Chief Delphi - Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

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

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

- - Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65301)

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diriye (Post 713317)

How ironic... http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/member.php?u=4068 :D

...and the other half, he spends coloring his hair....:eek: :)

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diriye (Post 713317)

How ironic... http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/member.php?u=4068 :D

Well played indeed Diriye... :D

But to Steve's credit. The questions in this thread about order of precedence of rules, updates and Q&A were asked by none other that Steve W a few years ago.

Again rules, updates and Q&As from prior years do not apply to this year's game, but to add perspective:

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=737

This quote in particular is salient:

Quote:

Answers on the Q&A system are not official rules. However, they are determinations of how the rules will be interpreted by competition authorities. When necessary,The Q&A answers are used as the basis for decisions by the judges, inspectors and referees (who are provided with the Q&A system responses as guidance).

Given that, in 2006 a Q&A interpretation of the rule would have set precedence.

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Allow me to make myself widely unpopular for a moment, perhaps even with my own team.

Let me begin by saying two things I understand as of right now:
1. "IMPEDING" - there is no such thing in hybrid mode
2. "Blocking" traffic, the way it's described in the 45 vs 148/217 example is not currently in violation of any rule that I know of at all and is currently a legal strategy.

Here's the very unpopular part. Suppose through some clarification in a team update this "blocking" in hybrid would be deemed illegal? This would not be the end of the world, nor would it be a bad thing given the fact that we have a game that limits defense (Yes, it does this on purpose. Can we get over that notion, please?) and promotes offense and scoring.

I would propose that any team than can plan a hybrid routine to potentially block, could also plan one that crosses two lines to score 8 points. Why not go score? Have we all read Wayne's hybrid challenge thread? Isn't it cool to have all teams moving forward in hybrid and putting points up?

If we all share code starting on Thursday, by the elims even the weakest alliance could cross 5 total lines and maybe even take a shot at one ball, right? So, that's 20 points for the five lines and if you're fortunate enough to swipe a ball it's 28.

Now, take the most dominant hybrid alliances from week one. 148, 217, and 830 could do 10 total lines max for a total of 40 if all of the planets lined up. The 1114 alliance at midwest was doing 8ish regularly with a ball sometimes for nearly the same top score as the St Louis crew.

So, would you be down to these powerhouses after hybrid, yes. Would it be tough to come back? Sure. Is it impossible to win? No.

But, even though I know that currently under the rules that these strategies are legal, I would ask everyone to think about the greater purpose of why we all are in FIRST. In fact, I'd ask you to think about the words of our Chairman of the Board, John Abele. In my humble opinion no one in all of FIRST deserves more respect than Mr. Abele. His words, which he has uttered many times, are found here in paragraph 3.

FIRST espouses values that are clear. We're supposed to be changing the culture. Winning matches is only a very small part of what we do. Go use any viable strategy you want to under the rules, we're all cool with that. But, I urge you all to also think deeply about why we're all here, especially when we're on the field in the spotlight and others are looking at us as an example for the future.

Enjoy the remaining weeks and change as many lives as you can for the better. Namaste.

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

If blocking is made illegal, would that mean only bots that can run for the full 15 seconds would be able to leave starting blocks? Would you still be able to come to a complete stop to nock ball off? where do you draw the line between blocking and a short auto? seems there might be a whole can of worms opened with a no blocking rule. i would love to see a bot zig and zag and nock a ball or two down.
last year the team challenged itself to make two ringers in auto. this year, the zig , zag and balls down sounds pretty tuff. lets thruogh in a hurdle too,just to make it fun.

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Uhm... this thread has an astronomical post count, and if you ask me, I don't think it's gone very far past where it was yesterday. (imho)

Are you guys arguing this for the sake of arguing it, or are there teams actually confused/angry over this? The thread started because (can't remember who) didn't like seing 1114 and our (1024) autonomous modes stopped, and I believe both of us have already stated we would have done the same thing, situations reversed.

I think the best thing to do is wait to see if FIRST has any updates on this. If they don't, there seems to be little reason to continue arguing this.

just my 0.48rubles

-q

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qbranch (Post 713567)

Then what else will we complain about :-(

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qbranch (Post 713567)

I think the best thing to do is wait to see if FIRST has any updates on this. If they don't, there seems to be little reason to continue arguing this.

Why would there be another update? The GDC already commented on this. Many of the arguments are based on interpretations of that comment. The problem seems to be that some people are fixating on the word "block" without noticing that it goes along with "the track" rather than with "a robot".

To "block the track" is not the same thing as to "block a robot". The GDC says the first one will not be permitted. Nothing in the rules or in the Q&A responses makes the second one illegal.

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Another Update :)

Team Update #15

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson (Post 713589)

It looks like the GDC disagrees with your interpretation of their words Alan.

(Added bolding for clarity)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Update 15

Blocking in Hybrid

As stated in Section 7.1, the objective of FIRST Overdrive is to attain a higher score than your opponent by making counter-clockwise laps with your robot around the TRACK while moving large TRACKBALLS over and/or under the OVERPASS that bisects the TRACK. Certain rules were put into place to allow and encourage this to occur. <G40> states in its first sentence that “ROBOTS shall not intentionally IMPEDE the March 6, 2008 flow of traffic around the TRACK.” That is meant for the entire match. The rest of the rule goes on to define IMPEDING during the Teleoperated Period. Intentionally violating the first sentence of <G40> during the Hybrid Period is against the spirit of the rules. Robots that come to rest AFTER they have completed some other actions in Hybrid Mode (e.g. crossed one or more lines, attempted to knock down the Trackball, etc.) in a position that might impede other robots will not be penalized. This is consistent with the revised rules, and our intent of the rule. It encourages them to do something during Hybrid Mode, without demanding that they have total field state knowledge. However, robots that intentionally establish a position designed to impede or block traffic WITHOUT doing anything else (e.g. they just drive forward and stop at the corner of the Lane Divider) will be given a yellow card.

This is consistent with the previous Q&A answer we gave. We think there is enough distinction between the two alternatives that teams will understand the difference.
Please note that this is not a new interpretation, the following was stated in a Q&A answer on 1/24/08:

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Well I didn't see that coming....

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

me nethier... lol What a shame...

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Fantastic news! Lets see a 150 point match this weekend!

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri (Post 713704)

Fantastic news! Lets see a 150 point match this weekend!

150......to 145?

or

150......to 27?

Sadly, I think the latter will be more frequent.

Let's all revel in the humiliation of the opposition! YEAAAAAAAHHHH WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. :(

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Tom,

Don't get too excited. All this does is move the line. Let's say all three robots move out 30' and cross the scoring line. They scored 12 points in hybrid. This effectively blocks the other alliance from doing more than 2 lines in hybrid.

This above scenario will happen this weekend, I guarantee it.

-Paul

P.S. - If anyone posts in this thread and states "I told you so" or any other form of I told you so, then my respect level for you will go to 0.

Re: Intentionally blocking traffic in Hybrid

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Copioli (Post 713710)

Its just nice to see people who designed to play the game the right way not get scorched like years past. While blowouts are unfortunate, high scoring matches sure do create buzz, which is exactly what is needed to gain exposure.

To your comment on hybrid: that is a possible scenario. I can see merit due to the fact that by the time most teams hit the 3rd line, there is less than 6 seconds left in hybrid, eliminating bump to pass and impeding penalties.