Real Week 2 update

[Boltman]

In day 1 of Central valley we actually worked our way up to #1 by the time the day ended...1678 will likely pass us due to not playing yet. We should end up Alliance captain 1,2 or 3. with three to play.

We got there by only losing 1 game , breaching every time, had on Capture with 254 and crew.

1678 and 254 are the best here, we just happen to be very good at collecting RP

So far we had to replace 4 of the pulleys from the treads (cracked again), my advice to teams with tank treads consider putting on Revision 4 before your competition and of course harden all connectors.

We upgrade our drive camera to http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Webca.../dp/B006JH8T3S and its fantastic

As for telescoping poles this central valley competition has tons of teams with them 1678 is 30 foot high it seems.

Team 8 built a screen to obscure Birdseye views out of duct tape.
Anyhow off to Day 2..will update afterwards.

[smistthegreat]

Originally Posted by Boltman

Team 8 built a screen to obscure Birdseye views out of duct tape.

Examples of items that will violate R9 include (but are not limited to): A. Shields, curtains, or any other devices or materials designed or used to obstruct or limit the vision of any DRIVERS and/or COACHES and/ or interfere with their ability to safely control their ROBOT

Note that R9 probably makes such a screen illegal.

[T8PineappleSam]

Originally Posted by smistthegreat

Note that R9 probably makes such a screen illegal.

Yup, the screen was ruled illegal due to vision obstruction. The original intent was to block boulders so we replaced it with a netted duct tape version that functioned well in match 10.

[topgun]

Originally Posted by Boltman

We upgrade our drive camera to http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Webca.../dp/B006JH8T3S and its fantastic

Any issues with lag in the picture on the DS? What size of picture are you displaying on the DS? What camera were you using before?

Thanks.

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by topgun

Any issues with lag in the picture on the DS? What size of picture are you displaying on the DS? What camera were you using before?

Thanks.

According to my driver the lag is 1 second, size was a big window, we were using the Microsoft 3000 prior.. My driver did much better with the new camera he really liked it.

[Anthony Galea]

Originally Posted by Boltman

According to my driver the lag is 1 second, size was a big window, we were using the Microsoft 3000 prior.. MY driver did much better with the new camera he really liked it.

What is the framerate that you set on your camera? Ours is set for 10fps and it has virtually no lag.

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by 3175student17

What is the framerate that you set on your camera? Ours is set for 10fps and it has virtually no lag.

Remember practice lag and field lag are different... not sure on framerate we had ZERO lag in the pit. 1 second lag on the field of play with new camera and more with the 3000

[Boltman]

Knock Knock Knocking on Finals.... Three semi-finals and three almosts.

Last year we (1836,696) lost by a single scoring play to the ultimate winners in Ventura (1717,330 ,2761)
This year in San Diego we beat the #1 alliance (2-0) as the 8th alliance losing to eventual winners Alliance 5 in SF...out shooter had stuck ball issues which got fixed for the most part in CV. had our shooter been working we would have given 5 all they could handle but alas it happened then.

This year in Central Valley we lost by not coordinating "batter placement" to castle capture at the end in SF3:

In QF in CV we beat the alliance with our previous partner from SD 812... in two games.

In CV game 3 semi..
Us and 973 had the castle to 0 and both Us and 2135 were on the batter but both 2135 and 973 were trying for the center batter spot... 973 had to leave to try left spot and ran out of time..had they done that we would have been in the finals and even if we lost as captains would have earned a wildcard to the final world championship. just like last year in super tough competitions we were one play short... so close.

I'm super pleased we racked up 27 ranking points that was good for #3 rank.
The world high score was set by 1678, 3970 and 254..... 210 points
-------------------------------------

Some thoughts on day 2 in CV...

Well we broke our hex shaft again! This time we were ready with a steel replacement and got it replaced over lunch.

We broke a strap on our shooter cage.

For elims we neutered our scaler as it was a liability in CV coming apart during the matches. Even though we scaled in SD in CV it was bent and once we got it fixed we never had an opportunity to use it while trying to stay in top 3.

We also ditched our goal shot camera ( to be able to reverse through Low bar to shave a few seconds) as we never quite got auto aim working so we secured that also... we we a simple Auto, Low goal, breacher withe a super fast intake bot in the eliminations in CV. We performed MUCH better than in San Diego, we were an asset and not a liability finally craked top 15 OPR in CV.

Our third bot 2135 had to rebuilt their drive train so most matches were just us and 973 at full strength. Conversely the other alliance we faced was down 1 in game 1 of SF. Its balanced out.... the executed has we executed better we would have won game 3.

