Thread: [FTC]: Defense robots and competition
View Single Post
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-12-2010, 05:32
gblake's Avatar
gblake gblake is offline
6th Gear Developer; Mentor
AKA: Blake Ross
no team (6th Gear)
Team Role: Mentor
  
Join Date: May 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,933
gblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [FTC]: Defense robots and competition
Quote:
Originally Posted by team F.T.C 4240 View Post
At the Maryland competition we had a defense robot on our alliance and the head ref yelled at us, telling us that.
"This is not the intent of the game, if you want to brake another robot there are competitions for that BUT this is not one of them, try scoring for once instead of preventing it"....
Depending on whether or not you were bashing into the other robot, or simply playing tight defense; I would encourage you to politely but firmly disagree with that ref, and to politely but firmly appeal to the head ref if you feel that the refs opinions/prejusdices result in any non-trivial disadvantages for your team.

[EDIT] I just read the post that says an ally was ramming an opponent - Ramming is not the same as pushing. - When I am ref'ing I definitely tell teams not to repeatedly back up and hit an opponent; and not to take aim from far away, and then charge into an opponent at high speed.[/EDIT]

Some other games that involve physical contact (human-human) make pretty good analogies. If you are swatting basketballs out of the air and doing a legal amount of leaning on the opponent - That's legit. If you are fouling the opponent - that not legit.

Learning to advance persuasive arguments that correctly link facts to defend an assertion, can (should?) be one of the benefits of participating in STEM robotics competitions.

Blake
__________________
Blake Ross, For emailing me, in the verizon.net domain, I am blake
VRC Team Mentor, FTC volunteer, 5th Gear Developer, Husband, Father, Triangle Fraternity Alumnus (ky 76), U Ky BSEE, Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, Kentucky Colonel
Words/phrases I avoid: basis, mitigate, leveraging, transitioning, impact (instead of affect/effect), facilitate, programmatic, problematic, issue (instead of problem), latency (instead of delay), dependency (instead of prerequisite), connectivity, usage & utilize (instead of use), downed, functionality, functional, power on, descore, alumni (instead of alumnus/alumna), the enterprise, methodology, nomenclature, form factor (instead of size or shape), competency, modality, provided(with), provision(ing), irregardless/irrespective, signage, colorized, pulsating, ideate
Reply With Quote