[rspurlin]

The Field management system keeps a log of data coming from the Drivers Station (classmate) and the robot. Those logs were reviewed for both teams that had issues in the final match. There was nothing in those logs that pointed to any kind of field error. Both robots had steady battery voltage throughout the match (all 135 seconds). The battery from 34 was later removed and tested. It still showed a full charge. What was relayed to me later was that it was apparently a failure of the main breaker. My own team has had some experience this year with the main breakers not actuating properly.

We do not have the luxury of rerunning matches until we get a result that has nothing whatsoever to do with robot parts failing. Would you also want to rerun a match when a robot breaks a chain 2 seconds into autonomous? Perhaps the biggest difference there is that no one would claim field failure when a mechanical part breaks.

For those that think that gracious professionalism should extend to the beneficiary of these failures calling for an extra match, where's the professionalism in not accepting the very best efforts of the volunteers who do their very best to run the event as fairly as possible? We'd all like to see every match decided with all robots performing at their best, but sometimes that doesn't happen and we have to accept it. Graciously.