2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

So, who's coming?

But more importantly, who's excited?

-Nick

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

1279 Cold Fusion is coming from central NJ. The students are extremely excited to compete in already their second regional this season.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Even though we aren't competing, several Team 48 and other NEOFRA team volunteers are coming to support the event.

Some other Team 48 dork might be there to help out Austintown Fitch rookie team 3193 with whatever and to generally be annoying. :cool:

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Hey Travis,

We are coming with our cannon in tow! Looking forward to a great event, I know Simbotics is psyched to come to Pitt too... Whee!!!!

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

222 is excited for Pittsburgh! We can't wait to see what everyone has come up with and how the game plays out. Also welcome and thanks to teams 1114, 1503 and 2809 for providing some Canadian flare.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I'll be there to provide any assistance to any team in the pits to make sure this event is competitive!

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Team 1249 is once again excited about the Pittsburgh Regional. Should be fun as always. Glad to see 1038 returning to Pittsburgh.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

On a side note, has anyone heard anything about a webcast?

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

We'd do one (we did the Pittsburgh webcast last year), but our alumni tech dude who has all the hardware and normally stages the thing is currently in Haiti with another 48 alumnus.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I heard they were looking for teams to sponsor the webcast. Supposedly the team that was originally going to host it, can no longer provide the service for whatever reason. They said they can provide all of the services at the regional, but they need donations from teams to pay for it.

That is last I heard, about a week ago.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I predict an update on the webcast from "someone in the know" shortly.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Hello! Regional Director from Western PA here - We are indeed planning to stream live video! It will be on both pittsburghfirst.org and steelcityrobotics.org. We've had a few teams step up to sponsor it, and Gabriel Goldman, our Regional Planning Committee Chair, is coordinating that effort. I've posted more information on the Chief Delphi calendar that should be live shortly. We have a lot of exciting things happening this year! And really glad to see the buzz here on Chief Delphi!

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Wow, it's like I'm psychic or something. :)

When in doubt, contact the right people who can answer your questions.

Awesome to hear about the webcast. I will pass it on to our NEOFRA teams.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

2809 is excited for its first US regional! should be a great learning experience for our young team. It will be great to have our Canadian friends 1114 and 1503 there with us. Should be a fun event!

great to hear that it is going to be webcasted, if I have time i'll try and set up a recording of the regional.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

2252 is "cautiously optimistic", mostly because we've not experienced the new two day format yet. Pittsburgh was already the most intense regional we attend, due to the short intervals between matches. Now we're expecting it to be an "11" on a dial that only goes to "10".

Has everyone read the rules? Everyone understand Cooperatition Points? Everyone done stairstepper exercises to prep for trips to the machine shop? ..........Bueller?.......Bueller?

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

The Firebirds (433) are very excited to be coming to Pittsburgh for the first time!

Also, we have partnered with team 117 to host the Fire-Dragon FIESTA! All teams are invited.
Details here:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...042#post934042

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Team 1114 is pumped to be returning to the Pittsburgh Regional. The Pittsburgh regional was actually the site of our team's first ever regional back in 2003. We played there in 2004 as well, but have not had a chance to return until now. It should be an interesting and fun weekend, especially with this new compressed schedule. We can't wait to see everyone on Thursday afternoon.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Team 3193, Falco Tech, is really pumped up about their first ever regional competition! From experience, it's always great to see the faces of students at their first FIRST event. Also, it will be exciting for me as I enter the coaching realm for the first time--can't wait!

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

1038 is excited to be returning to Pittsburgh. The last time we were there 48 flipped over our robot and landed on there back. Since they aren't there this time around, I wonder if Mike will have the same luck.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Actually they flipped over the tube in front of your robot, and there is YouTube video to prove it. I'm surprised you didn't attach the link. :)

48 also made the finals (with 1038) and won the Buckeye Regional following that (against them). Our fates were intertwined that year. ;)

The 48 logo will be somewhere on the 3193 robot so perhaps some good karma will still exist for their robot to do somersaults when you are in their general vicinity.

Pittsburgh also hearkens my memories back to 2004 and the last time another team visited that venue.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

:eek: Ask and you shall receive, Travis... As requested, here is the link of 48 doing acrobatics in 2007 at Pittsburgh...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjHMb...=youtube_gdata

I gotta agree our fates were intertwined, it was a good year regardless...:cool:

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Ahh Memories!

I still remember Pitt back in '03 (freshmen year) and I am still glad to be part of it this year and almost every year since.

See everyone on the field while I control field traffic and make sure everyone gets their game balls.:D

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I remember that 2007 alliance with 48 and 1038 as well. Knocked us out in the quarterfinals. We had an epic pushing match with 48, while watching 1038 hang, and hang, and hang again.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Well, here's hoping that 3193 can make it through WITHOUT flipping, thank you all very much!!

Thanks do go out to our new NEOFRA partners, teams 379 and 48, for all of their help this season.

It will still be great to see so many friendly faces, though. Good luck to all!!

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

anyone have a link for a webcast?

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Blar search before you post blar blar blar read the thread all the way through blar etc etc :cool:

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...9&postcount=13

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I know it's only practice... but did anyone see this?
http://twitter.com/frcfms/status/10375880361

18 goals for blue?!

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Sadly that score is not correct. The actual score was 20 points (missing 2 point hang), plus a few balls they scored for there opponents.

1114 kicks bot. ;)

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Simbotics is DIRTY good and I love it

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Does anyone get lag on the video feed? :yikes:

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Yup. Makes it impossible to watch since I'm getting video feed for about 5 seconds every minute or so. And it's getting progressively worse.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

only when 1114 is playing

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I'm running three streams(Cass Tech, Pittsburgh, and Florida) and all of them are extremely smooth.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I would like to see alot less close up shots and more far away shots. The camera man is starting to make me sea sick

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

LOL the camera man is aiming at the floor sometimes :confused:

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Is anyone else having issues with the webcast? We are getting laggy video frames with kind of working audio.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Oh noez. Can someone tell the field crew to put the feed onto the stream and not the alliance selection chart!?!?

EDIT: The webcast just went south for me. The sound and the vid are cutting out in 1 sec intervals. :P

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Yes the video is cutting out now every 1 second lol

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

i only saw one 1114 match and knew they would chose 63

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

If anyone at Pitt is watching this, tell the person running the webcast to stop and start the UStream server.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Wow.. This Stream is so bad! Hopefully the durring the playoffs their wont be as much lag! :eek:

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Not a fan of ustream right now

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I got nothing right now, just a black screen with that loading circle thing...anybody in the same predicament?

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

First, sorry for the lag. We'll see about investigating other broadcast technologies for next year.

Second, the perhaps unusually bad camera work (and I've seen some pretty bad stuff at FIRST comps before) may be partly due to the experiment FIRST is running with our regional on whether it works to only have one camera. Let them know how you feel, hopefully they'll give us back the second/third camera angle for next year.

--Ryan

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Does any one know if their are recordings of the webcasts?

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

http://www.pittsburghfirst.org/webcast

It isn't broken up by match quite neatly yet, but all the feed is there.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Thank you :)

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Just thought I'd mention, the controversial call is in the video here around the 57 minute mark: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/5417946

My $0.02? 2641 touched the tower long before 1114 pushed them into it, but still AFTER the start of the FINALE.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

That's exactly right... the video couldn't be clearer. The head referee's explanation of what happened was perhaps not as articulate as it could have been, but the call was correct, and she deserves to be commended for handling a very uncomfortable situation as well as could be expected. Team MARS (2614) also deserves recognition for standing and applauding the decision, even though it sealed their elimination from the tournament. Their display of gracious professionalism was particularly remarkable in contrast to whatever adult thought it was appropriate to back-talk the head ref loudly enough for everyone in the stands to hear.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Here's a link to that specific section of the video:
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/5417946/highlight/55883

It is very clear that 2641 drove into the tower of their own accord after the start of the finale. They then remained parked in a position that would block 1114 from hanging from either of the two poles in that zone until the referee waived the penalty flag. They then tried to move away and were blocked by 1114, but the damage had been done, their actions up to that point warranted a red card. Judging intent is always a difficult position for a referee to be put in, but based on this action it definitely appeared that 2641 was attempting to stop 1114 from hanging by blocking the tower, per the rules that is grounds for a red card.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

For what it's worth, I was standing all the way across the field from the incident, and I was openly saying "Don't touch the tower! Don't touch the tow-ahhhhhhhhhhhh you touched the tower!" as 2641 bumped it from red's near zone. This was after the finale sound and before the disputed pushing activity. If I could catch that from that disadvantaged viewpoint, I'm thinking the refs certainly were able to clearly see it, and they made the right call. The video supports this contention.

One gaffe in execution to ruin an otherwise outstanding, match-winning performance for the blue alliance. Unfortunate, but one hopes the team learns from the experience.

Let's be clear. G34 and G35 only prohibit touching the tower, or a robot in contact with the tower or elevated alliance partner, during the FINALE period. There is nothing that prohibits a team from blocking their opponent from reaching the tower, other than the risk involved in carefully getting into position close to the tower to attempt the block. I'd set a rule of thumb at no closer than 1 foot. I don't know what the *official* stance is, but I also think that a blocking team parked with drivetrain perpendicular to approach from the team trying to hang (just to make it crystal clear they cannot actively touch the tower themselves) that is pushed into the tower by the hanger-to-be should not receive any form of penalty whatsoever. 2641 had every right to attempt the block, but they violated G35 to do it, and thus, the red card.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I'm sure their team leader will post eventually, but on behalf of NEOFRA rookie Team 3193, Falco Tech, I would like to thank everyone who helped make their first regional competition a fun and educational experience in Pittsburgh.

Thank you to Team 1038 for picking them as an alliance partner and for 306 serving along with them. The elimination round experience in their first event will be very memorable and beneficial down the road.

Thank you to Teams 1038 (friendliness, professionalism), 1114 (duh), 1743 (spirit) and 3138 (rookie awesomeness) for existing in adjacent pits so the team could observe all these components in action. :p

Finally, thank you to the announcing crew for branding their bumpers the "best looking". It helps when your school's colors are red and blue. :)

The team expects to have the kinks worked out of their arm and bring an improved kicker with them to Buckeye. It'll be a fun time with all 8 NEOFRA FRC teams in attendance in Cleveland.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Thank you to teams 3138 and 2656. We played extremely well together. 1114, 63, and 117 were overwhelming, and in the 6 minute bumper change/wheel replacement between semis and finals, we couldn't get a strategy put together. 1114 was great, congratulations to them and the entire winning alliance.

Good luck to everyone who qualified for nationals, especially 3138, what a great rookie team.

Congrats to 433 on the Chairman's award too.

It was also great getting to know the members of 1503 next to us in the pit, and in the hotel later. They are a great group of people. Good luck this season.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Travis, if you have a chance, I would like to talk to you at Buckeye. We have formed CORI (the Central Ohio Robotics Initiative) here in Central Ohio and I would like a chance to talk to you about NEOFRA. Most of our teams (except 1317) will be at Buckeye.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I was checking out the video to see what the red card fuss was about..... and noticed some interesting footage at 56:10.

1114 has the ball, and gets tipped up from the side.

Is it my imagination, or does the ball go up with them?

If so, isn't that a clear case of ball posession (Carrying), and not an accidental one... their mechanism would tend to appear to firmly hold onto that ball (dual roller system maybe).

Clearly it's effective.... but doesn't <G44> outlaw this sort of mechanism...

We just competed at Chesapeake, and so I know that inspection didn't include a demonstration of ball handling, so when should this sort of <G44> thing get picked up and corrected?

(I mean, if it's permitted, I want one!)

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

It has been explained elsewhere but that roller type just reduces the normal force on the ball. When you get tipped over it will come with you.

It should not be a penalty though, because the opposing alliance cannot force 1114 into taking a penalty due to their actions.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

You could clearly see a loss of contact with the floor in many matches. However they shoot so effectively that is is hard to see. That particular move sort or proved it to me. Our team (and some others I hear) brought it up to the refs, but nothing was done about it. Hopefully it will be caught for future regionals.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

For what it is worth when I was driving I did go to block the tower so team 1114 could not hang as I had done in a previous match. The trouble is 1114 had bumped me into the tower during end game. The head referee had told me that bumping into the tower did not give me the penalty but it was the fact that I stayed there after I was free to escape for more that 5 seconds. I have video from our media person who has the clearest shot that clearly shows 3 seconds after making contact with the tower that my wheels where in full reverse. The G34 and G35 rules clearly state that if I obviously and intentionally touched the tower that I should receive a penalty. The whole conflict resulted from team 1114 bumping into me. Mrs. Perrotto told me that it was up to her and she did not have to give me a penalty, but she somehow thought that team 1114 bumping into me and then me not realizing I was on the tower until 3 seconds later was all my fault. That to me is not obvious intentional contact.

The change I would like to see in FIRST is this grey area where all of the referees have to interpret what a team is doing gone.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

When on level ground, 1114's mechanism is designed to keep the ball on the floor - it is even spring loaded to apply additional downforce.

However, much like as we witnessed in the 148 promo video earlier in the year, where 148 clearly could use their ball magnet to carry the ball into the goal before release during herding, this is an example, in my opinion, of a situation which warrants further analysis.

The defending robot was not doing anything special to interact with 1114 (getting underneath them, etc.). It was simple bumper zone contact, and 1114 clearly lifted the ball off the ground during it. However, in speaking with a few in the know, according to the head ref, this situation fell under the "another robot cannot cause a robot to get a penalty" situation. I can understand this viewpoint - if the defense weren't there, the ball would not have left the ground. However, I can also understand the view of those who might claim that a "legal" ball control device is one that releases the ball when the robot loses normal contact with the ground. Not an easy question - one which only the GDC could answer. Further debate here is pointless. People know where to go to get official rulings on such matters.

There can be no doubt that such systems have the potential to carry the ball during certain game situations. The 148 video and the 1114 video indicate several situations that should be closely monitored. The question is whether the GDC defines the normal operation of the ball magnet on flat ground as "carrying". I'm thinking, not at all; otherwise, these robots would not be competing.

My opinion? The systems should be deemed legal to operate on flat ground (and they DO, in fact, operate legally), but the teams should be held accountable (2 penalties via <G44>) for carrying whenever they so obviously lift the ball off the ground during rapid change in direction, aggressive driving, interaction with a field surface, goal incursion, or any other similar maneuvers. It would be prudent for referees to pay attention to any and all extremely effective "ball magnet" robots during such situations to ensure the rules are being effectively enforced.

Finally, I do think the video situation points out something else - drivers have to be careful in avoiding kicking the ball out of bounds, as intentional attempts to do so are penalizable offenses. 1114's kick was angled well away from the long axis of the field - there could be no expectation of scoring a goal at that moment, and if I'm not mistaken, the ball shot into the crowd, a definite safety concern. Accidental or otherwise, refs would be prudent to watch out for and enforce <G19> more stringently the rest of the way.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

The video from Ustream posted on here CLEARLY shows that you initiated contact with the tower. You were touching the tower before 1114 was even within 3 feet of you. Your robot was in contact with the tower for a good 10 seconds before you began to push back against 1114.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I believe we were called for posessing two balls at kettering,due to a wide roller. Sometime after that match the team proved to the head ref that the robot could only posess one ball at a time by putting a piece of paper under the ball and driving around practice field. The paper stayed under the ball and the ball stayed with the robot. This was done on a flat carpet, but i thought the question of this continues contact over those pesky half inch bumps and even up scoring ramp was answered in a q&a. Now if a robot just backs up and applies brakes and the ball comes up off the carpet, that sounds like a penalty.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

It should either be called more regularly or taken away by having field reset put the ball back in the same zone from which it came if the intent was defensive removal of the ball to prevent another team from scoring. I think this became a more available strategy as teams gathered that the ball would be placed in mid-field if the ball left the field borders.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I would like to thank all the teams who so "graciously" pointed out our perceived ball lifting to the refs and inspectors. It's too bad that these teams did not approach us directly, as we could have demonstrated our system to them and showed them how we keep the ball on the ground; as we did to all the teams who the common courtesy to talk to us directly.

Our entire roller system is sprung towards the ground, which keeps the ball in contact with the ground during normal gameplay, including quick forward/reverse motions. Multiple inspectors and referees at the event scrutinized our robot both on the field and in the pit and saw no violations. (Despite the supposed "clear loss of contact" described by others who never bothered to take a close look...)

In cases where we are being pushed and our robot lifts off ground by more than 3/4", the ball does come off ground as seen in the video. But, this is not a penalty since the contact was initiated by another team.

