Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

I agree 100%, I know that our team often skips practice matches to get the robot inspected.

As a note option 3 does work well, last year at Boston their wasn't an actual line but the queuing people filled most of the after noon matches. There was opportunity for a lot of teams to get 2 or 3 extra matches especially since there were so many rookies who took a while to get inspected and ready for the inspection.

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

For reference:
I'm assuming that the "10 minutes" will similarly be split up into two separate match periods, if Option #3 were to be implemented. Thus, batteries can be changed between the two runs during the time for field reset.

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

I prefer Option 3, but let's suppose that you must have at least started the inspection process to enter the line after lunch. To apply a standard to "started", we'll say the robot has been sized and weighed, and has four valid sets of team numbers on the robot.

In my experience as an inspector, I've found that most of the teams who start the inspection process tend to keep plowing through it until either there is a distraction (a need to get out to practice, pit closing, etc.) or a snag (oh crud, we have more sharp edges than a Ginsu knife). If we force them to start the process, they'll generally keep going for as long as they can. At the same time, you won't block teams who are desperate for field time to tune their robots from getting that time, particularly if that field time results in changes over the day that call for several reinspections.

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

I'll vote for that!!! I know of one team in particular that is notorious for waiting until the last minute to get inspected even when the robot is ready to run right out of the box. One of the reasons is there is no advantage to getting inspected while the field is open. So they keep putting it off as long as possible. But for a little extra practice time ...

I also like that it applies only to those looking for extra time. So everybody still gets the X matches they are intitled to, even if they are still working Inspection Issues.

The thought of teams racing to get in the inspection line when the Pits open brings tears to my eyes (sniff). It might even provide incentive to be sure things like team numbers are taken care of in advance. (sniff)

It is almost too much to contemplate, great idea Richard!

ChrisH

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

I think I like Option 3 the best, it creates more opportunities for teams to practice than the current set up and seems logistically easier than option 2. I like the "must be inspected" rule for the filler line as well.

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

I think that is the original point -- FIRST has set up a poll and a place to comment. http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=7893

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

Option 3 sounds the best to me too, with the additional inspection requirement.

Quick question...I'm the alternate contact for our team, and I'm trying to vote on the FIRST Forum, but I don't remember my 2007 Q&A Password. Last season, it was on the right side of the TIMS Team Info Page, but it doesn't seem to be there anymore, does anyone know where I can find this?

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

To those who are requesting that teams be required to be inspected before practicing: I see your point but this rule should not be in effect right away. Perhaps, if this becomes a rule, it should apply after 2pm or so.

My reasoning is this: I don't have hard evidence, but I suspect that the majority of missed matches occur early in the day (teams not ready or arriving late, etc). Obviously this is also the time when few, if any, teams are inspected. If this rule was in effect all day, then it's quite likely that open practice slots would go unfilled, and that's simply a waste.

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

Dave, the suggestion is not that teams be required to be inspected before practicing. (Although that requirement can be imposed at the discretion of the lead robot inspector: see <R112> on p. 29 of the 2007 FRC Manual.)

The suggestion was that teams be required to be inspected before entering the Fill Line as described in Option 3 above. I see no problem with practicing before completing inspection unless the robot is unsafe, and then I would apply the discretion provided by R112. Within the constraints of safety and a fair schedule, I think teams should get as much practice time as they can -- even if that delays inspection. But teams seeking to get additional practice time by entering the Fill Line should not be permitted to do so by delaying their robot's inspection.

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

Dave,

Likewise, I have no hard evidence but wonder why "few, if any, teams are inspected"? IMHO, many teams would be able to go through inspection early on Thursday and do not because there is no incentive to do so.

While I agree it is a shame to waste practice time, we are not talking about denying anyone their scheduled time here. If, indeed, "few, if any, teams are inspected" they should be working on their robots, not waiting like geeky vultures in a queue hoping that another less fortunate team (one whose robot is not working) does not show. At events where most robots are working enough to practice, the wait in that queue could be very long indeed.

There is no perfect answer here. At "younger" events (dominated by rookie teams) your proposal has more merit than at "older" events (dominated by veterans). As FIRST continues to grow, the percentage of veteran teams should increase...

If we can convince teams to complete inspection early, it will help the inspectors to identify teams in trouble and render assistance.

Also, if a team has passed inspection and in queued for extra practice, no work is being done on the robot. This increases a pool of pit savvy people who can be easily identified by the inspection crew and could be encouraged to help out teams having difficulties.

JMHO.

Mike

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

I understood your suggestion the first time, and my response stands. Incidentally, I believe you have misrepresented R112. R112, as I read it, says that IF a robot is inspected and fails, THEN the lead inspector, at his or her discretion, can allow/disallow the robot from practicing (presumably with a reason such as safety, not just because they felt like it). It does not say that the lead inspector can dictate that teams must be inspected before practicing. In fact, there is another rule (3.5.2) stating the opposite: "Teams may practice on the first day of the event without completing the inspection process, however, if field personnel deem a robot unsafe, it will not be allowed to practice until the unsafe condition is fixed." So, an un-inspected robot can be prohibited from practicing if the field personnel consider it unsafe, which makes sense of course. Neither of these two rules give the lead inspector the right to impose a general rule require that teams be inspected before practicing (again, this is as I read it).
I assumed someone would ask this. I know few teams are inspected early on Thursday, but I haven't necessarily noticed many teams who are actually ready for inspection. What I usually see is that just about everyone is working on, tweaking, etc. their robots, and that the vast majority of teams just aren't ready for inspection. Is there anything wrong with that? Personally, I don't think so - there's no rule saying you must arrive at an event prepared to be inspected.
Mike, I know that getting teams inspected early is a hot topic among inspectors. However, I don't see why we need to add additional punishment to teams who are not. There are many reasons that a team may not be ready to be inspected early in the day, including:

