Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Does anyone know how much of your robot needs to be in the safety zone for it to be considered "safe"?

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

ALL THE WAY IN.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

I agree, all the way across the tape line

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

^that's to be completely protected, whatever is sticking out can be hit by another robot, because no other robot can enter the zone.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

While it is true for an opposing robot not being able to hit you AT ALL, you need to be fully in. Any part of your robot that is outside the safe zone, is hittable/intractable. Due to:
However, it's my prediction, that since the safe zones aren't always the easiest to see, if most of your robot is in the safe zone, opposing robots won't risk getting the penalty.

But yes by ruling, as long as part of your robot is outside the safe zone and the opposing robot DOESN'T break the vertical plane of the safe zone, you are still completely hittable.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

that will be a tough line to see from 50 feet away.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Not for an on-board sensor.

Jason

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

While everyone like comparing this game to 2007 because of the tubes this part of the game is very 2005 where parts of the field were just off limits.
Those penalties proved to be a humongous game changer back then and I expect them to do the same this year because I expect a large amount of teams to not bother to read the rules like they always do.
Smart teams will just make it a point to just stay away from parts of the field so there is no way they can get a penalty even by mistake.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

do the line sensors work at an angle? otherwise you'd have to be over it to see it.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Might be worth a 3 point penalty to stop someone from completing a logo on the top row .....

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Knowing breaking the rules to gain a strategic advantage is a Yellow Card.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Can you show me the rule for this?

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Can't find it in the rules but a couple of years ago I brought up something I saw at the DC Regional where a team purposely carried four moonrocks and accepted the one penalty for getting four supercells.
The ref I talked to said the referee at DC had made a mistake and should have given a penalty for EACH moonrock they had possessed and he would have given them a Yellow Card for purposely violating the rules to gain an advantage.
Perhaps it's to the referees discretion. But if that's the case I wouldn't risk openly defying the rules. It's certainly not going to impress any judges or other teams for that matter.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Rules <T06> and <T09> give referees the ability to award yellow or red cards at their discretion for "egregious" behavior.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Thanks Kevin.
I can't see FIRST endorsing behavior where teams are given an option to completely disregard a rule that was a major part of the game just brazenly ignored without consequences.
At the very least it would cause an updated rule change.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Nice theory. I used to be equally naive. It's the Ref's call and there's nothing you can do about it.

In 2007 Rule G35 specifically prohibited robots from climbing the opposing alliances ramps. The rule specifically stated that doing so would be interpreted as an attempt to damage the opposing robot, which was not in the spirit of FIRST.

We lost our Regional by 2 points (fifth game of the series - we each had one win and there had been two ties) when an opposing robot climbed up our ramp and knocked off and tipped over our alliance robot that had been lifted for the 30 point bonus. We protested but it was over ruled. Got a huge "BOO" out of the whole arena when they announced that the results would stand. Anyone could see that it should have been a minimum of a 10 point penalty.

There was a big thread about it here. The opposing Drive Coach stated that it was obvious that their only chance was to risk the penalty. If he didn't stop the lift they lost.

FIRST has nothing to do with it, it all comes down to what the Ref at the regional decides. Each team will make it's own decision on whether risking a 3 point penalty to win a game is worth it. I don't see this years "Safety Zone" rule being any different than Rack-n-Roll's "Can't Climb Opposing Ramps" rule.

2007 Rule G35:

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

"You haven't won the race, if in winning the race you have lost the respect of your competitors." -- Paul Elvstrom

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

"If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?"

Vince Lombardi

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

So because one referee made a mistake and did not enforce the rules you feel that the rules don't matter any longer?
I wish you luck with that. Because there are plenty of refs who will follow the rules to the letter and if you do something obvious to gain an advantage I think there will be a price to pay.
I don't think it's a risk worth taking.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Your decision. Plenty of people out there who will risk a 3 point penalty to stop a 36 point logo and the loss of a game. No big deal, just like getting sent to the penalty box in hockey, intentionally hitting the batter in baseball, causing pass interference to stop a touchdown in football, etc. If the potential gain out weighs the risk, it will get used in competition.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

The core value of FIRST robotics is Gracious Professionalism. If the people coming out of this program learn just one thing, FIRST wants it to be that.

The concept that teams should way risk and reward when deciding whether or not to break rules is in direct opposition to that core premise of FIRST robotics. Indeed, Dean regularly talks about NOT emulating commercialized sports where the focus is solely on winning. Your example is the perfect example of why FIRST doesn't want to be like them.

In the end it's as you said. It's a choice. People merely need to ask themselves which is more important: their integrity or winning at a game.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Thank you 45Auto, for alerting the referees to pay special attention to Team 2992.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

All part of the game. Here's a hint. Figure out what year a team numbered 2992 would have made their first appearance, and the highest numbered team that played in Rack'n'Roll. Makes you wish that you knew my REAL team number now, doesn't it? ;)

If this is true then you are violating forum rules and action will be taken.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

So because he's proposing taking a 3 point penalty to stop a 36 point game we're going to single out his entire team now?

What's "un-GP" about a calculated risk that does not involve any of the rules he circled?

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

I won't get into whether it's GP or not, but whatever it is, I'd be very cautious about making that gamble. Given that a head referee can assign a Red Card for "particularly egregious" violations (which this might qualify as), is it really worth risking a DQ to make that defensive stop? A 3 point penalty is one thing, but an automatic loss and 0 RP's is something else entirely.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

In a related "Egregious breaking the rules to gain a strategic advantage" example:

In 2008 (Overdrive), did anyone actually possess an opponent's trackball for an extended period of time to keep them from hurdling at the cost of 1 penalty?

