Chief Delphi
Page 3 of 5 < 12 3 45 >
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Rules/Strategy (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45309)

Stu Bloom 13-03-2006 15:57
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick TYler
We have photos of two of our alliance robots sitting on the top of the platform at the end of a match. We also have video of a shot going through the center goal during autonomous in that same match. There were no penalties. We were awarded a total of six points for the match, including zero for autonomous. After protest, the referee added five points to our score. May I suggest that similar things happen several times per regional and that you should just get over it?
Agreed Rick. While I am comfortable guaranteeing that no referee WANTS to make a bad call unfortunately it happens, but as I mentioned in a prior post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu Bloom
...we refs are only human (AND volunteers). While I believe ALL FIRST referees do the best job they can to help teams avoid penalties while objectively making the best call we can, it is possible to make a mistake. Even highly paid professional referees officiating games where the rules remain constant from year to year make extremely costly mistakes from time to time.

Rick TYler 13-03-2006 16:37
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu Bloom
...we refs are only human (AND volunteers). While I believe ALL FIRST referees do the best job they can to help teams avoid penalties while objectively making the best call we can, it is possible to make a mistake. Even highly paid professional referees officiating games where the rules remain constant from year to year make extremely costly mistakes from time to time.
I am surrounded by Seahawks fans. You don't have to tell me about officiating!

Andrew Blair 13-03-2006 17:02
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan Foley
What if the robot was turned sideways? If it's wheels were parallel to the ramp, the steep angle of the ramp could possibly keep the robot from being pushed up the ramp and they certainly couldn't just drive up it, since they are oriented the wrong way. If the pinning robot had enough pushing power, it could possibly be able to prevent the pinned robot from moving side to side.

In one match, we pushed 1038 sideways in circles for ~ 40 seconds, and they had no control or ability to extricate themselves, but they were not considered pinned.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brindza
when you see the video you will notice that 1370 intentionally backed thier robot up to block our path as we attemped to get away. Pinning is refered to as inhibiting the movement of another robot and i belive that they did just that.
Yes, and no. Though there is no rule that I explicitly can recite, if I wish, I may corral another robot in the corner for as long as I wish, so long as I do not completely force them against a vertical barrier for more than ten seconds.

Quote:

<G24>
Pinning - While on the carpeted field surface, a ROBOT cannot pin (inhibit the movement of another ROBOT while in contact with a field element or border) for more than 10 seconds. This rule does not apply if either ROBOT is entirely on an ALLIANCE PLATFORM. If a ROBOT has been pinned for 10 seconds, the team with the pinning ROBOT will be told by a referee to release the pinned ROBOT and back away approximately 3 feet. Once the pinning ROBOT has backed off by 3 feet, it may again attempt to pin its opponent, and if successful, the 10 second count will start over. If a referee determines that this rule has been violated, a 5-point penalty flag will be assessed for each violation.



So, as long as they backed off a ways, (and believe me, distances are relative, we got DQ'ed that one time for infringement-another story) they were good to go. I know that we pushed a lot of people around, and we kept it fair, though fair is again relative.


***I think most of the confusion is coming from the fact that the rule says INHIBIT, and not completely stop.***


Brindza 13-03-2006 19:47
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
Ok here it is. Give me your opion of whether it was pinning or not.

Match 3 Semifinals

I could not get it to work in windows media player but VLC Player played it fine.

Andrew Blair 13-03-2006 19:51
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
I see about three seconds of video. Must have got cut off.

Brindza 13-03-2006 19:56
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
Oops, Sorry about that, Wrong file.

I am re uploading the file.

Brindza 13-03-2006 20:13
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
This should be the right file. It's a little big, but I don't have time to make it smaller. It's 8:30 and I have to go home... 24 is coming on soon.

Match 3 Semis

MikeDubreuil 13-03-2006 20:55
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
Wow, you're right. You were definitely pinned. Let me grab my pitch fork and you grab your torch. We're gonna find these refs and we're gonna make them PAY! :mad:

Seriously, what did you expect to accomplish my making this thread and posting the video? The collective community of FIRST to outcast the referees at Pittsburgh. You're right, it was a blown call. That doesn't mean you should parade around trashing the volunteers there. They didn't do it to spite you, they committed an accident. In the referee's defense, your robot didn't appear to try to escape the pinning. Because you have been so ungracious about the situation making claims of "shock and awe" I don't even think you deserve an apology.

Andrew Blair 13-03-2006 21:00
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
I don't know that would ever be called as a pin. I see where your coming from, but 1370 never made a move once you were stuck in there. All 291 or 398 had to do was come over and give you a little shove. But remember: the refs had no idea whether 1370 was dead in the water or not. I make the point- they did not move AT ALL. Bad circumstance, but I'm not sure that would have been ever called, by anyone.

Andy A. 13-03-2006 21:15
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
I've looked at this video pretty closely. I've come to the conclusion that there was no pinning rule violation.

From what I can see, the 888 bot clearly is moving back and forth. It on several attempts moves up the ramp a bit before stalling and sliding back down. This says to me that the bot was free to move forward up the ramp, and was in fact not wedged or pinned. The fact that the robot was unable to isn't a rule issue- it's a design issue on the teams part. Another robot that was better suited to climbing the ramp would have been able to get out.

I'm just calling them as I see them.

-Andy A.

