|
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
Quote:
|
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
Quote:
|
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
Quote:
Not being completely ready (i.e., fully tested code, and well practiced) is not a good position to be in coming into a "smaller" regional and on a 2-day schedule. But it was a great learning experience. We will be better prepared for Cleveland now in many ways. |
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
Quote:
I did hear the queing personnel several times commenting on certain teams having tight schedules (2 or 1 matches in between their matches). They had those instances highlighted, and I thought were very understanding at late arrivals and worked well with those teams. A great crew there! |
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
As a field reset-er I will help everyone out next time and add a little bottle neck to the operations;) .
But yes it was madness, I thought I was going crazy at times because I would see a team load off the field as I was resetting one match and then see them behind me in the queuing box for the next match. |
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
Since I had a vested interest, I have resisted commenting on the controversy regarding the red card given to 2641 in the semis until now. I have watched the video of the last 20 secs of the match about 6 times and it is very clear. 2641 did indeed contact the tower several seconds prior to 1114 pushing them. 2641 did not back off and clear the tower for about 4 secs. The timeline unfolds like this: With 17 secs to go 1114 travels over the bump and heads to a goal to shoot. At 14 secs to go, 2641 heads directly to the red tower to block and makes contact with the tower. 2641 remains in contact with the tower until 10 secs remaining (a total of 4 secs) at which time it begins to back away. A ref at the back of the field can be seen raising the blue penalty flag and the announcer states there is a penalty against 2641. At about 9 secs 1114 does cause 2641 to again contact the tower. This would of course not be a penalty.
A few additional comments: 1 - The red alliance had what should have been a 6-3 lead wiped out due to a scoring malfunction. Stuff happens and you deal with it. The red card controversy was during the re-do. 2 - In match 38 which 63, 128 and, ironically, 2641 played against 1114, 128 and 2641 blocked 1114 from the goal by placing their robots on either side of the goal WITHOUT contacting the goal. That match ended in a tie, giving 1114 the only blemish on their otherwise stellar record. 3 - Intentional contact with a tower during the finale is a <G35> violation, which results in a red card. |
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
I uploaded a few hundred photos I took from Pittsburgh here. Plenty of shots of 1503 and 1114, but a lot else besides.
|
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
Indeed, we were actually trying to replicate the very defensive manuver you are referring to. And we would have gotten away with it too! If it weren't for those meddling kids.. err, refs.
Kudos to your alliance and Good luck in Atlanta, although I was dying for a third round.. :eek: |
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
Quote:
|
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
The Pittsburgh Regional was a great experience for Team 1114. It had been a long time since we attended this event but it was exactly how we remembered it. We were thrilled to meet new friends and also to be reunited with old ones. The event was staffed with some fantastic volunteers who were wonderful hosts for the weekend. Special thanks and congrats go out to:
Teams 1279, 3138 & 2656 - Between the midzone prowess of 1279, all around ability of 3138 and the defensive tenacity of 2656, your alliance had us sweating immediately after alliance selection. You were worthy opponents and very deserving of your silver medal. Team 117 - All weekend long we were impressed with the heart and dedication shown by this team. They slaved to pass inspection on Friday morning and continued to give a great effort on the field despite major setbacks. (They blew their cRIO out at one point.) Despite all the problems they played some solid defence on Saturday morning that caught our eye. Despite a nerve wracking lunch hour, you guys came out on fire during the eliminations, locking down our far zone. We're honoured to have had you on our winning alliance. Team 63 - For anyone who only saw 63 in Rochester and is writing this victory off as a fluke, you are very mistaken. The Red Barons made huge improvements from Week 1 to Week 2 and were one of the top scorers at the regional. Their ability to finish was amazing. In the elimination rounds the were scoring in large volumes, despite experiencing issues with their drivetrain. In general this team was filled with a bunch classy mentors and students who were a pleasure to work with. Team 2809 - Don't let the 7th seed fool you, 2809 was easily one of the best robots at the competition. We agonized over the decision between picking 63 and 2809 until the very last second. They put together some brilliant strategies on Saturday and moved up from 22nd spot to 7th. If it wasn't for a bad cable in their second last match, they could have been even higher. In the semis they gave a definite run for our money. They are an up and coming young team to be reckoned with both this year and in years to come. Thanks for all your support throughout the weekend and also for providing us with a new locale after our first meeting got shutdown on Thursday night. |
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
The Pittsburgh regional was a great learning experience for our young team, and turned out better then I expected for us. This year has really been a growth year for us, with a new influx of keen grade 9 students and new mentors and I'm really proud how the team has come together this year to produce a great robot and really come together as a team off the field.