Scheduling curiosity and my observations over past two seasons ... I see no valid reason why 5137 had to play 1678 THREE times in 10 Qualifications (One with Two against one with 254 too) also its sort of weird 1678 and 254 played together in a late qualification. I noticed this trend last year where top bots often were paired together. I have a statistical degree does not seem like a random enough scheduling. Nonetheless teams especially those without "world credentials" seeming need to play above (scheduling and calls) each year until they finally crack through t the elite status.

There was another late qual game where 1678's (corrected) alliance seeming lost but upon further review it was a tie..that was a critical RP to get them to #1 past us at the time. I'm not saying it was a bad call/review necessarily but again an eyebrow raising..huh? I did not think it possible for 1678 to lose yet they apparently did until the tied decision.

As for calls forget bumper hang penalties..the judges did not call any and bots were constantly harassed in outworks. The world class teams still were successful as was that super strong rookie team Unirex. They have the hardest shot I've ever seen and only swerve drive there I saw.

Three robots were flipped/stuck in a QF game it was the triple tortuga.

Oh and when we were alliance captain 2 when they were talking about the teams ..it was all this team won this , this team won that , this team is amazing..they came to us do you have anything to say? (Literally "I got nothing to add"). Wow thanks. Guess its just world creds that play. To be fair in eliminatios they finally dug up some things to say..Like RAS, SF in SD etc.

Game lessons... LG/breacher with fast intake and cycle times is a valid design choice (lots of wasted time on missed HG shots from teams), we never did CDF in either competition and still won consitently (we probably could..did in practice but it was our slowest defense to solo cross.

Well that's it another year in the can...we'll be back next year and rev up again. Perhaps one of these years we finally break through again to add to our RAS campaign.

I may see some of you in OC if I decide to ref ... so good luck to all we had a blast in both competitions and met a ton of great teams , it was super exciting to work with 973 and 2135 awesome . Also had a blast with 1159/812 in SD beating the #1 alliance as #8 in two games was very cool too. The tank drive was the correct choice for us.

We've been very fortunate to earn rank high enough to pair with some of the best bots/teams in the world (973, 696) these last two seasons.

A successful and fun season overall.

Key lessons:

Don't get too complex in planning stage..we wasted tons of time on auto aim and planning sensors...things we never used
Finish prior to week 6 of build (Try to build it by week 4 and consider a practice bot)
Anything not 100% reliable need fixed prior to competition (The ball stuck in our shooter really hampered chance in SD)
Bring spare parts..in SD we had to scramble for the hex shaft.
Questionable systems that don't look that secure (as in may bend )...will BEND... so don't have bendable stuff.

[MARS_James]

Originally Posted by Boltman

Scheduling curiosity... I see no valid reason why 5137 had to play 1678 THREE times in 10 Qualifications (One with Two against one with 254 too) also its sort of weird 1678 and 254 played together in qualifications. I noticed this trend last year where top bots often were paired together. I have a statistical degree does not seem like a random enough scheduling. Nonetheless teams especially those without "world credentials" seeming need to play above that each year until they finally crack through.

So a couple of things, it is not that rare to have teams face each other multiple times at the same event, when the event has less than 50 teams. If you think about it you are at an event with 49 teams and you are going to play 10 matches. So that means that 48 teams get to fill the 50 spots that make up you alliance partners and the opposing alliance, in a perfect world that would mean that random team X and Y would play with and against you to make things fair, but alas we are not in a perfect world. At Palmetto, an event with 64 teams we never played with or against our eventual winning alliance partners 4451 and 1369 but we did play both with and against 2200. This is because in order to maximize the amount of time between matches for teams usually the algorithm will draw the teams for your next match from a set of 5 matches: The two before your match, your match, and the two after your match. Personally I wish there was a way to set the algorithm so based on event size it could limit the amount of time teams appear together in a match but I would match rather have the time to fix my robot, come up with a strategy and rest my drive team.

Top bots seemingly always being paired up together is also not to rare. Like I said above you have 48 teams to fill out the 50 slots to make up the matches you are in, so you have a 40% chance of them being an alliance partner and a 60% chance of them being on the opposing alliance not to weird. It is only noticeable when top teams are seemingly always randomly together because they are top teams, if you ran a statistical analysis of how many times a set of two teams have gotten paired up at a particular event versus how many times it could happen (ie number of times on an alliance over number of times both teams have attended the event), you may be surprised to find a lot of teams that the algorithm "likes" to pair up together.