- Practice matches are the first chance to test out on a real field, revealing what they need to change
- Known to be overweight
- Still working out the bugs in the <fill in robot appendage here>
- Had to disassemble part of the robot to fit in the crate, and now it needs to be put back together
- Repairing damage that occurred during shipping
- Repairing damage that occurred at a previous competition

All of these things are legitimate (and legal) activities for practice day. For several of the reasons above, giving a team a chance at an earlier practice (via fill-in) may actually get them ready for inspection sooner. Are teams taking a risk by being inspected late? Absolutely: there's already a rule in place stating that a team must be inspected before competing in qualification matches. It seems, to me, that saying "You can't fill in a spot in practice match #1 because you're not inspected" is an attempt to change the nature of practice day. To me, a rule like this is saying "You need to show up ready to inspect, and if you don't then you'll be punished by not being allowed to fill in." I guess my point is that a team which has a status of "un-inspected" on practice day, while greatly hated by the inspectors, is not in any way a rules violation, so this seems like an effort to change that.

Theoretically, if every team showed up at a competition and was ready to be inspected (and had to be inspected before being a fill-in team), what would happen? I highly doubt even the most experienced inspecting crew would be able to get them all checked off before practice rounds began.

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

I like option 3. I think it's the best. If you have a working robot and stand in line, you can get more driver practice; or if you have to build in the first half and then get in fix then you can make up for the practice you miss in the morning by standing in line and waiting for a open spot.

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

We may have to agree to disagree about R112. I think your reading above relies on assumptions not supported by the text of the rule: (emphasis mine)
The lead inspector's discretionary authority (to prevent a team from practicing before their robot is inspected) is stated in a postive way that I support -- the language is biased in favor of practice time, and that implies to me that the lead inspector should only exercise the stated discretionary authority when there is a clear reason to do so. Like safety.As I read it, 3.5.2 is not a rule, it is part of a summary of what to expect at the event:The lead robot inspector is one of a team of key volunteers that share responsibility for the smooth, safe operation of the event. Key field personnel (referenced in 3.5.2) who are responsible for identifying unsafe robots include the Field Supervisor, Head Referee, IFI representative, FIRST Technical Advisor, and Event Manager -- and any of these can be advised by other persons present on the field. At many events these key field personnel rely on the lead robot inspector and his/her team of inspectors to alert them to potential safety risks posed by a particular robot. At events where I have served as lead robot inspector or as FIRST Technical Advisor there has been very close communication between field personnel and robot inspectors regarding safety.

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

The last sentence is only part of the rule and shouldn't be read by itself, but in the context of the whole rule. The overall rule starts by saying "At inspection..." meaning this rule applies at inspection time. It refers to noncompliance resulting in the disqualification of "the ROBOT" - noncompliance would be determined at inspection time. The final sentence says the lead inspector may allow "the ROBOT" (use of the indicates it is the same robot which was in noncompliance, from the previous sentence) to compete anyway.

If you only read the last sentence alone, I could understand your interpretation. The two preceding sentences, however, make it clear that this rule applies at the time the robot is inspected, not before.

I don't disagree that a lead inspector (or any inspector, for that matter) can prohibit a robot from practicing if something is observed to be unsafe. Originally, you said: "Dave, the suggestion is not that teams be required to be inspected before practicing. (Although that requirement can be imposed at the discretion of the lead robot inspector..)" Did I misunderstand that comment? I interpreted it as meaning you thought a lead inspector could impose a general rule that teams could not practice until inspected, and that this could be applied to all teams at an event, without a specific safety concern in mind. Just to be clear, do you think a lead inspector has the authority to declare that all teams at an event must pass inspection before competing in any practice matches?

Oh, and since I've managed to drag this off-topic, I'll try to repent by saying that I think (3) is the best choice. I think (2) would be chaos (think of a practice field at a regional towards the end of Thursday - 20 teams all wanting to use it and mobbed together, waiting for a spot).

Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Practice Match Poll
 

No, I don't think a lead robot inspector has the authority to impose a blanket requirement that all teams at an event must complete inspection before participating in practice matches.

However, he/she does have discretion to prevent any robot that he/she deems unsafe from being used in practice matches, under my reading of <R112>. How that discretion should be exercised is open to interpretation, and that discretion is also subject to review and possible overturn by others at the event as prescribed by the Decision Authority Matrix that FIRST provides.

One possible method for unbiased exercise of this authority is the requirement, used at several past events, that all teams complete a limited subset of the complete inspection checklist items, selected based on their relationship to safety, before participating in practice matches. That method is neither required nor prohibited by prior year FRC Manuals. Whether it is used at a particular event has been determined by the key volunteer team and FIRST staff at that event.

As to applicability of <R112> (or any other rule) only at inspection time, my view is that any time is inspection time. Any time that he/she suspects a safety related problem with any robot, any of several key volunteers and FIRST staff members present at the event can require inspection or re-inspection of that robot.