Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Ha! As if you need to ask that question... Maybe it would of knocked some sense into me if it hit me in the head... I think 1114's operator was camera shy and sick of me taking pictures of her...

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Intentional vs. Accidental.
Does anyone believe 1114 meant to shoot outside the field?

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I added <S01> consideration in my previous post, because <G19> is one of those watered-down rules a ref will probably never call and teams would incessantly argue in the question box if it were (even if they were guilty of intent). This is an instance of safety enforcement over strategic intent.

In some cases, such as the ball incursion update, giving referees more discretion can be beneficial. In others, such as this instance, the "intentional" label waters down the rule to the point that they shouldn't even bother putting it in the rule book, because it'll never be called.

If by everyone's defenses, there is no enforceable action in the rulebook for reinforcing the fact that a robot is not to fire a ball in a careless, unsafe manner that results in the ball flying in a *very bad* direction almost perpendicular to the length of the field, then what's the point of having the rules in the first place?

Maybe if a ball takes out one of FIRST's scoring table gizmos instead of merely hitting the gut of a spectator or targeting the Pittsburgh referees numerous times throughout the competition, as many shots from Pittsburgh robots did, it would become more of a matter of concern?

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

We had a blast at the Pittsburgh Regional. It was great to see the different approaches to overcome that challenges that were placed before the teams. 1114 is a very well designed machine. The lift system was very sleek and efficient and it was very entertaining to watch it do it's thing. On the note of the controversial match, we feel that all of the robots on the field showed their spunk and it really was a great battle. Robots were slamming into one another and soccer balls were flying everywhere. The red card was unfortunate but nevertheless, a great team did go through and they won after fighting a very good set of matches. Well done everyone!


I do not think so. Robots were bumping into each other and soccer balls were flying everywhere. It was an accidental thing that was really no big deal. Like mentioned earlier in the thread, these kind of things happen in typical soccer games. If there was a problem and someone got hurt, there were medical teams standing by. Everyone was completely safe.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I don't know that you can blame them for targeting refs. You have to admit that the striped black-and-white jerseys look an awful lot like a black-and-white striped FRC target to the camera.

Regarding the intentional vs. accidental debate, being careless does factor in. Sure, maybe 1114 (or any other robot) didn't intentionally aim the ball into the stands, but it's the kind of thing that probably deserves a penalty if it happens more than once, regardless of intent. The safety rules aren't exactly the most specific ones in the manual.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Coming from a Pittsburgh referee, I appreciate this post.

It won't happen, but I would prefer a <G19> interpretation where a "repeat offender" penalty be applied to those robots whose shots repeatedly leave the field even when they are aimed at the goals. Robots with booming, high loft shots that increase chances of leaving the field of play, or ones whose kickers always undesirably "bend it like Beckham" a bit too often could be coerced into modifying their shot strategy/loft/kick force - force teams to reconfigure their long shots if a decent percentage of them leave the field of play.

Safety concerns and <S01> reign here - I would treat every ball shooting into the stands (perhaps across the black curtain) or toward the scorer's table as a single penalty, with a repeat offender receiving a yellow card for the practice. Intent be darned.

Regarding my suggestion that this would be taken more seriously if an expensive piece of equipment were damaged - it's true. Even though a person was hit by the ball, he was not injured or startled into tripping, or startled into dropping his camera. The first time one of these balls knocks a scoring computer off the table or causes someone to trip or drop and break their camera, you'll have wished the out of bounds penalties were more stringently enforced.

I've beaten this topic to death and will sum it up with a few more words - drive teams, take extra care where your shots land, and avoid shooting if there is even the slightest chance your ball will end up in the stands or headed toward the scorer's table area. If under duress, reposition for a safer shot. Don't just let fly and hope the ball ends up in a favorable location. Hold yourselves more accountable for where your "ammunition" ends up when fired.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I can certainly understand and appreciate your viewpoint. If I were a ref, I wouldn't assign a penalty for the shot in question; on the other hand, as a drive coach I wouldn't send a student in to question the call if it were made.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Team 3193 had a great time at their first regional competition. Several of our students commented how suprised they were when they found themselves sweating and their hearts racing over the stress of competition, and they all loved it. I know from personal experience that all it takes is that first competition, and you're hooked.

Travis's comments not withstanding (though his help this season was invaluable), we'd like to thank some folks on our own! ;)

Thanks go out to the Pittsburgh Regional planning committee and all of the volunteers for a terrific event. Also, thanks to those in the queing lines for their understanding of those of us teams that couldn't make it to the lines 2 matches ahead of time when there was only one match between matches (more to follow on that topic).

Many thanks to Team 1038 for chosing us as their partners for the playoffs, and thanks to Team 306 for rounding out the alliance. Hopefully, things will go better in Cleveland!

