Chief Delphi

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)

Big_Al_1741 02-03-2008 14:32

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Well, on the subject of impeding, all I have to say is that team 1741 (yes, i'm on that team, and i know because I gave this idea out!) used the great idea of stopping early in hybrid mode so that team 148 could not go any farther than where we were (brilliant, right? ;) ), and from what I know, another team did the same in the final matches in the elimination! YAY for my idea! :cool:

jgannon 02-03-2008 14:43

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Stud Man Dan (Post 711124)
What happened in those matches was illegal no ifs ands or buts about it, There is absolutely 0 question in my mind or any one of those involved minds that what they did was illegal.

These are very harsh accusations that you are leveling. Nonetheless, you sound pretty confident about this issue. Can you please provide a rule from the latest revision of the manual that would back up your claim? It would really provide something more useful and less libelous to the discussion.

Cory 02-03-2008 14:51

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jgannon (Post 711147)
These are very harsh accusations that you are leveling. Nonetheless, you sound pretty confident about this issue. Can you please provide a rule from the latest revision of the manual that would back up your claim? It would really provide something more useful and less libelous to the discussion.

I think this discussion is really headed nowhere useful at this point.

The Q&A is quite clear that the GDC intended for teams to not be allowed to block in hybrid.

Due to the fact that the Q&A response was not added to a Team Update, it's easy for me to believe that the referees were not aware of it.

Furthermore, as Joey pointed out to me yesterday, and I now seem to recall this being the case, that in the case of a Q&A response disagreeing with the manual, the manual/team updates take precedence. I'm not sure where this was stated. Can anyone else confirm?

I think we all just need to chill out and wait for a team update to clarify this situation.

Paul Copioli 02-03-2008 14:52

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
I agree 100% with Raul (and Travis .. which never happens). Those of you that have made an auton (hybrid, whatever) that can do laps, stop whining. It is quite ridiculous. We have a hybrid that does laps and we have been stopped by 1 robot moving to block us. 1 robot can't stop the flow of traffic ... period.

This is not a science fair. Being able to complete a lap in autonomous with no one on the field is boring. Being able to complete a lap with others in your way is exciting.

People tried to do this to us in hybrid all elimination rounds. The risk that they are taking is to not get any points in hybrid. 45 tried to do this in finals 1 and 148 went in front of them and we went behind them. The result: a 36 point deficit after hybrid.

One robot moving 3 feet and stopping will not be called impeding this year and we all better stop complaining and get used to it.

I can't believe the amount of whining already, especially from teams who haven't even played yet.

EricH 02-03-2008 15:56

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cory (Post 711155)
Furthermore, as Joey pointed out to me yesterday, and I now seem to recall this being the case, that in the case of a Q&A response disagreeing with the manual, the manual/team updates take precedence. I'm not sure where this was stated. Can anyone else confirm?

I can't remember such a statement, and I can't find it in the manual, but I would say it's valid. Though I think that somewhere there should be a clear statement of what takes precedence, such as what FLL has. (Not necessarily FLL's statement, though.)

Quote:

I think we all just need to chill out and wait for a team update to clarify this situation.
Ditto.

Oh, and I agree with Tristan on 1519's robot. Unless both parts together violated a rule (weight/size), it should have been allowed to play as is.

Matt H. 02-03-2008 16:07

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
I believe the situation has already been clarified--that is what the Q&A is for. It is simply a matter of the refs not being aware of a preexisting rule.

AdamHeard 02-03-2008 16:40

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt H. (Post 711207)
I believe the situation has already been clarified--that is what the Q&A is for. It is simply a matter of the refs not being aware of a preexisting rule.

Actually the situation is very tricky.

Right now, it is not clear if the Q&A can override the rules when they contradict. Usually this isn't an issue because Q&As that change the game substantially are quickly incorporated into the team updates.

Alan Anderson 02-03-2008 16:50

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Stud Man Dan (Post 711124)
What happened in those matches was illegal no ifs ands or buts about it, There is absolutely 0 question in my mind or any one of those involved minds that what they did was illegal.

I don't understand how you come to that conclusion. A single stationary robot cannot be impeding traffic. In the specific situation prompting this thread, there was certainly a passing zone around the robot attempting to block the hybrid lap-runner. Impeding traffic is prohibited, but sitting still to block a robot is not illegal.

(On the other hand, running into a stationary robot at high speed is likely to deserve a penalty for ramming.)

AdamHeard 02-03-2008 17:01

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson (Post 711241)
I don't understand how you come to that conclusion. A single stationary robot cannot be impeding traffic. In the specific situation prompting this thread, there was certainly a passing zone around the robot attempting to block the hybrid lap-runner. Impeding traffic is prohibited, but sitting still to block a robot is not illegal.

(On the other hand, running into a stationary robot at high speed is likely to deserve a penalty for ramming.)



I hate that this thread makes me disagree with people I respect, but; based on the wording of the Q&A, it just says block traffic. So, I would assume any intentional traffic blocking, whether or not it blocked the whole lane, is illegal.

