Thread: Curie 2010!
View Single Post
  #273   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 18-04-2010, 12:10
jspatz1's Avatar
jspatz1 jspatz1 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jeff
FRC #1986 (Team Titanium)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Lee's Summit, MO
Posts: 836
jspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to jspatz1
Re: Curie 2010!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derbyshire View Post
As an alumni I'm beginning to get very frustrated by the lack of follow through with penalty assessments. Alliance number 3 had almost two timeouts essentially. And a game replayed where there was no advantage what so ever. If anything the number 6 alliance where the ones that were at a disadvantage as those balls that come in from alliance 3 come in their direction. I really am frustrated by this entire event.
Here is the story from the field floor. When 888 failed to boot up and connect on the field, the field techs began the process of trying to determine whether it was a field error or robot problem. All diagnostic efforts were done by the field staff. No work was done on the 888 robot, other than power cycles and connection checks by the FTAs. They worked the problem for a long time. Probably longer than they would have at any regional. We assume this is because at championships they want to make an extended effort to make sure every match happens without field issues. The alliance had no choice or say in how long or short this effort lasted. When they finally concluded that it was a robot issue, the match was played 2 on 3 with 888 disabled, because they had already taken the field. Hardly an advantagous outcome for Alliance 3. Alliance 3 later utilized their time-out to try to fix the problem, was unable to, and called for a substitute in the later moments of the time-out as directed by the field officials.

Regarding the replayed match, again this was totally a decision of the field officials. No protest or challenge was made by any team. The rules explicitly state that any match with such field malfunctions will be replayed, so we assume that was the ruling. We would judge that the accumulated balls on our return rack did present a disadvantage for us, as we play a recycle strategey by controlling balls from the rack.

Edit: After reviewing the video of this match, the stuck balls did indeed starve our recycle efforts, and forced us to abandon the midzone and move to the forward zone, where there where only 2 balls remaining.
__________________

Last edited by jspatz1 : 18-04-2010 at 23:30.