View Single Post
  #47   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-02-2006, 14:25
Stu Bloom's Avatar
Stu Bloom Stu Bloom is offline
I REALLY want to be Andy Baker
FRC #1018 (RoboDevils)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 662
Stu Bloom has a reputation beyond reputeStu Bloom has a reputation beyond reputeStu Bloom has a reputation beyond reputeStu Bloom has a reputation beyond reputeStu Bloom has a reputation beyond reputeStu Bloom has a reputation beyond reputeStu Bloom has a reputation beyond reputeStu Bloom has a reputation beyond reputeStu Bloom has a reputation beyond reputeStu Bloom has a reputation beyond reputeStu Bloom has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Stu Bloom Send a message via Yahoo to Stu Bloom
Re: an evil, desperate, ramp strategy

I believe the central issue surrounding this entire debate is - how do you determine "intent"? For any action on the field that is clearly covered by the written rules it is obvious those rules should apply. Unfortunately it would be impossible for the GDC and rules committee to foresee every circumstance of this (or any) game, and even if they could there would still be some issues subject to interpretation. I am not, nor do I know of anyone who is, capable of reading another's mind, so in those cases we can only make our best judgment based on what we observe (in current AND prior matches). It is unfortunate that some judgment calls (that IMO should reflect the Head Ref's interpretation of the rules) will always have to be made. AND the GP thing to do is to go along with the call and NOT whine and complain that it was unfair (Believe me, all of us referees are doing the best job we can).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Moore
Stu, I understand your interpretation of the rules, but you are correct, we have a disagreement here. If a robot "sits" on their opponents platform and waits for the "tipsy" opponent to fully cross the field before it interacts with it, I consider that "intent". The offending robot has knowingly selected a strategy at which the tipsy robot is most vulnerable to tip over. If this isn't the "sole" intent of the strategy, why wait on the platform? ...
Bill, let me address your scenario, first from an engineering perspective. If a team is utilizing a strategy that includes ascending the ramp and their robot is "tipsy" then IMHO their robot has a design flaw.

Now, to address the strategy - If my team's strategy includes defending our position on the platform/ramp AND trying to keep other robots off then I think we have a valid reason for waiting on the platform then defending our position when challenged. I do not believe that I can envision every strategy that a team could pursue in this game, but I DO know of at least one (and I suspect there are more) that would require a robot to remain on the opponents platform and keep other bots from ascending. (Our team DOES have such a strategy in our arsenal, but I am not at liberty to divulge the details). Don't forget that the opponents platform is also a great place to park and lob balls into the 3-point goal.
__________________
Stuart Bloom
Mechanical Engineer
Rolls-Royce Corporation
FIRST Team 1018 - Pike HS RoboDevils
My activity for 2012:
  • Boilermaker planning committee
  • Israel Head Ref - DONE (and it was FANTASTIC!)
  • Boilermaker Regional (with 1018) - DONE
  • Midwest Head Ref - DONE
  • WORLD Championships (with 1018) - DONE
  • IRI Head Ref - DONE
  • CAGE Match Head Ref