Brindza 13-03-2006 21:24
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil
Wow, you're right. You were definitely pinned. Let me grab my pitch fork and you grab your torch. We're gonna find these refs and we're gonna make them PAY! :mad:

Seriously, what did you expect to accomplish my making this thread and posting the video? The collective community of FIRST to outcast the referees at Pittsburgh. You're right, it was a blown call. That doesn't mean you should parade around trashing the volunteers there. They didn't do it to spite you, they committed an accident. In the referee's defense, your robot didn't appear to try to escape the pinning. Because you have been so ungracious about the situation making claims of "shock and awe" I don't even think you deserve an apology.

If you watch our robot closely you can see it rock back and forth trying to escape.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil
Because you have been so ungracious about the situation making claims of "shock and awe" I don't even think you deserve an apology.
I sincerely regret that this was ever posted. I completely agree and had already asked thesse to delete it. It was out of line, but out of my control.



Andrew, as I said before, the ref had started a count and that is why i did not ask my alliance to come over is because the ref had started a count and we believed they were either going to recieve a penalty or be asked to back off.

Brindza 13-03-2006 21:28
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy A.
I've looked at this video pretty closely. I've come to the conclusion that there was no pinning rule violation.

From what I can see, the 888 bot clearly is moving back and forth. It on several attempts moves up the ramp a bit before stalling and sliding back down. This says to me that the bot was free to move forward up the ramp, and was in fact not wedged or pinned. The fact that the robot was unable to isn't a rule issue- it's a design issue on the teams part. Another robot that was better suited to climbing the ramp would have been able to get out.

I'm just calling them as I see them.

-Andy A.

I think that calling it not a pin because it was a design issue is ....
If that were the case then there would be no pinning rule in the manual at all. Any team could build a robot to be able to push another off. We could have made our robot omnidirectional that would allow us to move in all directions without turning and we wouldnt have been pinned either. If that is the case then i would like to see the rule removed so that we are not lead by the false sense of security that we will be able to run away from the opposing robot at the worst after 10 seconds of pinning.

KenWittlief 13-03-2006 21:32
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
Ive always looked at being pinned like in wrestling, when your opponent is applying a force to hold you in place, and you cant squirm loose to get any leverage to free yourself.

If the other bot was turned 90 degrees and pushing you against the ramp then I would say 'pinned'.

From the video I would say 'blocked'.

Keep in mind the ref doesnt know if you are trying to push the other bot out of the way, or if you are stuck between the bot and the ramp. If you were up against a wall it would be obvious you had no place else to go, but how would the ref know your robot was not able to climb the ramp and go around?

Yes your bot moved back and forth a few times. Trying to push the other bot, or trying to climb the ramp? How would the ref know?

Andy A. 13-03-2006 21:40
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brindza
I think that calling it not a pin because it was a design issue is ....
If that were the case then there would be no pinning rule in the manual at all. Any team could build a robot to be able to push another off. We could have made our robot omnidirectional that would allow us to move in all directions without turning and we wouldnt have been pinned either. If that is the case then i would like to see the rule removed so that we are not lead by the false sense of security that we will be able to run away from the opposing robot at the worst after 10 seconds of pinning.
No.

The pinning rule is to protect teams from being wedged against a vertical barrier- such as the field railings. It's acknowledged that in this position even a very powerful robot would heaved great difficulty pushing back, especially if it is caught in a corner. The difference here is that you had a clear method of getting away. In fact, you had a method of escape that is a major factor of the game design. The ramp is not some impassible obstacle. It is intended to be climbed. The fact that your robot couldn't do what a large fraction of robots can- climb the ramp with out a running start, does not make the other robots actions illegal.

-Andy A.

Brindza 13-03-2006 22:20
Re: Pinning? Apparently I just don't seem to understand
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenWittlief
Ive always looked at being pinned like in wrestling, when your opponent is applying a force to hold you in place, and you cant squirm loose to get any leverage to free yourself.

If the other bot was turned 90 degrees and pushing you against the ramp then I would say 'pinned'.

From the video I would say 'blocked'.

Keep in mind the ref doesnt know if you are trying to push the other bot out of the way, or if you are stuck between the bot and the ramp. If you were up against a wall it would be obvious you had no place else to go, but how would the ref know your robot was not able to climb the ramp and go around?

Yes your bot moved back and forth a few times. Trying to push the other bot, or trying to climb the ramp? How would the ref know?
I interperted the rule literally as it is written.
"Inibit the movement of another robot."
Our robot was clearly inhibited from moving anywhere while 1370's robot was there. If you could see the wheels of our robot during the video(or myself at the controls) it would be pretty clear that i tried every method of escape i could possibly think of. After 20 seconds it should have been clear that we were not able to move out of our position unless 1370 moved thier robot.


Also, I am still amazed that people still believe that it is not pinning due to a design issue. Whether we designed our robot not to be able to go up the ramp or whether we could not due to damage recieved to our robot during gameplay should not determine whether it was a pin or not. Of course the ramp is a major part of the game design, I completely agree. But to suggest that robots that have been designed a certain way are not privy to the same rules as other robots is absurd. There are many robots that chose not to be able to go up the ramp, are you saying that we are allowed to do that to any robot that can't climb the 30 degree ramp?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:15.
Page 3 of 5 < 12 3 45 >
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi