Thread: Team Update #18
View Single Post
  #30   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2007, 21:07
ChuckDickerson's Avatar
ChuckDickerson ChuckDickerson is offline
Mentor / Bayou & CMP Division LRI
FRC #0456 (Siege Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Vicksburg, MS
Posts: 877
ChuckDickerson has a reputation beyond reputeChuckDickerson has a reputation beyond reputeChuckDickerson has a reputation beyond reputeChuckDickerson has a reputation beyond reputeChuckDickerson has a reputation beyond reputeChuckDickerson has a reputation beyond reputeChuckDickerson has a reputation beyond reputeChuckDickerson has a reputation beyond reputeChuckDickerson has a reputation beyond reputeChuckDickerson has a reputation beyond reputeChuckDickerson has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Team Update #18

Interesting. I think I am starting to see a pattern here:

drill presses = OK (at kickoff)
drill presses = NOT OK (middle of competition season)
(everyone raises a stink)
drill presses = OK (again)

stacking robots at the start of the match = OK (at kickoff)
stacking robots at the start of the match = NOT OK (middle of competition season)
(everyone raises a stink)
stacking robots at the start of the match = ????????

I personally think that this strategy would be used so very rarely because of the risk involved that why in the world should it have even been a blip on FIRST’s radar. Does FIRST think that this strategy is such a problem that it in effect deserves it’s own team update? Good grief. Why can’t we just get a clear set of rules in the beginning and just stick with them the whole season. Doesn’t FIRST have enough to worry about as it is without making a “new” rule for something that has, as far as I know, only happened once? And even then, wouldn’t have made a difference in the outcome of the match because the score reflected that they would have won anyway (1 on 3 BTW). Most people got a good laugh and thought, “Now that was a cool idea, we should have thought of that!” Now that someone was creative but within the rules, FIRST has to go and make an example out of them I guess. I really have to wonder what is the big deal. I suppose FIRST doesn’t really like creativity after all. FIRST wrote the rules, the question was asked in the Q&A to make sure it was legal, and now FIRST doesn’t like it. Can’t FIRST just roll with it like everyone else and say “That was a good one, you got us.”
Reply With Quote