST work on their game, and the rules, such that similar events will never take place again. Whether be it changes to the rules like "there will be no wedge shape components on the robots other than for the purpose of manipulating the scoring object", or "tipping of opponent robots will not be allowed, be it accidental or incidental", or "build a robust robot and be prepared that your robot will be tipped over every second in the game". I dunno. I don't want to argue which one of those is right and which one is wrong, neither. I want people to think about it, and that's it. No more pointing fingers, no more quoting, and no more yelling.


At the end of this post, I just want to share a thought that's been lingering my mind in the past few weeks after watching a very inspiring show twice. It goes something like this:

"As human beings we should concentrate in taking care of each other, and the future generation after our time. We are now capable of feeding everyone in the planet and generating enough energy to use, and yet, every day hundreds of thousands of human died of hunger, and every day we worry about the potential dangers that could wipe us out in a mere 15 seconds. We no longer need to fight with each other just because there isn’t enough to go around. With advancement of technology, we can now do more with less, giving humanity a chance to evolving into something higher, away from what’s been happening the past thousands and thousands of years, away from the conflicts when people used to believe that the only way to satisfy their needs is by robbing others of that very same satisfaction.

In time, it wouldn’t matter how much we have at the moment. What’s going to matters is that we keep on going from generation to generation, and evolving to be better and better every step of the way.

When you eat cereal yesterday, the cereal becomes part of you today, and tomorrow it turn into forms of your body you will be abandoning behind. That cereal isn’t you, nor the skin or the hair you lose every day. When you lose 20 pounds last month, those 20 pound isn’t you. You are a pattern of integrity that exists because of the universe exist. Your mind exists only because your body is supporting it, but your mind is very different from your body. And one day, when your body fails to continue supporting your mind, you will disappear unless you are able to pass along a part of your mind onto future generations, a mind that’s built of experiences based on the all years you lived.”

I am sorry if that “thought” is a bit long, and boring, and unorganized. I wish one day you would have the same experience I had with life and everything in it to understand what I mean, but unfortunately I can only tell you, in my own word, what I think about, and what I’ve experienced. Sorry for wasting your time.

Time's up. If you really feel the need to talk about this again, wait 4-5 days at least to start a new thread. All other threads regarding this particular ruling will probably be locked/deleted.

[edit]I opened it back up for Ken. He always has something positive and thought-provoking to add to the conversation, and I wanted everyone to be able to read it.[/edit]