Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

I'm going to restate some things that have already been mentioned, but I think it's worth it.

Consider the perspective of the alliance captain of the teams who have all their robots it working condition. By asking him whether you can play your third robot, you're asking him whether or not you can break the rules. Think about that.

Look at the position you've now put this poor young man or women in. On one hand they know that if they say no, they can basically ensure victory for their alliance. So, on this side they're feeling pressure from three entire teams. But if they say no, they have to deal with people telling them that they are unsportsmanlike, and don't embody what is right with FIRST. You've now placed this person in a spot where they either let an entire alliance down, or they earn the label of being un-FIRST like. How fair is that?

And all this because you want to step around the rules?

It's almost as if the alliance captain is being guilted into making a choice.

I hate to sound melodramatic and critical, but I really think at certain point people need to accept the rules, and deal with them. I think it's completely admirable and amazing for a team to lend a timeout to another team, or let a different robot play. But they should not be put in the position to make that choice. The rules exist for a reason.

I always say "you can't get what you don't ask for". This is very true, but sometimes asking isn't the fairest thing you can do.

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

These types of situations are always awkward. I feel that Karthik is very right here, and posted my opinions better than I could ever say.

I don't believe in 'guilting' another team into sharing their professionalism - professionalism is something you display on your own, not something to be asked for.

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

If this thread is referring to what I think it is, then the match in question was in the finals. The finalists were 571, 61, and 1100 on one side, with 181, 126, and 178 on the other. As I recall, 571 and 61 played match 1, and won. The rules state that each robot in an alliance must play at least one match. 61 and 571 had already played, so both could not play in match 2. I'm not sure what happened on 1100's end (I think due to technical difficulties they couldn't get their bot ready in time), but they were unable to field their robot for match 2. From what I heard, it sounded like the question was asked whether 61 could play the second match. I guess the refs enforced the rules and said no, 61 could not play with 571, because both had played in the previous match. I was sitting at the scoring table with Dez, so I didn't hear any of the conversations, but I think the head ref got on the mic to explain what was happening.

What happened then was an incredible show of determination on 571's part... In match 2, two robots vs. one, the score ended up tied, 70-70 (571's amazing ball handling enabled them to score enough balls to counter a hanging robot and 4 balls from the other alliance). In the finals though, ties are not allowed. A match that ends in a tie must be replayed- so the match didn't count as anything for either side. By the time that match was over though, 1100 was ready for action, and stepped in for match 2 second edition. As I recall, 181, 126, 178 won that match, something like 85-70 (Interestingly, 571 and 1100 scored the exact same number of balls as 571 did themselves in the previous match).

So ultimately 571, 61, and 1100 took match 3 (don't remember the score), and ended up winning the first Beantown Blitz. The whole day was filled with exciting matches- especially the eliminations. Even though we didn't see any high score records (highest score was 180), the matches were filled with more than enough offensive and defensive action to make them exciting! Kudos to all the teams involved, and to Erin, Aidan, Dez, Tom, and all the volunteers who made it such a great event!

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

not having been at BtB, i am not going to comment on the actual incident. the story, however, does not merely end there. My team (571), was part of 61's alliance, and by the transitive property we are now taking flak for decisions made by our alliance captain that some people, such a Steve M, have deemed ungracious.

I realize that, as a part of 61's alliance, my views are slightly biased. but I ask you this - which is more ungracious? that we were part of an alliance that won because of our alliance captain's (61) unwillingness to allow another team to break the rules? or members of that team, out of bitterness, attempting to give our alliance a bad reputation through complaints such as this?

allow me to illustrate further. a few days after beantown, a student on our team was contacted by another student from a team that was apparently extremely unhappy about the events that transpired. he informed our team member that the entire first community was extremely pissed about what we had done, and that certain members of his team were even going to the extent of writing letters to FIRST informing them of the incident, so that if we ever were to try for a chairman's award we would not even be considered.

now, this is most likely just the pent up frustration of an individual who does not represent the whole of his team, seeing as some of his claims are extremely difficult to believe. nonetheless, it illustrates just how out of proportions some of these issues can be blown into. the fact that someone would be so angry over the event as to threaten retribution over us for a decision made by a completely different team goes to show that we should all step back, take a deep breath, and stop lingering over sour grapes. this is a competition, and it is supposed to be fun. a strategic decision another team makes that somehow puts your team at a disadvantage is just that, a strategic decision. it is not a personal affront to your honor, and is not intended as such. If we did insult anyone to such an extent, then I apologize on the account of our team and our alliance. we made a strategic decision, and I would hope in the future such decisions will be viewed in the light in which they are intended.