That strategy was discussed, but I dont think anyone actually tried it. There certainly was a risk of a Yellow or Red Card for this egregious behavior.

Hitting an opponent in their zone to break up a Logo is basically the same as intentionality possessing an opponent's trackball in '08. If you are going to intentionality take a penalty, why wait till they have almost completed a Logo? Why don't you just spend the entire match playing D in their zone? It is only 1 penalty in both cases, right?

Strategies like this is the reason the refs have/need the authority to issue cards to discourage any behavior they judge to be out of line (regardless of whether a card is specified in the rules). Break any rule and you can be carded.

I am not a ref but if I was this would be my policy on the matter (and I would make it clear at the driver's meeting):
If your robot is entirely outside of the zone and the opponent is entirely inside their zone there is clearly no legal defense you can play on them. If you then drive into their zone and contact the opposing robot, that is egregious and an automatic Yellow Card.
Too harsh? Remember, a Yellow Card is just a warning, so don't do it again. If it was a mistake, you should not have put yourself in a situation to make that mistake. Next time, stay behind the caution line (it is there to warn you "cross at your own risk").

Perhaps drivers need ask for a clarification of this possible situation at the driver's meeting. I expect all the competition teams in FIRST to read, understand and not intentionally break the rules of the game. I know this expectation will never be met by every competition team but I still expect it.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

I suspect that now this will be addressed in an update.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Very true - I'm just objecting to the very mention of the strategy resulting in his team quite literally being singled out ("tell the refs to pay close attention to 2992").

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

As the other mentor on 2992, and fellow mentor on the team my colleague mentioned that played in Rack and Roll the year we had our ramps climbed, I remember the incredible disappointment after fighting a fairly big powerhouse team to an exciting 5 games and losing to a bad ref call.

As mentors we do continue to promote gracious professionalism to our students, and we usually go out of the way to play the game within the spirit of the rules. After our own experience that one year, we also introduce our students to the fact that sometimes, in the heat of battle, in the adrenaline fueled competition of the game that sometimes, bad luck happens. Sometimes, the opponents may sneak in a questionable choice and get away with it. We are discussing a hypothetical rule situation in the calm of a discussion forum, where in a fast paced competition, high spirits are something that are very real.

We were burned by that high spirit type of decision in the past, so we usually look for similar situations in new games to try and defend against them if they happen again. Bringing it up early now, highlights the issue, and gives us documentation to fight that battle if we're faced with the situation again.

FIRST also introduces many chances to teach your students to deal with disappointment in a professional manner. Teaching our students how to look for flaws in a system is one way to prepare them for disappointment if it happens. Hope for the best, but prepare for the worse is a very good approach to most things in life.

That's 2 cents from the other half of the 2992 mentorship.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Wow. I guess I have been in FIRST too long.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Hmmmm unless you are projecting your sensor in front of you... I think you would be in violation if your sensor "saw" the line..

I guess that would be possible.. I have just never done it...usually straight up and down has worked with ours...

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

I believe that the possessing a trackball penalty was tried in Atlanta against FRC1114/FRC217/148 in the quarterfinals in their division (Galileo)... I can't remember what happened.... anyone remember that? I know they went through I don't remember the penalties assessed.. One team held onto the other teams ball for the whole match..and also trapped the 2nd ball against the wall for most of it...

Of course they went on to win the whole thing regardless of this attempted use of the penalty to stop them...

They were a juggernaut that year...
I guess some teams thought this was the only way to beat them..

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

What happens if a robot attempts to block you from entering the safe zone and you push them in on your way to score?

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

<G61> The actions of an ALLIANCE shall not cause an opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule and thus incur PENALTIES. Any rule violations committed by the affected ALLIANCE shall be excused, and no PENALTIES will be assigned.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Hmm- don't like that one... So as long as you get your opponent to push you into their scoring area you can harass them all you want?

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Not anymore. See Team Update #6

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

And it looks like by my fellow mentor bringing up the flaw in the "safe zone", the taking a 3 point penalty to stop a 36 point logo score, the GDC has taken notice. Team Update 6 makes it a death knell to enter the safe zone to block an opposing team score. The penalty is even greater than the pinning penalty. Automatic yellow card, and if you contact another robot it's a red card.

On one hand I am happy to see this change in the rules, because if it happens to us we have a specific ruling to pull out. We have been planning all along to be sitting in our safe zone scoring, so any discussion we had was in fear of the worst happening to us. This update pretty much makes the safe zones inviolate.

On the other hand, it is obvious that the GDC is making this game have shades of Overdrive with all the contact penalties and protected zones. I personally hated that aspect of Overdrive with the penalties more often than not deciding the matches. This almost makes defensive bots useless, which is a shame since a basic kitbot can't really do any scoring. This year is gonna be especially hard on the rookies I guess.

To stay on topic if you are completely inside your safe zone then you appear to be completely untouchable upon pain of lost game.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

http://www.thebluealliance.net/tbatv.../2008gal_qf1m2

I believe they were given a yellow card.

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Funny, by my recollection, contact outside the bumper zone penalties were just about NEVER called during Overdrive...

Re: Safety Zone on Playing Field
 

Hazzah for update 6!