Quote:
|
Originally Posted by EricH
Negative. That was given in the rules as a guide, however someone asked Q&A(I think a search through the Rules/Strategy forum should turn up a few threads on this) and recieved an answer to the effect of, "we're still trying to decide which one or combination of the following (list of methods)". Using this method as a test is also risky because you need to account for shooter height when you do it, otherwise tall shooters will complain that short shooters can shoot faster.
|
This seems to me to be unfortunate. It does two bad things.
#1 It continues the uncertainty. What FIRST teams need more than anything is a quick ruling that they know they can trust to not change. Uncertainty causes delay or forces teams to go with a safer but less optimal solution. In both cases teams are justified in being upset with FIRST.
#2 It takes away an easily repeated test method from team. 30 Degrees is easily measured. The height of the shooter from the ground is easily measured. The distance a ball flies is easily measured. Seems as good of a method as anyone could have hoped for.
Does anyone have any insight into why there has not been a clear ruling on this? The only thing I can think if is that the folks in CO may have less air resistance than they have at Altanta, but I think teams can deal with that.
I don't think that the robots will be significantly more dangerous if balls exit the robot at 12+delta m/s in Altanta and 12-delta m/s in Denver especially if they fly the same distance.
As for me, I hope FIRST rules in favor of the Angle, Height, Distance method.
Joe J.