Overall the Pittsburgh regional was a well run regional, and the shorten schedule really didn't feel that much shorter. On saturday afternoon I was talking to our coach Petey and to both of us the regional didn't really feel any shorter then a normal regional. The matches back to back with only one match between them were a bit rough, but we didn't have any major mechanical issues all weekend so it didn't hurt us too much. Thanks to all the volunteers for running a great regional. It took our drivers Friday to get the hang of how our robot can score most effectively, we tried out some different strategies and some failed, but we learned from them and continued working to improve our performance. By Saturday morning we were able to turn up the scoring and win some tough matches to jump up to the 7th seed (and eventual 5th alliance captain). As most people have heard by now our alliance was eliminated in a controversial final match, it was unfortunate that we had to loose like that but we moved on from it quickly and celebrated our alliance's success against the top alliance. 2614 Our team worked hard through Friday and Saturday morning to find two teams that could work well with our strategy. 2614 was one of the most consistant middle zone robots with a scoring autonomous from the middle zone. You did a great job balancing playing defense, feeding us balls in the offensive zone, and trying to score from the middle zone. I would also like to point out the great example of Gracious Professionalism your team showed after loosing our last controversial match, your team stood up and applauded the head referee while others where not being so gracious. 2641 Your defense was very key to our alliances success, your drivers improved every match shutting down 451 in the quarter finals and 63 in the semi finals. You worked well with our teams to improve your defensive strategy every match. 1114 Your team's professionalism and continual excellence in all aspects of FIRST has inspired our team to continually improve. Your team drives us and many other teams to improve every year, keep on pushing the bar higher. We were ecstatic that we were in the running for your first pick, hopefully next time we can make that choice even harder. I'm sure we will have some fun together at GTR. To all the other teams at Pittsburgh, and our other Canadian friends 1503, thanks for making this regional a memorable one. Hopefully we can see you all again in the near future. |
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
I have not commented on the so-called red card controversy before now, mostly because I ordinarily think it is better to let the student team members work through things on their own, while trying to advise them in the background. In fact, this is my first comment in this or any similar forum, ever. However, in this instance I think it is important to attempt to set the record straight on a few points. First, let me thank some who have here provided wise council and a good example – the students and others do follow these discussions and care about the outcomes and this process can be a chance to learn valuable lessons all around.
It is very difficult to accept an adverse outcome in a contested or close judgment call, particularly when just being there and in a close match is such a significant accomplishment and represents such a large investment of emotional capital, time, energy, and focus. I try to be objective, though I obviously am not totally detached, and I really did think that this was one of the most exciting matches I have seen. For our team, these eliminations were the first time that this year’s robot worked reliably and well – we seem to have been plagued by a bad radio up until we replaced it just before alliance selection (and by other technical problems we had resolved by then). So, the heat of the moment was understandably pretty hot and it has taken some time for this heat to dissipate, though this seems to have happened. I completely get that the point of FIRST is not 'winning' or defeating anyone, and on the whole, I have had very good experiences through FIRST. More importantly, this holds for the teams which I have observed and for the young people I know who are fortunate enough to participate. I wish FIRST had existed when I was younger and am glad that it is there for my son and for our society. I am grateful to all who put so much into this program. I also respect and admire the other teams who participated in this match and congratulate them all for their performance on and off the field. I thank our alliance partners for selecting us and our opponents for a spirited match. Finally, I am very appreciative of those who volunteer to officiate, and can readily see that this is a very hard job and often, puts one in a difficult position. Please try to consider these thoughts if they don’t yet resonate (this note is to my own team as much as anyone). I have coached soccer for many years and my philosophy has always been that everyone is better off when things are close, although this does tend to make it harder to remain composed and keep things in perspective, particularly when there are fewer events, as this tends to raise the stakes at the same time it leaves participants with reduced chances to experience coming out on both sides (there is benefit in this) and mentors with fewer opportunities to try to coach how to handle such situations. Over the years, I have seen things in this other context that have been hard to witness, and disheartening. I have also seen the opposite end of the spectrum and growth, as many (but certainly not all) matured and some behaved in an exemplary manner under difficult circumstances. I could generalize