Thread: Opinions of Q&A
View Single Post
  #18   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-02-2016, 17:14
Lil' Lavery Lil' Lavery is offline
TSIMFD
AKA: Sean Lavery
FRC #1712 (DAWGMA)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,600
Lil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Lil' Lavery
Re: Opinions of Q&A

Pit scouting is far from perfect, however, it certainly doesn't hurt. If you have the manpower to do it, there's no reason not to pit scout. There's plenty of situations that teams will never find themselves in during qualification matches, and good pit scouting can aid in making educated guesses as to how teams will fare in those situations. Asking "how many points do you score" is not a good pit scouting question. Getting concrete data in terms of design choices is.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jared Russell View Post
Given that there are 9 unique types of defenses a robot may need to traverse this year - and depending on the event, a robot may have between 8 and 12 qual matches - it is likely that you won't witness all robots attempt to traverse all defense types during qualifications.

Determining whether the missing crossings were because a team can't, prefers not to, or just never needed to cross a given defense seems like the kind of question that only pit scouting (both Q&A and inspection of the robot) could answer.
This x 1000
__________________
Being correct doesn't mean you don't have to explain yourself.