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

:shaking head: My recomendation for anyone put on the spot like this: immediately refuse to make the decission, let the refs handle it. Don't think, just refuse.

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

Judging from the stories I have heard, I think that this situation is very unfortunate. I do agree with Karthik that 61 was put in a rough position. No one should ever be flamed for following the rules, and its unfortunate that is what happened. On the other hand...it IS an offseason event. The purpose of offseason events is for a good, lighthearted, fun competition. I respect team 61 fully and will always consider them to be great competitors, however, sometimes there are just cases where ya gotta lighten up and be lax about the rules. I learned a valuable lesson last year after Battlecry that sometimes we take ourselves and this competiton a little too seriously and to heart, and we need to avoid that and just have fun with it. That being said...was team 61 wrong? Absolutely not, they followed the rules as written. I may not agree with their decision, and I may not have made the same decision myself, but I respect it because its within the bounds of the rules.

As for the second thing I heard...if teams 61's alliance did not call a timeout in all of the elims, and they were not allowed to take a timeout during finals...there is something very wrong with that. I would hope that the ref staff would be professional enough to not let emotion or personal difference get in the way of making a decision. I would like to hear the explanation from Aidan or anyone else from the ref staff, as far as I have ever known of Aidan, he has never been the type to be unprofessional in that manner. There is always two sides to each story, it would be good for us all to be able to hear both.

Have fun!
-Andy Grady

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

Mike --

I don't know what you are doing, or why you are doing it -- but your two posts are full of fictitious slander -- which I will not accept from you.

For some reason that I do not understand, you seem extremely bitter about something that happened at Beantown Blitz. That became obvious on Saturday, when you came over to me during the finals and started screaming at me about the fact that you didn't like the call and that I should call by the rules. (which, imho, was extremely ingracious behaviour) The fact is Mike -- that I did call by the rules -- as I'm sure you have figured out by now, it was you that were not aware of the rules -- don't get on my case for that.

Now, the truth as to what happened:

As Mike stated, there was a disqualification called on the 61 Alliance for intentional tipping in the first match of the SF. Thats a fact - its the way it happened - it was a unamimous decision by the ref crew. Enough said there.

Both alliance captains declared which robots were playing in match two - as they were required. Four minutes after the end of the first match, the 1474 Alliance was not yet on the field -- I went to the alliance captain to find out why, and he informed me that they had called a time out for team 175 to be repaired -- I told them he had not told me -- he said he had told the field attendant -- which I verified. Although that was a mistake on the Alliance Captain's part, I gave him the benefit of the doubt - decided there were three minutes left in his timeout, and went to inform the 61 Alliance Captain of the situation. At the end of the timeout, team 175 was not ready, I, per the rules, did not allow them onto the field. As that discussion was taking place with the Alliance Captain, team 175 became ready. The Alliance Captain asked me if I would ask the other Alliance if they could still put the robot on the field. Although I was clear on the rule, I decided, in the sprit of the off-season competition, to honor his request. When I asked the 61 Alliance Captain, he said he wanted to consult with his coach, then immedicately came back to me with his decision not to allow leeway of the rules. At that point, I was ready to start the match, when it was brought to my attention, that the crowd was thoroughly confused. I took a mic and explained to the crowd exactly what had just transpired, in a completely unbiased manner. Then I immediately started the match. The 61 Alliance won that match, forcing a third match.

As we were setting up for the third match, the 1474 Alliance Captain ran up to me - stating that he had declared 1474 and 839 as the two teams to play in match three, however, at the time he had made that declaration, he was not aware that team 839 had blown a drive motor, and was unable to move. He wanted to swap 175 with 839. I informed him that he was past the time limit to do so, and he again pleaded with me to ask the other Alliance. Again, in the spirit of Beantown, I explained the situation to the 61 Alliance Captain, who told me that he expected them to put the broken robot on the field, which I honored, as it was the rule. The 61 Alliance won match three, advancing into the finals.