about life experience here, but I suppose people learn best from specific instances in which they are involved so, back to the match. I think that it is best to try to see all sides of something like this match and learn as much as you can from it, so in my view, it is good that it is being discussed here. We can all learn – about each other, about ourselves, about handling adversity, about being civil and composed and calmly trying to reason through things, and about the nature of life. Inevitably, each of us makes mistakes. We each have a point of view and are likely to see things differently at times. It is up to us to decide how we will react and govern how we individually interact. In the end, the match and the fate of our alliance was decided by a single call. I am the first to admit that we would not have been favored had it gone three rounds and it is also true that there was a restart. We got lucky in kicking a ball onto 1114, where it stuck, resulting in a possession penalty. We were also helped by some good fortune in the opposing alliance not doing as well as they typically did in the autonomous period. Still, we were in this match, mostly as a result of adopting a defensive strategy that worked well at this point and might have made a third match interesting. A one point penalty (or even two of these) would have resulted in a different outcome than the red card and was clearly an available option. It is also true that 2641 seems to have an unfortunate history of being on the wrong end of similar calls, and this does tend to encourage a predisposition to mistrust them. Of course, we do all tend to remember when we are wronged by such an occurrence more than we remember or even notice when we benefit. The day before, we were wrongly penalized, enough to wipe out six goals and a win, altering the outcome of a seeding match and likely resulting in a significant swing in the standings. By waiting before contesting this (what had happened wasn’t explained until the team was off the field and most were back in the pit), we missed any chance of having the decision reconsidered. To their credit, the officials did admit that they had got this one wrong. I bring this up only as background because in my assessment, history was a significant factor at the time. I think that this red card was an instance where having a video replay would have helped. Replay makes it easier for everyone to accept a call, because they can see what happened again and they know that the officials have taken time and the opportunity to have a second look. If there is a concern about review slowing things down, perhaps a system could be put in place where each team has one challenge to use. As it was, there was a significant delay and it is the case that there is at least some time between matches anyway, so the proposal seems practical from this standpoint. I don’t know if this has ever been tried or considered, but this would probably add to the excitement while reducing controversy and help to lessen the pressure on the officials. I understand that Pittsburgh had gone to only one camera as part of the effort to control costs. Someone associated with our team has video taken from a much better perspective for purposes of considering this call, but not using something that is available only because it might perhaps be better would seem to be untenable. I was told this was a factor in not using the official video, but this may only have been speculation. I see that other video is explicitly not to be considered and can understand this position. To be open, I don’t know that the officials didn’t examine the video they had, although if they did, this was not mentioned. I saw the match live. I haven’t had much success in watching the match on ustream, though I have managed to catch some static frames that I suppose must represent what others have seen. I don’t suppose the point of all this is actually the call itself so much as what happened in the aftermath. I went back to the pit, where one of the students replayed video he had taken. I was watching the kids and talking to some of them, rather than watching the video, but I can say they all concluded that the call had been wrong, but only after watching this video. I missed the explanation of the call but have reread the rules since. For me, the rules that are most clear have to do with the officials having the final say and on what is permitted in terms of questioning the call or asking for clarification. So from this standpoint, there is nothing to argue. I’m not going to try to substitute my judgment for that of someone who was there on the field and had been watching matches all day, particularly when they gave of their time to be there. I will say that I don’t see this call as clearly as many who have posted here – particularly the issuance of the red card. And yes, I have read the circumstances under which intent is to be presumed, in different sections regarding different rules. My secondhand understanding of the explanation that was offered following the match was that by failing to take all immediate action to break any contact with the tower, “obvious intent” was inferred. No benefit was to be obtained by touching the tower and I assure all that the drive team knew to avoid this. This was not part of any strategy (using the tower to hold position, shaking the tower, etc.) and any contact that is apparent in this match would seem (to me) to fall under “inadvertent contact”. So, even accepting that there was contact, the interpretation of the rules (which can probably never explicitly cover every possible contingency but should be particularly clear on things such as the issuance of a “red card”) was controversial. In