Chief Delphi
Page 3 of 4 < 12 3 4 >
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)
-   -   Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294) (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85436)

jblay 27-04-2010 03:54
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by waialua359 (Post 958297)
Cory,
My only question after watching the first match, was why not start from near the middle and go straight into the tunnel. Why kick the balls out first, since it seemed that you folks got there what seemed like, a tad bit late?
I asked some of your team members this past weekend at the VEX tournament, and some said that's exactly what they wanted to do.
I obviously can't explain the choices made by 254 but in my opinion the autonomous they ran was perfect aside from the fact that 469 managed to push them out of the tunnel. 254 managed to get inside the tunnel at the right time they just weren't pushing 469 and keeping them out.

Also I think in almost every single match this year it was very crucial to clear those 3 balls out of your opponents home zone in autonomous mode. My only exception would be if you are against a weak alliance in qualification matches and you want to give your opponent a shot to score. This way you can build up your seeding score.

Tom Bottiglieri 27-04-2010 03:56
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jblay (Post 958299)
I obviously can't explain the choices made by 254 but in my opinion the autonomous they ran was perfect aside from the fact that 469 managed to push them out of the tunnel. 254 managed to get inside the tunnel at the right time they just weren't pushing 469 and keeping them out.
Yup. It got there in time. It just didn't push back hard enough.

waialua359 27-04-2010 03:59
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri (Post 958301)
Yup. It got there in time. It just didn't push back hard enough.
If that's the case, it would have been exciting to see what would have happened if 469 couldnt loop the balls.
Being that 469 was a good robot even without the looper, it would have been great to see both alliances adjust on the fly and try to win!

Cory 27-04-2010 05:00
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by waialua359 (Post 958302)
If that's the case, it would have been exciting to see what would have happened if 469 couldnt loop the balls.
Being that 469 was a good robot even without the looper, it would have been great to see both alliances adjust on the fly and try to win!
The problem with our autonomous is that it was effectively worthless.

Had we stopped 469 from getting in the tunnel we'd have needed to stay there the entire match, or they would go right back in. We'd be taking our best robot out of the game completely. We might be able to win 2v3 if we had our two best robots out of the tunnel, but there's just no way it would have worked if we were in the tunnel. At some point we would have to come out and score. We might have bought 15-30 seconds of no looping, but it would ultimately still have happened.

Particularly when you consider that 469 is still a VERY good midfielder.

jblay 27-04-2010 05:17
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory (Post 958305)
The problem with our autonomous is that it was effectively worthless.

Had we stopped 469 from getting in the tunnel we'd have needed to stay there the entire match, or they would go right back in. We'd be taking our best robot out of the game completely. We might be able to win 2v3 if we had our two best robots out of the tunnel, but there's just no way it would have worked if we were in the tunnel. At some point we would have to come out and score. We might have bought 15-30 seconds of no looping, but it would ultimately still have happened.

Particularly when you consider that 469 is still a VERY good midfielder.
In that case why have your autonomics bring your robot to the tunnel? It doesn't seem like your strategy from the start was to stay there and stop 469 from entering so why even run that autonomous?

waialua359 27-04-2010 05:54
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory (Post 958305)
The problem with our autonomous is that it was effectively worthless.

Had we stopped 469 from getting in the tunnel we'd have needed to stay there the entire match, or they would go right back in. We'd be taking our best robot out of the game completely. We might be able to win 2v3 if we had our two best robots out of the tunnel, but there's just no way it would have worked if we were in the tunnel. At some point we would have to come out and score. We might have bought 15-30 seconds of no looping, but it would ultimately still have happened.

Particularly when you consider that 469 is still a VERY good midfielder.
Actually,
I thought if 469 couldnt get in there because you folks did, then you could proceed to play defense with them, making it a 2 vs 2. If they hung around the tunnel just in case you folks came out, they'd be hard-pressed to try to score also.

Cory 27-04-2010 13:35
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by waialua359 (Post 958307)
Actually,
I thought if 469 couldnt get in there because you folks did, then you could proceed to play defense with them, making it a 2 vs 2. If they hung around the tunnel just in case you folks came out, they'd be hard-pressed to try to score also.
That was pretty much the thought. Keep them out initially, maybe stay in there a little bit, and then come out and try to harass them enough that they wouldn't be able to go back in.

akeisic 01-05-2010 20:05
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris is me (Post 958253)
Even if they're not scored, 2041's defense ensured they were not leaving the zone)
As you can imagine, I've been watching the final matches over and over again! :rolleyes:

In the first match 294 cleared 4 of the 6 balls in the blue offensive zone and then blocked the remaining 2 for the closing seconds of the match!

