Chief Delphi
Page 22 of 24 « First < 1215161718192021 22 2324 >
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Championship Event (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=12)
-   -   Galileo Division 2008 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66771)

Travis Hoffman 20-04-2008 13:08
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bongle (Post 738965)
They failed to score 100 in their 2nd match (barely), but 72 is certainly much farther from 100 than they're used to. So it appears it is indeed possible to play strong defense against them, even with a dead robot. Though if 254 wasn't stuck against the divider, 1114 might have had an easier time getting around 8, and thus scored more.
8 spent a decent amount of time during this match trying to poke 254 out of its predicament.

I think a lot of the scoring depression was indeed a result of the traffic jam created by 254's unfortunate situation.

Quite a blah sequence of events considering all the hype leading into the match.

XaulZan11 20-04-2008 13:14
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
[quote=jayjaywalker3;739345]I dont understand why 148 is a good pick. All I saw was 148 picking up penalties in qualifications and then picking up penalties in the eliminations. I will look at their videos from other regionals though.
QUOTE]

When they picked 148, I was thinking the same thing. While I still think they should have taken 70 just to have a backup hurdler, which they could have used a few times as both 1114 and 217 tipped in matches, 148 played great defense. They don't play dominate defense by pushing opponents, but by just getting in the way and pushing balls around. I saw countless times they get inside someone's gripper and push the ball around. 148 was certainly a good pick.

Vikesrock 20-04-2008 15:41
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
[quote=XaulZan11;739437]
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayjaywalker3 (Post 739345)
I dont understand why 148 is a good pick. All I saw was 148 picking up penalties in qualifications and then picking up penalties in the eliminations. I will look at their videos from other regionals though.
QUOTE]

When they picked 148, I was thinking the same thing. While I still think they should have taken 70 just to have a backup hurdler, which they could have used a few times as both 1114 and 217 tipped in matches, 148 played great defense. They don't play dominate defense by pushing opponents, but by just getting in the way and pushing balls around. I saw countless times they get inside someone's gripper and push the ball around. 148 was certainly a good pick.
Also with the penalties flying the way they did during Galileo elims, there is a lot less risk for 148 to get a G37 (read: almost none) than 70 getting one.

ErikaE1717 20-04-2008 19:20
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
I just wanted to thank all of the teams for their energy and passion throughout the three days! Team 1717 (D'Penguineers) has a rookie team every year of 32 seniors so we didn't know what to expect in Atlanta and though the regionals were phenomenal, the World Championship was such an eye opener into the spirit of the entire FIRST community. It was amazing to see how far people traveled to compete, and the sense of camaraderie was not only inspiring for the world of science, but it was also refreshing to know so many people share my dream to better the world in every way we can.

For those continuing on next year, keep up the innovative ideas and hard work! Keep FIRST alive and thriving!

Thanks again :)

sayso_411 20-04-2008 19:46
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
Thank You Teams 1717 and 254 for picking us and I am really happy that all of us were in the Galileo Finals!!! :D

Team 384 had been an offensive bot all year, we found that we can defend as well :)

Thank You again 1717 and 254

galewind 20-04-2008 22:11
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
Someone had asked why 148 hadn't been picked until last. Not to offend 148, but there are some clear reasons why. From our scouting meeting Friday night, we knew that if we were going to be in a position to pick, that we'd need two good hurdlers, because we know we're not that good at it. We figured that since we can play decent keep-away (and legally), the only way we'd do as well as to get two good hurdlers. When some kids complimented 148 at our meeting, other people made it clear that they cannot be one of our picks because we need better hurdlers, and we would be that defensive bot if we could get the hurdlers. Fortunately we did in 103 and 1503, and we had a great run with them!

That being said, I think 148 wasn't picked until the end due to some alliances needing good hurdlers (the amazing hurdling teams weren't all in the top 8), and possibly some inexperienced scouts on other teams. I had a really strong feeling that 1114 and 217 were going to pick them once it came back to their second selection. 148 was a great pick to complement their style, and I had really high hopes for Galileo once they picked them, because I truly believe that almost everyone in that arena knew what the outcome of our elimination brackets was going to be before QF1-1 even started.

jayjaywalker3 21-04-2008 00:22
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by galewind (Post 739781)

That being said, I think 148 wasn't picked until the end due to some alliances needing good hurdlers (the amazing hurdling teams weren't all in the top 8), and possibly some inexperienced scouts on other teams. .
That 3rd Alliance was painful for everyone on my team.

65_Xero_Huskie 21-04-2008 02:08
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by galewind (Post 739781)
Someone had asked why 148 hadn't been picked until last. Not to offend 148, but there are some clear reasons why. From our scouting meeting Friday night, we knew that if we were going to be in a position to pick, that we'd need two good hurdlers, because we know we're not that good at it. We figured that since we can play decent keep-away (and legally), the only way we'd do as well as to get two good hurdlers. When some kids complimented 148 at our meeting, other people made it clear that they cannot be one of our picks because we need better hurdlers, and we would be that defensive bot if we could get the hurdlers. Fortunately we did in 103 and 1503, and we had a great run with them!
I think this is why the alliance selection was so strange in my eyes.
It looked like every alliance was looking for firepower. They knew if they were gonna go up against 1114/217 they needed to try to get firepower.