Thanks and congratulations to Team 1114, our neighbors in the pits, for showing our students your professionalism on and off the field. Your 3-second hang was something they couldn't stop talking about.

Congratulations also go to fellow rookie Team 3138 for their Rookie All-Star performance.

Thanks to all of the great comments on our team's robot--our team worked very hard...and yes, Travis, we especially loved the bumper comments. Thanks go to our sponsor, Red Diamond, and to our team leader's wife, Denise (who works there), for our uniforms and those bumpers.

My only disappointment of the regional, was the schedule of matches. In my years of FIRST, I've never encountered such a brutal, overly-tight, schedule. I'm glad that FIRST is trying to get us more matches to play for our money, but when you don't have time to make simple repairs or follow your pre-match checklist between matches, it's insane and unnecessary.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

First 222 would like to thank our partners in the eliminations. 1503 thank you so much for having faith in what looked to be a less reliable robot(see below). Thank you also for doing a great job of moving balls forward. 2252 thank you for playing some great defense and clearing balls forward from the 3rd zone. I only wish we could have gone further.



M. Mellot has stated my thoughts almost to a T. We were fighting for more time the entire qualifications. This led to some dum dum mistakes and an inoperable kicker for most of our matches. I thank the kind queing crew who were so patient with us.

Finally congrats to 1114, 63 and 117 for taking home the blue banner. 1114 has an excellent robot that will be a force to be reckoned with all season.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

As others noted, I agree whole-heartedly... We had two instances where we only had one match between ours, which actually cost us a match. Never in 1038's history, prior to Pittsburgh, had we ever missed a non-practice match... But, we broke a chain in match 26 and were unable to get the chain repaired and the robot back on the field in time for match 28. I get that FIRST is trying to use an algorithm which scrambles the alliances for fairness, but how was it fair to our alliance partners to go two on three in a qualification match because of a brutal schedule? Due to the fact that 20% of the teams were on the field at any one time at Pitt, possibly the smaller regionals should forgo trying to give all teams 12 matches and drop back to 10 or so, with an additional 3 minute break between matches to allow the teams to catch up... Our apologies to 1503 and 128 for missing match 28, we would have been a powerhouse alliance!

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

On behalf of Team 3062, I want to thank all the teams that helped us as we attempted to get our pnuematics working. Team 63 was extremely gracious and professional in their attempts. They even took the time to show teach the students how to fix some of the problems.

Once again, the level of support and encouragement that we received throughout the competition is unmatched by any other competition I have ever participated in.

Congratulations to all of the teams for making it to the competition and putting a robot on the field. An extra congrats to the teams that won all of the awards. Your teams are a true inspiration to out young program and incentive to us to continue growning.

Even more praise for the award winning Pittsburgh teams.

117 - for continuing to fight until the end
2051 - for their Quality Award
1743 - Autodesk Design Award and the Team Spirit Award (I know you have been working on that one when I was still there!)
1708 - Gracious and Professional
3260 - Rookie Inspiration - Keep up the good work!

And last, but not least....

Congratulations to David Dujmic! What an outstanding volunteer!

I would also like to add that, yes, 12 matches is nice, having minimal time between matches was rough. It seemed like as soon as we got the robot back to the pits, they were calling again. We barely had time to complete some of our repairs, and one match we were asked to leave because we didn't get our bumpers fixed properly.

The other concern that I had was the Classmates. Matches were happening so quickly, I was starting to get worried about how charged ours was. We plugged it in everytime we got to the pits, but how much does one really charge in 10-15 minutes?

Amoungst all of the frustration (stuff not working, getting tipped too often) and the devistation from not being in the tournament, my students are proud of what they accomplished with the resourses they had and are already thinking about next year's team (we are losing 14 members) and how to continue growing our program.

Those going to Atlanta... Have Fun!
Those going to other regionals... Good Luck!
Those done for the season... See you next year!

Mike Klanica
Coach/Mentor - Team 3062

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I, for perhaps only one, did not have a problem with the match schedule. Yes, it is intense, but no more intense than competing in the Elimination Rounds.

What it did do was put a premium on having a robust machine, obviously, we did not at the time - we're fixing that for Cleveland.

I prefer having more matches. If schedulers want to avoid the short turn around times at "smaller" regionals, perhaps a break could be built into the schedule between "rounds" in Qualifications to ensure some minimum time between matches?

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Was anybody else recording video of the event? I'm really itching to see qualification match 31 one more time, but unfortunately nothing from Friday afternoon got archived on Ustream.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Unfortunately, it sounds like the webcast feed was the only thing potentially recorded:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...7&postcount=58

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

With only 31 teams, each team will need to play on average once every 5.166667 matches. In order to not keep seeing the same robots together on the field, I suspect minimum match separation had to be set to 3 when the schedule was generated. You're right, it is brutal. But that's the way it goes at smaller events.