Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by burkechrs1
He said that as long as we have a keeper in our possession the other alliance could pin us against the rack as long as they wanted. I thought it was a wrong call but I didnt argue and ended up having to drop many ringers in the match to follow im order to get 190 to stop pinning us...



I'm not quite sure I understand everyone's position as stated above. Madison, could you please clarify what part of burkechrs1's statement you believe is "correct"? As much as I'd love for the defense to be able to pin ringer-possessing offensive bots to the rack all day without penalty, I believe the opposite is actually the rule:






DAVE COULD YOU PLEASE CLEAR THE INTENT OF <G39> UP FOR EVERYONE?

Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

To think that the refs at UTC called things differently when 25 was on the field then when they weren't is just being a poor sport. There is no massive conspiracy to prevent 25 from winning. From the description in this thread, nobody violated <G35> OR <G39>. Incidental contact outside the bumper zones (such as arms contacting each other while one team play defense). It is especially permitted here:
If the other team had used it's arm to grapple or latch onto your game piece, it would have violated the rules. If the other teams used it's arm to purposely damage yours, it would have violated the rules. If the other team used it's arm to tip yours, it would have violated the rules. If the other teams used their arm (and arm alone, not movement from the base resulting in contact with the arms) to hit your robot, it may or may not be against the rules. Otherwise most arm-to-arm contact will be permitted, especially by refs at a regional like UTC.
As for <G39>, the wording is ambiguous as to who receives protection from the pinning rule while scoring, the scoring team, or the defensive team, but it appears that refs are ruling that the team playing defense can pin as long as they wish legally. No rules violation there either.
From what I have heard in this thread, no rules were violated. When I watch the video, I may or may not change my mind.

Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

Woah! How is the rule ambiguous? It is clear that the rule is intended to allow an OFFENSIVE robot trying to score a ringer to pin a DEFENSIVE robot against the rack while trying to score. So you are saying that a ringer robot trying to score can be pinned against the rack for an indefinite period of time? If this is true, then I am zip tying my arm down and pinning every single offensive robot against the rack at Champs.

C'mon guys, the rule is clear:
It says the ROBOT attempting the HANG is immune to the violation, not the ROBOT defending the hang is immune. Whoever interpreted it any other way is just plain wrong.

I am entering a Q&A tonight.

Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

I agree with you Paul...I thought it was pretty clear.

Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

so if team A is trying to hang a ringer and team B pins them against the rack for more than 10 seconds then there is no penalty or are u saying if team b is pinned against the rack as long as team A is trying to score there is no penalty?

Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

The second of the two. If a robot gets in between you and the rack while you're trying to score, then if you pin them while attempting to score for over ten seconds, you are not penalized (my interpretation).

Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

You're right -- I'm just a bit braindead today.

It's about learning
 

We (2104) were fortunate to be picked by the 25, 176 alliance at UTC, knowing we had a crippled drive train, and are grateful for that. Up until the finals, the strategy of 25 & 176 scoring then ramping on us worked well. During the 1st final round, 25 was double-teamed and had difficulty scoring - a great strategy by the winning alliance. I wish we (2104) had done a better job making our drive-train work so we could have done some body-guarding, as our alliance was essentially playing 2v3. Even without any help from us, 25 did a brilliant last 10-second spoiler then missed ramping by 1/2 a second. During the 2nd final round, they changed strategy to just hold down the opponents score, then ramp for the win. During the 3rd final round they used the same strategy and our alliance was unlucky in the ramping. I didn't see anything unfair or overly aggressive in the matches. What did we learn? I love FIRST and we'll do a better/smarter job next year!

Re: It's about learning
 

I am completey suprised with so few Auto-modes. The auto-mode is SOOO important this year. Probably only 1 step lower in importance from Aim High. Seriously, having keepers on the rack before robots can play the defense game is like going twice to begin a game of Tic-Tac-Toe.

And it's not like it's a difficult auto-mode either. Tripple Play was difficult, Aim High was easy, Rn'R is between. I am suprised that no robots take a ringer by the side and run toward the spider legs to hook the keeper on the side.

I think the high defense is a result of the low auto-modes.

Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

Paul:

Dave confirmed your and my assessment of G39 via PM. G39 is written to protect OFFENSIVE robots trying to score ringers. Case closed.

Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

Sean, I believe my teammate did not put things the right way. A rule book is only effective if things are always done by the book, and always the same. That said, it is not fair that at some regionals penalties are called on the field, and at others--the issue is dealt with 'off the field'. The rules have a purpose, and that is fair game play. Matters can be discussed with teams off the field all the time, but a penalty still sends the message more clearly.

The referees at UTC were very understanding by all means--they took the time to listen to our side and made tough judgment calls that not everyone was happy with. But that's what FIRST and GP is about.

We learned a lesson for next time, and we will be ready for Atlanta in the coming weeks.

Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

Paul,

I had the same view you did, but myself and many others were surprised to learn at the SVR this weekend that it was indeed considered "legal" by the refs to pin a scoring robot against the rack the entire match. The only option for the offensive robot being pinned was to drop the ringer - otherwise the defensive bot can pin them against the rack as long as they want. This rule defined the SVR and pretty much took the scoring teams like 100, 668, 254 and others out of the matches....as 668 pointed out, the simple strategy against any alliance with one really strong scoring robot was to double or triple team them and pin them as long as they could - as long as the pinning alliance had a ramp bot, they basically couldn't lose.

Hopefully the Q & A will clarify it for everyone one way or another, but the refs at SVR seemed fairly confident that they were instructed to call it as they did. If they misunderstood the rule or their instructions, then they called it incorrectly throughout the event, which would be very unfortunate. If they enforced it correctly, then whether people think it's right or wrong, or whether we disagree or agree with that type of defensive strategy really doesn't matter. If, as the refs explained it to the teams this weekend, it is in the rules and that's how they've been told to call it - then the ramp/defense bots are just doing what is a winning strategy given the rules and how refs are told to interpret them. If that is the case, then yes, get out the zip ties. ;)

Re: It's about learning
 

Not so much. This year there is no auto bonus. There also is no real strategic value to it beside the opportunity to start a row and get a clear head start. It would be one thing if 3 robots could all land ringers at once, but i scarcely see too many teams successfully placing keepers.
Last year on the other hand, there was a clear advantage. First, you get points, second, there is a bonus, third there was the advantage of playing defense first, which i know at least 25 used to thier advantage when playing. I even think that they lost the final in nationals due to the fact that they were beaten in autonomous in one of the final matches. ( correct me if im wrong)

Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

Having an auto is huge. It basically doubles your points. If your team can score 6 in normal play having that auto was really worth 64 points.

Re: Week 3 Impressions of Rack n' Roll
 

Actually on Einstein last year I believe 25 came up with the strategy of losing auto mode on purpose in order to save the 10 balls for tele mode since they were more accurate during user mode. This allowed them to score the full 30 points instead of missing half of them in auto mode.


EDIT:
Eric already posted this :
As for auto this year, you have to see beyond the box. It may seem like 2 points but its not. A keeper in automode is doubling any ringer points you may get in user mode. 15 seconds for the possibility of DOUBLING your score? That is HUGE!