The only other incident was in the finals between match one and match two. The 61 Alliance had declared 61 and 1100 as the two teams for match two. 1100 was making repairs to their robot at the side of the field. I informed the 61 Alliance Captain at the three minute mark, that he had a minute to field the robot -- and also gave him a heads up at the 3:30 mark. Each time I was told "We are ready - it will just be another second." At 4:30 I told him he could no longer field the robot, and that I was starting the match. He told me he wanted a time-out, and I explained to him that a time-out had to be declared within the first three minutes after the previous match was finished. He then asked me if I would ask the other Alliance Captain if they would allow it. Again, in the spirit of competition and Beantown Blitz, I honored the request. The other Alliance Captain declined to allow it. When I returned to the 61 Alliance captain to inform him he said "Thank you, I guess fair is fair".

So.... that is what really happened during the finals on Saturday.

Lastly, your accusations that the rule changes were made by me to favor any specific team, is completely ludicrous. I refuse to even address that, other that to let you know that those rule changes on hanging and placing the 10 pt balls on the field were made by the Beantown Blitz Committee, and not me.

Enough said... this the last I have to say on this subject (excepting if the slander continues).

Aidan

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

My definition of sportsmanlike would be following the rules, so if that "replacement team" had already played a game, it was MORE sportsmanlike to not let the replacement play. If the replacement was allowed to play, then it would just show that the "unsportsmanlike" team caved in to this kind of pressure and aided the breaking of a rule.

And, in the first place, like Andy Baker said, the opposing team should not have been asked at all. The refs know enough to follow the rules - that's what they're there for!

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

From what I see, Cool Down, Let go of all the grudges.. Its just an Off-Season. Moreover, its a competition, unintended things happen. Unfortunate things happen. Just let go of them. I agree there we some ungracious things, but just forgive and forget. When we go out to competitions, we make good friends with teams around us. The reason is we never go out there just to win, to make friends, to have some fun, and have some memorable experience. Thats what its all about. I know we upset the crowd at PARC, but they were very forgiving(365 - MOE, 1403 - Cougar robotics). So the ultimate message is.. cool down.. have fun... and now smile because I have encoded this message to take a picture of your face :D

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

Yes. Quite so.

My first post I wrote based on no premise. I would like to comment on this specific incident.
1474 was already pushing it as it was. They were placing a great deal of pressure on the refs and 61. I stand behind the refs decision. You (1474 & co.) may feel differently, however, you must realize the pressure you place on others. Not to mention the whole Sportsmanship thing is vague.

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

this was an off season event?

a exposition match?

a chance for local people who might be thinking of starting teams, or being sponsors, to see the robots in action

and people are quoting chapter and verse of the rule book

and screaming at each other?

wow! what do we expect to accomplish by doing this

what are we expo'ing about FIRST?

expo matches use to be a chance to let you hair down, let your 3rd string team drive, heck let your little brother drive - talk to people about FIRST, make those mods you wanted to but couldnt cause you bot would be 5 lbs overweight.....

things have changed. :c(

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

Well its funny because we were involved with something like this at the Palmetto Regional. In the finals, our alliance and the opposing alliance had each won a match. We get all set to go and the MC comes over to talk to our whole alliance. He tells us that because, i think it was 271, wasn't on the field at the time they announced their team, the rule said they couldnt play. He left it up to us to decide whether they should play or not. We let them play wanting to, if we won, win legitly. In the long run we won the regional, but I think everyone was pleased with our alliances decision.

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

In any competition there are bad calls, bad breaks and just plain injustices...I always try to remember a few sage words from my good friend Gary Dillard:

"...ya gotta just leave it on the field..."

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

I believe the rule is that a robot can run every match, but the other two robots must play at least one match apiece. Or in otherwords the picking team and one of the two teams picked can play; the next match the other team that didn't play MUST play with one of the two teams that played previously.

-Pat

Re: A Question on Sportsmanship
 

Guys please for a minuet dont think of me as the Bean Town Blitz head scorekeeper but please think of me as just another FIRST'er...

[minuet of being normal] Guys this is an off season event, we had a top notch crew with top notch teams competing. This was one of the best events where for the first time it ran almost flawlessly. i think what happened there should be left in the mathews arena and that you should forget about some things. Everyone including the refs are human and should not be judged days later on a single call or 2 that were made. This was a very busy weekend for all and please just stop with the slander and the bashing of people that were there. Lets just accept whats occured this past weekend and move on. I hope to see you all later at different events and hope not to see this be brought up again... [/mobn]