fact, to me, there is still controversy on this point. I would like to review all of the video and clear things up in my own mind, just so I know, but my point here is that this was a controversial call. In a way, arguing over this only serves to underscore the point. There was a lengthy discussion prior to the call being announced and the score being updated, so the officials apparently did not feel that this was as clear-cut as some who have posted here. Continuing to try to ‘win’ the argument isn’t particularly helpful in my view and doesn’t reflect well on any of us. For my part, I am not going to debate the call any further – I don’t want to convince anyone it was wrong, only that it actually was legitimately controversial, at least to many. In my experience, when something like this happens, usually those who have some allegiance to one side or the other will mostly see it one way or the other, which seems to be the case here. My interest is in dissecting what happened at the time and in the immediate aftermath, under this circumstance. I did not see or hear any adult making derogatory remarks, but I accept that this is there in the video (again, I haven’t been able to watch this). From the general reaction, I have to hope that this was not someone associated with my team or even with FIRST (or, that this was an overreaction). I think there may have been another comment thread at one point which I can’t find (deleted?) and I can’t really comment on what I didn’t see or even hear described specifically, except to say that it is certainly possible that this was not someone associated with our team. I have to say that those on the team that I was around at the time behaved well. I gather that there was a post subsequent to the event that did not reflect particularly well on us, but also that this was retracted. Since I didn’t see this either, I prefer to think that it was an understandable and not excessively egregious response by a high school student to a difficult and novel set of circumstances. Some of the posts that I have read have been notably judgmental or accusatory and may well have been factually wrong. If you do not know that someone else is guilty of some fault or mistake (or in this instance, that that someone is associated with a particular team), it is usually best to refrain from commenting beyond the facts. I’m suggesting this to both ‘sides’, so if you’re wondering if this could be you, the answer is probably yes. It is particularly difficult to accurately ascribe feelings or motivations to others – we do this though projecting our own emotions and thoughts as we imagine them under the perceived circumstances, mirrored onto others and this is not an infallible mechanism at all. I can say that members of my team are likely to have been at the event for the same reasons as anyone reading this, going through many of the same experiences, and on the whole, comporting themselves in a very similar way. I’m asking that people stop and think this over before piling on. Continued sniping doesn’t reflect well on any of us and isn’t going anywhere good. Debating the call is fine, but please try not to enflame things! To end on a positive note, I enjoyed this year’s game and it was good to see some really nice teams, in terms of the robots and results on the field, but also from the standpoint of providing a good environment and experience for the students and contributing to their communities. We are going to one more regional, on Long Island, where we hope to benefit from our experience and capitalize on finally having a robot that is running well. Then too, there is always the hope of next year… Thanks for reading, Allen Nuttle Mentor, Team 2641 |
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
Very well written post Allen. Welcome to CD, its a shame you are joining under such a dark cloud.
I believe one of the posts you're referring to is a thread that was deleted because of its content being squarely aimed at, and laying all blame for 2641's hardships at Pittsburgh, on the head ref. As for the person who backtalked the head ref on the field as the call was being explained, I have no idea who it was, what team(s) they may or may not be associated with, or even if they're a student or mentor. It doesn't matter. It was barely audible on the webcast, but it was definitely there, and you could see her react to it right away. It was unprofessional, yes, but I don't consider it entirely a bad thing. It gives us an example of how we're NOT all saints. We as participants in the FIRST program aspire to the ideals of GP, we strive to improve the world around us, and be a positive force in our communities to change the world for the better. We are not perfect. Some days, our emotions WILL get the better of us, and we'll say or do things that we might regret later. Learn from it. Try to catch yourself the next time you're about to blow up at someone, and look at it from the other side. To quote a famous religious text: Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those that trespass against us. |
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
We found a chuck jaw next to our pit (team 3138) during clean up at Pittsburgh. We will have it with us at the Buckeye Regional or contact us though our web site innovatorsrobotics.com.
|
Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
Since we're doing lost and found, has anyone found an 8-1/2 x 11 envelope full of vinyl logos? It's really aggravating that I lost it, especially since another mentor saw me put it in my laptop case. Must've fallen out at some point.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:39. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi