Chief Delphi - Do We have a trend here?

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)

- General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - Do We have a trend here? (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26708)

Re: Do We have a trend here?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usman - Theory6

so, if the goal was in the corral, you could push it back, making sure that you didn't break the plane yourself, and lose only 10 pts. since i was scouting, i didn't get a chance to see this, but how far in does the mobile goal get into the corral? is it a couple of inches or half a foot or what?

The intent of the rule is to not touch the mobile goal- therefore do not touch the mobile goal! Besides,even if you pushed it flush, the bot would still be unable to deliver balls. Why not just herd the balls to the other teams's player? I'm sure they could pass them to you if you asked.

Re: Do We have a trend here?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alavinus

wish we could, but in our case, both the corrals got blocked. alright, so don't touch the mobile goal is the verdict then.

Re: Do We have a trend here?

Alan,

I basically agree with your statement that Nats will probably run late because of ties. With that said, WHO CARES?!? At Great Lakes, QF2 had a tie (or maybe two) and it was an outstanding match, very exciting, and the crowd was going crazy.

I think the tie adds a tremendous amount of excitement to the game.

We, as a FIRST community, need to get the lay person sitting on the couch eating bon bons interested in what we are doing. Last year we were the soccer of televised robotics. This year ... time will tell, but I can say for certain, that I was hoping for ties in some matches because I just didn't want the game to end.

With regard to the level of bashing going on; I noticed some teams at GLR ramming others, but not to the extent that others noticed at other regionals. I saw all the matches from Friday morning through eliminations and great defensive plays with strategic blocking were abundant. In the eliminations, most of the robots were broke due to the level of contact while trying to hang.

-Paul

Re: Do We have a trend here?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dlavery

Actually, I think that this makes sense. The goals are fundamentally inert, monolithic objects without an ability for agile motion. They are big rocks on wheels.

The robots are (theoretically) active objets with multiple degrees of freedom, one or more of which can be activiated without notice (from the perspective of the Human Player) in any direction. Almost every robot has exposed chains, gears, wheel sets, pulleys, cables, etc. which will cause harm if a finger/hand/elbow/head are mistakenly stuck into them.

Given these differences, I think that the differences in the penalties make sense. The penalties are structured to provide an implicit message: "these machines CAN be dangerous, and CAN do harm if you are not careful - so we are going to help you remember to behave around the machines with appropriate caution." During the excitement of a competition match, the Human Player needs to stay away from the robot, and the robot needs to stay away from the Human Player, just to make sure nothing goes wrong.

Given some of the unsafe behavior that I have observed from many teams in the pits (i.e. people shoving hands into drive mechanisms while the power is on, tensioning sprocket/chain assemblies by driving while pushing the chain with a bare hand, operating robot arms while people are inside the work envelope, hauling batteries around by using the connectors as a handle, etc.), I don't have a problem with anything that helps reinforce the concept of appropriate caution during the operation of these robots.

-dave

Dave I have to disagree with you on this rule. I was a coach behind the glass reaching for a ball when our mobile goal came smashing into our glass, propelled by our worthy opponents and subsequently penetrating our corral by what seemed like a foot.. Yes, it was a Rock on Wheels, but it was being moved by a robot. It is JUST as dangerous for a robot to push the mobile goal into the corral as any robot that is pushing balls in. Point of fact is that the mobile goal is a bigger hazard as robots who are gathering balls and pushing them in are already "trying" to NOT break the plane. If the stated reason for the breaking the plane of the corral opening is to provide safety to the human players, the rule should have been written to not allow the mobile goal to be pushed inside by any robot. I understand that the rules allow this potential hazard to exist. I do believe that everyone should at least be warned of this potential outcome. Someone will get hurt by this...
I am not suggesting that we change the rules midway through ... but warnings should be issued to all the competitors by the head referees to watch for this potential safety hazard. thanks

Re: Do We have a trend here?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Steele

...I do believe that everyone should at least be warned of this potential outcome. Someone will get hurt by this...
I am not suggesting that we change the rules midway through ... but warnings should be issued to all the competitors by the head referees to watch for this potential safety hazard. thanks

At BAE before EVERY SINGLE MATCH the drive teams of all robots were warned to watch limbs and dont touch anything that comes through the corral. And the only way i think someone will get hurt is if they are over zelous and try to get a ball by reaching into the field. Also to see just how far it goes in have someone CAD it up and double check.

Re: Do We have a trend here?

Speaking of ties and the excitement they generate...

While at the Nats in Disney in 2002 we were in the last round of qualifying in the division on the middle field of the three-field tent. Both of the other fields in the tent had concluded and people were milling around and started watching our match. We (329) and our ally had actually tied at the buzzer. Our mouse (mighty mouse) ran to the other side of the field and tied the score at the buzzer.
That was the year that they actually had FIVE methods of tiebreaker. WE WENT THROUGH ALL OF THEM!!! Yes! we had to flip a coin to decide the winner. In fact the ref tossed the coin and it actually landed on the tether of the mouse. He had to lift the tether to make the decision> heads/tails. It was one of the most exciting matches I have ever seen. To this day people remember the little yellow mouse that caused the tie and they talk about how exciting it was because of the tie.
The only thing that could have made it more exciting would be if they had employed the rematch till you win rule like this year.

GO FIRST!!!!!

Re: Do We have a trend here?

Now that we've had a few more weeks of regionals, it seems that ties in the eliminations are much less common. Does anyone have any hypotheses?