View Single Post
  #39   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-04-2008, 19:28
meaubry meaubry is offline
volunteer helper
FRC #6099 (Knights)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: Shelby Twp, Mi
Posts: 784
meaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Look Back: Week 5

nikeairmancurry,
Hey thanks for opening that wound back up. After the match that we were pushed onto the over pass when you rammed into us, we sent the student out to the ref to ask why there wasn't a penalty assessed. We were told "I didn't see it". Yesterday, while reviewing the video of our last 2 matches at GLR, we were able to confirm that the ref had it right. He was clearly looking into the opposite end of the quadrant when we were hit - apparently, watching the intense goings on between 2 other robots. He couldn't have seen the collision that got us stuck for half the match.

Is it just me, or did the intensity and robot interaction increase significantly during the afternoon on Saturday?

The one thing that bothered me was that it sure seemed like some teams were getting alot of robot to robot interaction penalties. I found that there was alot of inconsistancy from quadrant to quandrant. I truely wish the quadrant refs would rotate around the field, and that stats would be kept for which refs were calling which penalties on which teams.

Here is <G37>
ROBOT to ROBOT Interaction - Strategies aimed solely at the destruction, damage, tipping over, or entanglement of ROBOTS are not in the spirit of the FIRST Robotics Competition and are not allowed. In all cases involving ROBOT-to-ROBOT contact, the TEAM may receive a PENALTY and/or their ROBOT may be disqualified if the interaction is inappropriate or excessive. However, it is noted that FIRST Overdrive is a highly interactive game. Robust construction of ROBOTS will be very important in this high-speed competition. ROBOTS should be designed to withstand the high-speed contact that will occur during the MATCH. Appropriate contact is allowed under the following guidelines:
a. High speed accidental collisions are likely to occur during the MATCH, and are an expected part of the game. However, high-speed intentional ramming is not acceptable and will be penalized.
b. Contact within the BUMPER ZONE is generally acceptable.
c. Contact outside of the BUMPER ZONE is generally not acceptable, and will result in a PENALTY. The offending ROBOT may be disqualified from the MATCH if the offense is particularly egregious or if it results in substantial damage to another ROBOT. However, incidental contact outside of the BUMPER ZONE will not be penalized.

I find this to be very subjective and I believe it explains alot about why certain teams were being flagged more than others. What was incidental in one quadrant wasn't deemed the same in others.

The key word being "incidental" - just exactly how is that defined? When does "incidental" start and "intentional" begin??
Isn't that in and of itself, subjective?

Wouldn't it have been clearer to say, if the interaction results in tipping over or entangling the opponent (I wish I knew what egregious means, sadly I must admit that I can't even seem to pronounce it).

So - I guess playing offense also comes with it's own potential problems.

Anyways - this post is long enough now - hopefully, no one takes offense, or should I say "get's defensive".

Mike

Last edited by meaubry : 01-04-2008 at 19:38.
Reply With Quote