View Single Post
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-04-2005, 09:42
Mike Ciance Mike Ciance is offline
Registered User
FRC #0025 (Raider Robotix)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: North Brunswick, NJ
Posts: 693
Mike Ciance has a brilliant futureMike Ciance has a brilliant futureMike Ciance has a brilliant futureMike Ciance has a brilliant futureMike Ciance has a brilliant futureMike Ciance has a brilliant futureMike Ciance has a brilliant futureMike Ciance has a brilliant futureMike Ciance has a brilliant futureMike Ciance has a brilliant futureMike Ciance has a brilliant future
Send a message via AIM to Mike Ciance
Re: Should FIRST address "ramp bots"?

i've been pretty angry about wedges for a long time. i was actually thinking of starting a thread like this. glad to see that i'm not the only one.

nearly every year i've been involved in FIRST - 3 out of 4 - i've seen wedge robots that were built with the obvious intention of getting under other robots and pushing or flipping them.

wedges give robots a clear and unfair advantage. shouldn't a pushing match be decided by the strength of the drivetrains, rather than who makes a cheap shot?

we put a lot of work into our drivetrain. nobody could push us back... as long as we had all our wheels on the ground. on friday at nationals this year a wedgebot got under us and pushed us halfway across the field with little effort. at both of the regionals we attended we saw other teams getting pushed around by wedges.

in this game and in games of the past there have been robots with wedges that obviously have no function in the game itself. what reason is there for a wedge other than to get under other robots? wedges are just as unfair as pinning, and i can't imagine why FIRST hasn't already made rules against it.

rep me how you want, i stand by what i've said

Last edited by Mike Ciance : 26-04-2005 at 10:01.