BoyWithCape195 21-04-2008 08:45
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
In terms of the match with the 40 DQ. They actually took all the points scored by 40 in that match off the board completely. Had there have been no DQ, the 195,330,40 alliance would have won and brought it to a third match.

Karthik 21-04-2008 12:12
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoyWithCape195 (Post 740038)
In terms of the match with the 40 DQ. They actually took all the points scored by 40 in that match off the board completely. Had there have been no DQ, the 195,330,40 alliance would have won and brought it to a third match.
This is incorrect. The final score before the DQ, but after all penalty points were assessed was 50-48 for the 1114, 217, 148 alliance.

Tom Bottiglieri 21-04-2008 13:15
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
1 Attachment(s)
Great time on Galileo. We recorded every point scored by every team and these were the results:

Code:
Team    Avg Contribution
1114    87.2
195    56.4
469    56.3
25    54
121    49.2
254    49.2
330    49
103    47.6
217    46.8
40    39.6
1319    39.6
494    39.2
694    39.2
1503    38.4
2062    38.4
291    37.2
1676    37.2
234    36.8
70    33.2
1717    32.8
88    31
384    30.4
176    29.6
343    29.2
1089    29.2
1629    28.8
716    26
612    25.2
316    24.8
1983    24.5
1758    24
548    23.6
1138    23.6
364    23.2
2487    22.8
1816    22
2046    22
65    20.8
180    19.6
1038    19.6
1212    19.2
2237    18.5
1540    17.6
2437    17.2
48    16.8
115    16.8
894    16.8
1885    16.8
597    16.4
932    16.4
1450    16
2549    16
2354    15.6
2621    15.5
1023    15.2
2165    15.2
2340    14.8
2568    14.4
1523    14
8    13.6
1390    13.6
84    13.2
2423    13.2
2599    13
399    12.8
457    12.8
1296    12.8
839    12.4
980    11.6
2468    11.5
148    11.2
1739    10.8
1880    10.8
302    10.4
425    10
812    9.6
2638    9
134    8.8
1595    8.8
509    7.2
1254    6.8
2023    5.2
168    3.2
226    3.2
1366    3
1576    2.4
(We may have missed a line or two here or there, so ours may not agree 100% with every other teams scouting data. But its close enough.)

EDIT: These are for Friday's matches only.

BoyWithCape195 21-04-2008 16:26
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karthik (Post 740154)
This is incorrect. The final score before the DQ, but after all penalty points were assessed was 50-48 for the 1114, 217, 148 alliance.
Yes, I am not disagreeing with you on that. The score, pre penalties, was altered though. With the DQ, they removed all the points that 40 had scored during that match. The 48 points was the amount scored by 195 and 330 only.

Zflash 21-04-2008 16:51
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
[quote=Tom Bottiglieri;740213]Great time on Galileo. We recorded every point scored by every team and these were the results:

[code]
Team Avg Contribution
1114 87.2
195 56.4
469 56.3
25 54
121 49.2 254 49.2
330 49
103 47.6
217 46.8
40 39.6 1319 39.6

Being in the top 10 in avg contributiuon scores and not getting picked; shocked 1319 to some extent. This was our fifth year and we were aware that it could occur because anything can happen at these things. Does anyone have any suggegestions as to how we can prevent this from happening again.

Karthik 21-04-2008 17:57
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoyWithCape195 (Post 740409)
Yes, I am not disagreeing with you on that. The score, pre penalties, was altered though. With the DQ, they removed all the points that 40 had scored during that match. The 48 points was the amount scored by 195 and 330 only.
No, the only points removed were for the penalties. The score was not altered in anyway. Nowhere in the rules does it call for the removal of points scored by the DQed team. Also, there is no way for the refs to track the individual points scored by a robot, aside from their laps. The scoring system credits all hurdles, herds and deperches to the alliance not the robot.

CzarValvador 21-04-2008 22:16
Re: Galileo Division 2008
 
Average contribution doesn't exactly correlate to how you will be picked for a team. Some Robots work better with others. Some features compliment other features. It's all about how people scout out different mechanics and matches.

Besides, if you played in 7 defensively absent matches, you could have easily raised your "Average Contribution" above that of 1114's if they have played in very defense heavy matches. This is why we have scouts... if everything would have been decided by Average Contributions, Scouting would be a job for one person on the team who just pulls information off of some database.

Anyway, Congratulations 1114, 217, and 148. Great defense, great offense, and I must say I honor your dedication to your team, playing 2 vs 3 without replacing 148, and letting them have some time to repair their bot. Congratulations! It was an honor to play against you guys.

Thanks to 254 and 384 for playing on our alliance.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:38.
Page 22 of 24 « First < 1215161718192021 22 2324 >
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