I could go on a rant about all those who felt the need to call us cheaters and even go so far to ask for our removal from the competition, but it's really not worth my time. Thankfully, these negative attitudes from a small minority were overwhelmed by the great displays and actions of the large majority of Pittsburgh Regional participants.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

After looking at the UStream video and seeing what you guys are seeing it really is a much harder call to make than I thought. I will not longer contest Mrs. Perrotto's call about the red card. I had no right to pester her like I did. I will agree that there are things in life that are not fair and we have to deal with them. I would instead like to apologize and say that I would like to see different rules for future events that don't put so much pressure on the referees and their discretion.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Hey Travis,

Yes, the ball shot in to the crowd - it actually nailed me in the gut while I was shooting Simbotic's drive team - so I never saw it coming! On a good note, soccer balls don't pack much of a punch... Pic to follow... :D

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I am continually amazed at the differing interpretation of rules that appear crystal clear (not all the rules this year meet that criteria, but the ball handling rule does) There is nothing in the rules that prohibit "firmly holding onto the ball". The rule only prohibits lifting the ball from floor contact while "firmly holding onto" it. Our vacuum gripper was fully capable of holding the ball off the floor if the bot was lifted up. In fact, we received a penalty for doing so. somehow, when we were trying to acquire against the hump, the ball got lodged in between the vacuum cups and our bumper. It was clear that we were carrying, and we got a penalty for it. We still don't know how it happened, and we couldn't reproduce it in the pits.

At any rate, since an opposing bot cannot cause you to get a penalty, and you only carried because an opposing bot lifted you up or forced you be lifted up, no penalty.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

It's the same way vacuums are allowed. As long as the ball touches the floor, it's not carrying, even if in extraordinary circumstances it could be.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Thanks to the Pittsburgh RPC and all of the volunteers who made it a great event. 1038 really appreciated all of the hospitality.

Congratulations to all of the award winners and thanks to all of the teams for making the competition so much fun.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

You are 100% correct, my language did not clearly communicate my point effectively. Your explanation is right on.

Assuming you are talking about the kick at 56:16 in the video I believe this is another case of the opposing alliance not being able to force you into a penalty. 1114 and 2809 were fighting back and forth and 1114 managed to get pointing straight down the field, 2809 hits their corner and spins them towards the side of the field right as they fire off the kick.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

And everyone at home on the webcast.

Its always been interesting to me how the loudest arguer is usually the one who's incorrect.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Karthik,

In order to make the best determination I can of the legality of your ball handling mechanism, I'm going to require exhaustive photos of the finished robot and full engineering drawings. I can PM you an address to provide these to.

:)

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Can we get a copy too???? For purely, um, evaluative purposes... Feel free to send your practice bot in place of the photos...

:ahh: :yikes: :cool:

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

So you prefer the version of <G46> in Week 1, prior to Team Update 16? That one rule alone generated hundreds of penalties in Week 1 events, because the referees had no discretion.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

I am.

2809 may have altered the shot angle, but that had nothing to do with the actual decision to release the ball under duress. It is the shooter's responsibility to verify the ball will launch in a safe direction when firing. Let's call it the "Dick Cheney Rule". If that outcome is in question, then don't shoot the ball. I would like referees to consider <G19> and <S01> whenever such a skewed shot result occurs.

I'm just glad Dan's camera/head (I'm not sure which one he values more ;)) wasn't hit.

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.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

A corollary - we were hesitant to download any program changes into 3193's robot throughout Friday/Saturday - they use LabVIEW. I'm no LabVIEW expert - slowly gaining experience - but it seems the long build/deploy times are not very compatible with a compressed match schedule (or for quick tweaks during the elimination rounds). I feared what happened to 1038 mechanically with their chain could have happened to the rookie team programmatically - we wouldn't have time to correct any coding oversights. It was a weird position, feeling handcuffed like that, especially being used to using C++, which has much faster compile/download times. This seems to be the sole remaining buzzkill I have for LabVIEW.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

Minimum match separation was less than three. We were scheduled for matches with only a single match between them on at least two occassions.

Re: 2010 Pittsburgh Regional
 

A problem we experienced as well.

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
 

On that point, I agree completely. Our team will also be better prepared for Cleveland becuase of the intense schedule in Pittsburgh. See you there!

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
 

I will see your few hundred pics and raise you another few hundred HERE! Check out the 1503 folder, I got a few good shots of your drive team...

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.