Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

So far on webcasts I have seen about 5 robots with the kicker+possession combination good enough that I would make that tradeoff.

2 of those 5 do not have hangers, I know at least 2 of the other 3 do, although I only saw 1 of the 5 successfully use their hanger.

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

In KC, we had a few matches today with two robots from the same alliance hanging. A few more individual teams hung, and some came very close.

Teams playing defense may not always be able to cross the bump, so it may not be strategy for them.

Penalties are very costly in this year's game. There was a team today that got down to -4. Yes, it only counts as 0 at the end of the game, but it is a large deficit to get out. There were a lot of matches lost to penalties.

Most robots probably were not sitting by choice. Most were disabled, and a couple of stations seemed to have problems more than others. It's probably just the "week 1 cobwebs," but things seem to be moving a lot smoother than last year.

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

That almost scares me. Here at Kettering there are about 3-4 robots that can consistently hang, and only 1 out of the top 5 ranked robots hang.

I know as a team we try hanging every time, and we're only 1 of 2 teams that does that :ahh:

When strategizing this year we found that a majority of the "defense bots" this year did so because a) they couldn't traverse the bump and b) their kicker didn't work. Unfortunately a lot of these robots didn't want to be "defense bots" initially...

And this is certianly the year of the penalty. One team in a match this year racked up 11 penalties due to a kicker malfunction. Fortunately their alliance didn't score so it didn't hurt them.

And I have to agree with you on the field issues. There were matches where 5/6 robots were disabled because of field issues. When we first started today we had to program all of the radios twice because of field issues. Due to that there was only 1 practice match. Hopefully week 2 will run much smoother!

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

Peachtree had a few of the 0-0 matches but those were due to penalties. Most of the games were 3 or more per team which was more than what I expected. With what I'd heard about the scrimmage it was about an average of 4 points a game both teams combined. A lot of field problems plagued our regional too; ended up 1.5hrs behind schedule because of radio problems. After that they just decided you have 15 seconds to connect or you're disabled.

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

Hours went by and numerous field faults on the districts in Michigan. Some experienced teams sat motionless for numerous matches and couldn't find out why. I sincerely hope that First comes up with a better solution that "15 seconds or you're disabled". That's pretty harsh considering the number of field issues we've seen that had little to do with the robots.

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

My long standing prediction to our team was an average week 1 score of 10-8 without penalties. Maybe we'll get there during the elimination rounds.

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

I was also wondering that I've seen plenty of teams with really great hangers over build season but non r are doing it at comp. Am I missing something? I'd ue your hangers if you have them or they could just use a ramp XD

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

I believe that they did not overestimated there own kickers, but more overestimated their ability to line up kicks and to have the ball in the right position. I'm sure there kickers worked fine in the shop when the ball want rolling away.

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

To clarify, I think they misjudged how well their ball manipulation assembly would work, in terms of making and maintaining possession, aiming, and firing.

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

Yea, I figured as much, thats why i posted what your really meant.


I think we are going to see a lot of teams bring ball handling mechanisms to their robots at competition. I saw alot of teams that were scoping out and gawking at the best handling mechanisms at Kettering. That includes the better teams looking at the best because only a couple of teams had a magnet that could take the ball backwards with them.

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

At the Michigan Kettering competition we've had most games around 3 to 4 points per alliance, but some had as many as 15 and 16.

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

FLR has had most matches randomly gyrating. Usually, when two good alliances play, it is 5-6, but when two slightly worse ones, it usually degenerates into a turtle (bad idea in qual) and ends up witha 1-0 lucky score, or the hanging team wins. The other thing that has been lowering scores dramatically is G46. I can not think of how many times I have heard the MC say "ball penetration violation" this weekend. In fact, NOT getting those penalties is one of our robots strengths!

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

We saw a large jump in scores for the end of qualification matches I'd say. All of elimination I think we never missed a match without at least an attempted hanging, and usually both alliances went for it. The major problem though was field errors. 2 of our 3 alliance bots died in quarterfinals (no comms), leaving just our team to try and pull a win out. We actually could have if the refs called all of the penalites and we successfully hung.

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

it was actually a bummer, in my experience, I watched one elimination match be decided by one team, because they pushed out of there zone during autonomous and "encouraged balls" to put them at -6 their score.

if it wasn't for those penalties, they would've won 5-1.

for our team, we won one match with 5 points, and most of the others was because of faulty systems (be the Operator Interface or field).


In my opinion, this game had a lot of potential, but a lot of teams (a lot of eastern coast teams) got screwed over with weather, and critically crippled week 1 (or at least DC)

Re: 2010 week 1 low scores
 

Average score throughout ALL week 1 matches = 2.72

Highest score = 15
Teams 67, 70 & 910 at Kettering District

Highest combined score = 22
Teams 33, 894 & 2619 - 12 points
Teams 27, 494 & 2834 - 10 points

I'm surprised at the low average score. I would have thought there would be some real knockout teams out there scoring like crazy. The biggest surprise is the number of matches that end in a 0-0 tie. It is disappointing to hear about the field issues although in my previous experiences we've had some pretty quality field techs on the case and hustling to resolve issues. Into each life a little rain (and snow) must fall.

Bring on week two.