View Single Post
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 27-03-2005, 19:18
AmyPrib's Avatar
AmyPrib AmyPrib is offline
Registered User
no team
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 688
AmyPrib has a reputation beyond reputeAmyPrib has a reputation beyond reputeAmyPrib has a reputation beyond reputeAmyPrib has a reputation beyond reputeAmyPrib has a reputation beyond reputeAmyPrib has a reputation beyond reputeAmyPrib has a reputation beyond reputeAmyPrib has a reputation beyond reputeAmyPrib has a reputation beyond reputeAmyPrib has a reputation beyond reputeAmyPrib has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Worst Call Ever and Congratulations from San Jose

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon Bell
Here's a brief synopsis of what happened: A red robot was in the human player loading station.$@# A blue robot was driving across the field, holding a tetra, on their way to a goal.$@# A red robot in front of the center goal, also holding a tetra, turned and hit the blue robot to intercept them (makes sense, good strategic move).$@# While engaging the blue robot, the red robot pushed the blue robot into the dead red robot in the loading zone.$@# Our interpretation of the chain/cascade rule was that the red robot was responsible for the violation, that the blue robot was clearly avoiding the loading stations and going to score but was pushed into the zone by another red robot.$@# We are confident that there was no intention whatsoever by the red robot to do this - all six teams were playing great, they were all trying to score, and there was very little overly aggressive play in the finals.$@# Good defense at times, but nothing malicious or destructive.$@# Intentional or not, it was a rule violation, and we made the call we did.$@# You might not agree with it, but it was discussed at length before we made the score final.$@#
I've read these posts several times, and for the benefit of everyone, I just want to clarify what happened. Sounds like Red2 pushed Blue1 into Red1 while Red1 was in a loading zone.
The penalty that was assessed, which alliance was it assessed to? According to Update 4 and the examples of G15 they describe, it would seem that no penalty should have been assessed. Specifically Ex8 and second half of Ex4 describe this case.
If a robot of same alliance contacts their own partner in a loading zone, they wouldn't receive a penalty. But if an opponent contacting them was not the "source" of contact, then they also shouldn't receive a penalty. Since Red was the source of contact, then nobody should be penalized.

I am asking because I would like to know if those Examples are still valid. Seems there was an Update that came out later saying that "the process of loading a tetra finishes when a robot leaves the loading zone", but some of the Examples (6-7) seemingly contradict that (since it used to be they had to be physically in the process of loading a tetra). Would it be legal to block a robot from leaving their loading zone, or would you be penalized because they contacted you while they were still in the loading zone?

But purely for the case at your regional, it would seem that neither alliance should have received a penalty if Update 4 is still valid.
I just wanted to make sure I was reading this right, and to check if Update 4 was still in effect. Thanks,
__________________

Co-Chair Boilermaker Regional Planning Committee 2004-2011
2008 St. Louis Regional Finalists and Engineering Inspiration Award
2007 St. Louis Regional Champions - Thanks 1444 & 829! / St. Louis and Boilermaker Quality Award
2006 Boilermaker Chairman's Award
Referee - IRI - 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
2005 Midwest Regional - Semifinalist, Engineering Inspiration Award, and Safety Award / Boilermaker Regional - Judges Award
2004 Midwest Regional Champions - Thanks 269 and 930! / IRI Runner-Up - Thanks to 234 and 447!!!
2004 Championship: Archimedes Finalist - Thanks 716 and 1272!
"We are going to be praised and criticized more than we deserve. We are not to be affected by either." ~ co-worker