Stopping a Triple Balance

[Dale]

In the week 2 Autodesk Oregon regional only one alliance triple balanced and, even though they were the 8th alliance, ended up winning the regional. As the weeks tick by I suspect triple balancing will become the path to victory for many alliances.

Teams with a long orientation robot, like ours, would seem to be at a disadvantage here. They are more stable on the bridges in the qualification matches and double balance nicely but unless you are lucky enough to pick a couple of abnormally short robots for your alliance you aren't likely to be doing much triple balancing.

I haven't watched all the week three regionals but has a method emerged to legally slow down or stop a triple balance by an opposing alliance? Can anyone point to videos of matches where that worked out?

[MrBasse]

As a defensive player and a feeder robot, a team can just park on the wall right behind the opposing alliances bridge. Keep enough distance to eliminate a chance of a foul from transitive contact, but make it a tight squeeze so navigating to the bridge is tough. Doesn't stop it, but it does require a lot more time to pull off even a double balance with this in place.

[Tommy F.]

In reality, the alliance is playing defense on themselves. I can't even count how many times I've seen while watching the webcasts this week a robot tip over while trying to triple balance with their alliance. You really don't have too many options to stop a balance because of [G25].

Originally Posted by FIRST

[G25]
Robots may not contact or otherwise interfere with the opposing Alliance Bridge.
Violation: Technical-Foul. If the act of Balancing is interfered with, also a Red Card and the Bridge will be counted as Balanced with the maximum number of Robots possible for that Match.

I suppose one could sit in front of the bridge on the opposing side of the field where you're not in their alley, but then you could be pushed into the bridge, which may cause a foul.

You might also be able to get balls under the opposing alliance's bridge to try and stop them from being able to get on. This should at least slow them down somewhat.

[Ether]

Originally Posted by 7h0m54

You might also be able to get balls under the opposing alliance's bridge to try and stop them from being able to get on. This should at least slow them down somewhat.

[G14]

Strategies that use Basketballs to either aid or inhibit Balancing of any Bridge are not allowed.
Violation: Technical-Foul, and counting or discounting the affected Bridge as Balanced, as appropriate.

[Tommy F.]

Originally Posted by Ether

[G14]

Strategies that use Basketballs to either aid or inhibit Balancing of any Bridge are not allowed.
Violation: Technical-Foul, and counting or discounting the affected Bridge as Balanced, as appropriate.

Aha, I knew there was a rule I overlooked. Nevermind then.

[MagiChau]

Today 2054 attempted to block 910 from reaching the bridge to finish off our triple balance since 910 was trying to play defense on the other side while 1918 and us, 85 were freely allowed to go on our bridge due to 141 and 3546 already double balancing leaving 2054 to shoot 3 pointers in. 910 however managed to break free and finish off the balance barely in time (like 1 second on the clock.)

The team in the lead has a possible advantage with not needing a triple balance to win the match so they could dedicate a robot purely to defense on the bridge timing approximately before when the other alliance will attempt. Trying to time the defense is a lot more risky but frees up a robot to do something else besides block a bridge.

My 2 cents on bridge balancing.

[JakeD]

I suppose you could trap a robot in the corner. Push them into the corner opposite your alley. Essentially box them out by angling between the corner of the fender and the wall near the opponents bridge. It effectively traps a robot in the corner assuming they don't have a drive train capable of pushing your robot out of the way sideways.

Its a 1 for 1 trade in terms of available robots on the field so your alliance would still have to out score the 2 bot balance. Ideally you could trap a good hoop scorer using the same strategy.

NOTE: I'm not positive but I believe as long as this is a 1v1 defense it would not violate [G-23]. Its still risky as you are close to the key and the bridge at times, and requires some reasonably advanced drives skill to prevent not being "juked" out enough that the opponents robot could catch a corner of your robot and spin you in place and escape.

[Thad House]

I saw 488 defend the triple balance in week 1. what they did is get inbetween the bridge and the robots trying to get up. it worked well, and actually stopped the triple that match.

I'd take a good look at the robots attempting the balance. If they haven't done it before, or aren't very successful/have a high CG, there's one great trick that will always work: Leaving them alone.

Most teams who get the triple balance do so because they practice it, or have a real good mechanism. Most teams don't get it on their first try if they don't have a mechanism for doing so.

All you need to do is sit back and watch the carnage.


Though IMO, if you can't mirror with a triple balance, you shouldn't try and disrupt their balance. The risk os too heavy, and the extra bot can be doing something good for your team (like scoring).

[princessnatalie]

We tried to stop the 3-bridge balance ala 488 in Alamo. They did it pretty successfully, and we just couldn't pull it off.

[Dale]

If you know the opposing alliance will try to triple balance since they've done so before in earlier elimination matches then, as we learned the hard way, you need to have a plan. It's very hard to make up that extra 20 points with baskets during teleop assuming both alliances have reasonable hybrid scoring.

[Madison]

Originally Posted by sst.thad

I saw 488 defend the triple balance in week 1. what they did is get inbetween the bridge and the robots trying to get up. it worked well, and actually stopped the triple that match.

Credit for that strategy belongs with 2468, however. They did the same against that alliance in the quarter-final and it was fairly effective. The missing piece, in their case, was that they didn't have a scoring machine as powerful as 118 to drive up their score while they played defense like we did.

[qzrrbz]

In the vein of "the best defense is a better offense", you defend a triple balance by putting up your own triple -- more quickly.

The downside of defending a scenario where a bot already is poised at a floored bridge end and getting shoved into him for a red card is pretty much a "one move win" for the shoving alliance. It can't be worth it.

[Coach Norm]

Originally Posted by Madison

Credit for that strategy belongs with 2468, however. They did the same against that alliance in the quarter-final and it was fairly effective. The missing piece, in their case, was that they didn't have a scoring machine as powerful as 118 to drive up their score while they played defense like we did.

Thanks Madison for the kudos for our attempt to block the triple balance.

Our plan was to have 2969 go do the blocking of the bridge while we,2468 played defense on 148 and allowed 245 to stay at home and score. 2969 was having difficulty moving so we went to block the bridge. We stayed as long as I thought we could and still have time to bet on the bridge to balance with 245 but we ran out of time. Our original plan was to begin the balance at 45 seconds left. If we had gotten the balance, we would have won the match. you can see the match here.

I still believe it is a viable strategy to prevent the triple balance. We had even discussed blocking the barrier so that the opposing alliance had to use the coopertition bridge or go the long way around thus taking extra time to get there.

http://www.thebluealliance.com/match/2012stx_qf2m3

[dellagd]

I must say, this is my rookie year and all this strategy stuff, especially defense, is really interesting. It seems bridge defending is a very effective strategy if you can be careful, and be in the right place at the right time.

While they were balancing, it seems a foul was called on the red alliance. Can someone tell me what that was for?

EDIT: Oh, I guess that was just the announcer making a mistake.