[quote]However, intentional strategies designed to block traffic during the Hybrid Period will not be permitted. This may be considered a Yellow Card offense.[/[quote]]

TubaMorg 02-03-2008 19:03

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
I suppose the issue here is what the definition of blocking traffic is. The GDC in Q and A says that strategies designed to block traffic are not allowed. Some here are interpreting this to be in conflict with the manual. However consider the idea that they are in perfect agreement. The manual says that a robot is not impeding if there is a passing lane. Phrased another way, a robot that is stopped (whether in hybrid or teleoperated mode) is not blocking traffic if there is a passing lane. A strategy that involves blocking traffic would require a concerted effort to block all lanes. Therefore a single robot driving forward and stopping in the known path of another robot's hybrid is not blocking traffic as long as there are other avenues to travel. This is simply a good idea, not an illegal move.

During Aim High I was very impressed with various team's strategies during autonomous to block the shooters. I was even more impressed during elimination rounds at the ever evolving auto modes where a shooter was blocked, then the next round the blocker was blocked to free up the shooter. I have to believe that any team clever enough to drive laps during hybrid mode can counteract a simple parked robot.

Tristan Lall 02-03-2008 19:05

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 711245)
I hate that this thread makes me disagree with people I respect, but; based on the wording of the Q&A, it just says block traffic. So, I would assume any intentional traffic blocking, whether or not it blocked the whole lane, is illegal.

Does that mean, blocking any traffic in hybrid mode is illegal (and yellow-cardable), or blocking all traffic? And when is impeding equivalent to blocking traffic? These are things that need to be clearly and precisely specified, otherwise we're bound to have referees calling it in different ways, and teams operating under different impressions of what's legal.

And regarding the order of precedence of rules, it has not, to my knowledge, been stated anywhere official this year. In the past (not necessarily last year), there was a communication from FIRST that said rules, team updates, e-mail blasts and Q&As were official, and that in case of conflict, the most recent revision of the rule (i.e. from the latest rulebook and/or latest update) was binding. Q&As and e-mail blasts were interpreted as being clarifying statements only, but could not change what was in the rulebook.

I've personally continued to operate under the assumption that that hierarchy is valid, but I make sure to take account of whether an official order of precedence has been issued (and therefore if a team should have been expected to follow it).

Matt H. 02-03-2008 19:06

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Although this may sound lawyer like I believe there is little conflict between the manual and the Q&A. As many teams have pointed out the impeding rules in the manual do not apply to hybrid period.
The Q&A makes not mention of impeding. It only mentions blocking. This word choice is highly significant and would indicate that their intent is to allow no obstruction of the field. Part of the problem in discussing these issues is that first has taken common words such as impeding and given them very specific definitions.

SU 39 02-03-2008 19:11

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 711198)

Oh, and I agree with Tristan on 1519's robot. Unless both parts together violated a rule (weight/size), it should have been allowed to play as is.

Not trying to get too off topic either, but I believe the rule is <R09>...although I do love the idea.

Quote:

<R09> Each registered FIRST Robotics Competition team can enter ONE (1) ROBOT into the
2008 FIRST Robotics Competition. That ROBOT shall fully comply with all rules specified in
the 2008 FIRST Robotics Competition manual.

EricH 02-03-2008 19:24

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SU 39 (Post 711334)
Not trying to get too off topic either, but I believe the rule is <R09>...although I do love the idea.

That could explain it. Though that would depend on whether the speed demon could be attached to the hurdler without changing anything other than bumpers and what was connected to the RC.

Laaba 80 02-03-2008 19:38

Re: Impeding in Hybrid
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TubaMorg (Post 711326)
I suppose the issue here is what the definition of blocking traffic is. The GDC in Q and A says that strategies designed to block traffic are not allowed. Some here are interpreting this to be in conflict with the manual. However consider the idea that they are in perfect agreement. The manual says that a robot is not impeding if there is a passing lane. Phrased another way, a robot that is stopped (whether in hybrid or teleoperated mode) is not blocking traffic if there is a passing lane. A strategy that involves blocking traffic would require a concerted effort to block all lanes. Therefore a single robot driving forward and stopping in the known path of another robot's hybrid is not blocking traffic as long as there are other avenues to travel. This is simply a good idea, not an illegal move.

During Aim High I was very impressed with various team's strategies during autonomous to block the shooters. I was even more impressed during elimination rounds at the ever evolving auto modes where a shooter was blocked, then the next round the blocker was blocked to free up the shooter. I have to believe that any team clever enough to drive laps during hybrid mode can counteract a simple parked robot.


You are looking at the impeding RULES not the definition. The rule you are talking about only applies in teleoperated, it means nothing in hybrid.
The real definition of hybrid is:
Quote:

Originally Posted by 2008 Game Manual
IMPEDING: Preventing or obstructing an opposing ROBOT’S ability to proceed around the TRACK
in the direction of traffic.

With that definition, I think 1 robot driving out to block the flow of traffic is considered impeding, dont you? That said, the Q&A people are quoting never says anything about impeding or bump to pass or anything like that.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Q&A
However, intentional strategies designed to block traffic during the Hybrid Period will not be permitted. This may be considered a Yellow Card offense.

It says it may be considered a yellow card offense. I may be wrong, but I dont know if there is anything in the rulebook about yellow cards this year. There are things that are said to be a yellow card offense, but I have never actually seen what a yellow card does. I would look for it now, but I think the FIRST site is down again. If someone else knows where it is defined please let me know. There needs to be an update to clarify this, because as I see it, it is not allowed, however there is no penalty for doing it, unless a yellow card also gives a penalty.
Also, I dont think that the Q&A is conflicting. If the manual has nothing about impeding/blocking in hybrid, how can the 2 be conflicting?
Joey


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 15:49.

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