Originally Posted by Boltman

There was another late qual game where 254's alliance seeming lost but upon further review it was a tie..that was a critical RP to get them to #2. I'm not saying it was a bad call/review necessarily but agian an eyebrow raising..huh?

I just checked 254's match results and in quals they went 9 wins 1 loss. They never tied, so there was no critical RP getting them up to the number 2. Also 254 finished with 30 RP versus the 27 RP for your team, they would have needed to lose 2 more of their matches to have had them fall below you in the rankings.

Originally Posted by Boltman

Oh and when we were alliance captain 2 when they were talking about the teams ..it was all this team won this , this team won that , this team is amazing..they came to us do you have anything to say? (Nothing). Wow thanks. Guess its just world creds that play.

That sucks, no other word for it but also remember those other teams earned those world/regional credentials. 973 your alliance partner is a former world champion which they earned, should your team have gotten their regional rookie all star award mentioned, yes, but that doesn't take away from the amazing things that those other teams have accomplished.

At Orlando we had a similar thing done in the finals the number 1 seed was made up of 233 (13 Regional Wins, and 5 Einstein Appearances) 180 (7 Regional Wins, and 2012 World Champion) and 4592 (First Time in a Finals), versus 2383(1 regional Win, and a subdivision finalist), 3556 (1 finalist appearance) and 2797. 2797 Knight & Nerdy was competing in their 8th season and had just won the first official award in their entire existence the previous day with an imagery award and had never made it past quarter finals at a regional. Do you want to know what I thought when these things were announced, it wasn't "wow look how bad those other teams are in comparison to 180 and 233" It was "wow we are finally getting the previous generation (2383 9 years, 2797 8 years, and 3556 6 years) competing with the veterans of their time (180 19 years, 233 18 years) and this generation (4592 4 years) making their debut with the big boys." Don't discredit your own accomplishments, it is a big deal for such a young team to be competing at the level you are especially with the giants of your state at the event, any team who you want to notice you, noticed you, and if they didn't you didn't want them to notice you in the first place.

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by MARS_James

So a couple of things, it is not that rare to have teams face each other multiple times at the same event, when the event has less than 50 teams. If you think about it you are at an event with 49 teams and you are going to play 10 matches. So that means that 48 teams get to fill the 50 spots that make up you alliance partners and the opposing alliance, in a perfect world that would mean that random team X and Y would play with and against you to make things fair, but alas we are not in a perfect world. At Palmetto, an event with 64 teams we never played with or against our eventual winning alliance partners 4451 and 1369 but we did play both with and against 2200. This is because in order to maximize the amount of time between matches for teams usually the algorithm will draw the teams for your next match from a set of 5 matches: The two before your match, your match, and the two after your match. Personally I wish there was a way to set the algorithm so based on event size it could limit the amount of time teams appear together in a match but I would match rather have the time to fix my robot, come up with a strategy and rest my drive team.

Top bots seemingly always being paired up together is also not to rare. Like I said above you have 48 teams to fill out the 50 slots to make up the matches you are in, so you have a 40% chance of them being an alliance partner and a 60% chance of them being on the opposing alliance not to weird. It is only noticeable when top teams are seemingly always randomly together because they are top teams, if you ran a statistical analysis of how many times a set of two teams have gotten paired up at a particular event versus how many times it could happen (ie number of times on an alliance over number of times both teams have attended the event), you may be surprised to find a lot of teams that the algorithm "likes" to pair up together.


I just checked 254's match results and in quals they went 9 wins 1 loss. They never tied, so there was no critical RP getting them up to the number 2. Also 254 finished with 30 RP versus the 27 RP for your team, they would have needed to lose 2 more of their matches to have had them fall below you in the rankings.



That sucks, no other word for it but also remember those other teams earned those world/regional credentials. 973 your alliance partner is a former world champion which they earned, should your team have gotten their regional rookie all star award mentioned, yes, but that doesn't take away from the amazing things that those other teams have accomplished.