In the second match 294 cleared 3, but 177 deflected one into the zone. We might have cleared more, but we scored point 7 for the blue alliance because - in trying to clear - we deflected the ball off of 1114's bumper and it rolled over us into the goal. We then needed to wait to prevent the redirect back in.

Chris is me 01-05-2010 20:14
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by waialua359 (Post 958297)
And did anyone else notice that the balls looped from 469 were slightly off when unopposed to the goal?
If that was the case, why play defense on the defender, but instead have both 2041 and 1114 focus on scoring?
This was really variable, depending on the direction, the match, and the angle. Of course, in F2 the 2 or 3 that didn't go in on the "right" (from the driver's) side were key to the match, but many matches they did score. 294 kept them busy in the more reliable direction for match 2.

Quote:
Originally Posted by akeisic (Post 959490)
As you can imagine, I've been watching the final matches over and over again! :rolleyes:
Not counting auto, it took you guys enough time to clear them that if 1114 used that strategy it would have probably allowed them to keep their lead a little better than they did, IMO. They were still basically facing their worst nightmare in the back though.

Chris Hibner 02-05-2010 10:33
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris is me (Post 959493)
This was really variable, depending on the direction, the match, and the angle. Of course, in F2 the 2 or 3 that didn't go in on the "right" (from the driver's) side were key to the match, but many matches they did score. 294 kept them busy in the more reliable direction for match 2.
That is still really weird for 469. I've seen them play a lot and prior to Atlanta, I don't think I've ever seen them miss the goal altogether (except for when they get hit as the ball falls to the ground). If their redirections don't score, it's usually the result of the chains or a lack of momentum, but they were on target to both goals at least 95% of the time during the regular season. As I watched the finals on Einstein, I was surprised to see how many were missing.

jblay 02-05-2010 12:15
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hibner (Post 959577)
That is still really weird for 469. I've seen them play a lot and prior to Atlanta, I don't think I've ever seen them miss the goal altogether (except for when they get hit as the ball falls to the ground). If their redirections don't score, it's usually the result of the chains or a lack of momentum, but they were on target to both goals at least 95% of the time during the regular season. As I watched the finals on Einstein, I was surprised to see how many were missing.
I did notice that 67 bumped them a couple of times when the balls hit 469's chute. I think this was what caused their issues.

Cory 02-05-2010 13:56
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hibner (Post 959577)
That is still really weird for 469. I've seen them play a lot and prior to Atlanta, I don't think I've ever seen them miss the goal altogether (except for when they get hit as the ball falls to the ground). If their redirections don't score, it's usually the result of the chains or a lack of momentum, but they were on target to both goals at least 95% of the time during the regular season. As I watched the finals on Einstein, I was surprised to see how many were missing.
We heard that due to slight variances of the Einstein field relative to Curie, 469 had tweaked the positions their chutes swing to. It seems like maybe they weren't quite able to get the positions down perfectly.

Greg Marra 02-05-2010 18:41
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory (Post 959613)
We heard that due to slight variances of the Einstein field relative to Curie, 469 had tweaked the positions their chutes swing to. It seems like maybe they weren't quite able to get the positions down perfectly.
I know that this is a problem 125 faced between Boston's practice field and competition field. Especially with variations in how the ball exited the tower's chute, it was tough to move from field to field and even alliance to alliance.

TEE 03-05-2010 22:22
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Marra (Post 959668)
I know that this is a problem 125 faced between Boston's practice field and competition field. Especially with variations in how the ball exited the tower's chute, it was tough to move from field to field and even alliance to alliance.
aren't all of the fields supposed to be identical? :confused:

David Brinza 03-05-2010 22:52
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEE (Post 960000)
aren't all of the fields supposed to be identical? :confused:
Not quite (see Section 6.1.1 of the FRC Game Manual):
The competition ARENAS are modular constructions that are assembled, used, disassembled, and shipped many times during the competition season. They may undergo a significant amount of wear and tear. The ARENA is designed to withstand rigorous play and frequent shipping, and every effort is made to ensure that the ARENAS are as identical from event to event as possible. However, as the ARENAS are assembled in different venues by different event staff, some small variations do occur. Fit and tolerance on large assemblies (e.g. the TOWER) are ensured only to within ¼ inch. Overall gross dimensions of the entire field may vary up to 4 inches. Successful teams will design ROBOTS that are insensitive to these variations.

The division fields saw extensive play throughout the entire 2010 Breakaway season. Whereas the Einstein field was brand, spankin' new: i.e. never played on until Championship. Most likely, there were some dimensional differences between Einstein and the other fields in Atlanta.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 22:12.
Page 3 of 4 < 12 3 4 >
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