At Orlando we had a similar thing done in the finals the number 1 seed was made up of 233 (13 Regional Wins, and 5 Einstein Appearances) 180 (7 Regional Wins, and 2012 World Champion) and 4592 (First Time in a Finals), versus 2383(1 regional Win, and a subdivision finalist), 3556 (1 finalist appearance) and 2797. 2797 Knight & Nerdy was competing in their 8th season and had just won the first official award in their entire existence the previous day with an imagery award and had never made it past quarter finals at a regional. Do you want to know what I thought when these things were announced, it wasn't "wow look how bad those other teams are in comparison to 180 and 233" It was "wow we are finally getting the previous generation (2383 9 years, 2797 8 years, and 3556 6 years) competing with the veterans of their time (180 19 years, 233 18 years) and this generation (4592 4 years) making their debut with the big boys." Don't discredit your own accomplishments, it is a big deal for such a young team to be competing at the level you are especially with the giants of your state at the event, any team who you want to notice you, noticed you, and if they didn't you didn't want them to notice you in the first place.

Thanks 179 for the World Class perspective on my young three year observations starting with a team from scratch.... I was there and there was a tie. I'm fairly certain it was with Blue alliance is wrong as I see no ties and there were several in CV. I'm pretty sure I am remembering it correctly as I knew it affected dropping us to 3. That 1RP versus 0RP was huge (at that point).

I appreciate the thorough explanation of how you see the schedule making.

We do pride ourselves on being the scrappy low resource team that seems to design effective bots and we take pride with getting the 27 RP in 10 which is similar to your own 22 in week 0.5 in 8 (within 0.75)... in qualifications. I love your bots I look forward to seeing them every year. We will earn our way back in one day and hope we share same side of the glass one day.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Boltman

Thanks 179 for the World Class perspective on my young three year observations starting with a team from scratch.... I was there and there was a tie. I'm fairly certain it was with Blue alliance is wrong as I see no ties and there were several in CV. I'm pretty sure I am remembering it correctly as I knew it affected dropping us to 3. That 1RP versus 0RP was huge (at that point).

Well you need to get your memory checked because we were 9-1.

Our ranking had no bearing on anything anyways. It was completely irrelevant that we seeded 2nd. Everyone moved up one after we were picked.

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by Cory

Well you need to get your memory checked because we were 9-1.

Our ranking had no bearing on anything anyways. It was completely irrelevant that we seeded 2nd. Everyone moved up one after we were picked.

Sorry 254 I think it was 1678 I remembered incorrectly you both blend together on the awesome 1,2 scale (according to match data 9-0-1) I got confused they 1678 had a tie..awesome job BTW

Like I said I could be wrong it was a long weekend. I stand corrected.

[FrankJ]

Originally Posted by Boltman

...

Scheduling curiosity and my observations over past two seasons ... I see no valid reason why 5137 had to play 1678 THREE times in 10 Qualifications (One with Two against one with 254 too) also its sort of weird 1678 and 254 played together in a late qualification. I noticed this trend last year where top bots often were paired together. ...
...
Oh and when we were alliance captain 2 when they were talking about the teams ..it was all this team won this , this team won that , this team is amazing..they came to us do you have anything to say? (Literally "I got nothing to add"). Wow thanks. Guess its just world creds that play. To be fair in eliminatios they finally dug up some things to say..Like RAS, SF in SD etc. ...

Somebody with more knowledge please feel free to correct me. The match schedule is an algorithm. It can be tweaked a bit, but you cannot tell it to favor certain pairings.

If we were on the field with the likes of 254, we would be in the same boat as you. But there is a fact sheet you fill out to give to the announcer. It seems that it is always one of those last minute things that doesn't get the attention it deserves when the teams fill it out.

[Anteprefix]

Originally Posted by Boltman

Scheduling curiosity and my observations over past two seasons ... I see no valid reason why 5137 had to play 1678 THREE times in 10 Qualifications (One with Two against one with 254 too) also its sort of weird 1678 and 254 played together in a late qualification. I noticed this trend last year where top bots often were paired together. I have a statistical degree does not seem like a random enough scheduling. Nonetheless teams especially those without "world credentials" seeming need to play above (scheduling and calls) each year until they finally crack through t the elite status.

There was another late qual game where 1678's (corrected) alliance seeming lost but upon further review it was a tie..that was a critical RP to get them to #1 past us at the time. I'm not saying it was a bad call/review necessarily but again an eyebrow raising..huh? I did not think it possible for 1678 to lose yet they apparently did until the tied decision.

Looking at the match schedule, you guys played against us twice (Q35, Q74), with us once (Q20), and with 254 once (Q52). Having to play against a good team twice is unfortunate, but at least you weren't in match Q67!

[Boltman]

Originally Posted by Anteprefix

Looking at the match schedule, you guys played against us twice (Q35, Q74), with us once (Q20), and with 254 once (Q52). Having to play against a good team twice is unfortunate, but at least you weren't in match Q67!

Yup wish we were in the end matches though