Lessons learned for Week 2 Regionals?

[Mark McLeod]

Originally Posted by JVN

The flip side of this is, if your autonomous isn't any more consistent than the hypothetical 3 tube auton...
Now you're the team who we know is more interested in showing off than in doing what is most beneficial for the alliance to help win the match.

People notice things like that. Scouts on 148 like team players, and I assume we're not the only ones.

-John

Care to share the number of times you've picked nice guys over nice robot performance?

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Mark McLeod

Care to share the number of times you've picked nice guys over nice robot performance?

We run into multiple instances where we're comparing two teams with almost identical robot performance, all the time. In these scenarios, we try to pick the partners who we think will "play smart" and do what they can to help the alliance.

This happens more frequently than you might imagine.

-John

[Mark McLeod]

Originally Posted by JVN

We run into multiple instances where we're comparing two teams with almost identical robot performance, all the time. In these scenarios, we try to pick the partners who we think will "play smart" and do what they can to help the alliance.

This happens more frequently than you might imagine.

-John

We do this too, with close performance robots, but your "almost identical" robots won't be one of those who stepped aside to let you shine. They will have fallen in the scouting ratings for almost all other teams.

[Chris is me]

We take note of anomalies when scouting - i.e. "no auto mode to allow partner to score 3" - in order to make sure they aren't unfairly disadvantaged.

But if a team is skipping their auto to help someone, their auto probably wasn't very good anyway.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Mark McLeod

Care to share the number of times you've picked nice guys over nice robot performance?

Teams who showcase individual strategies/features at the expense of their alliance's success always plummet down our pick list. In fact certain teams who have consistently done this year after year are no longer even considered for our pick list.

There's two angles to the scenario that's being discussed. Say Team A has a sketchy 3 tube auto mode, while Team B has a rock solid 1 tube mode. I would be very disappointed if Team A ran their three tube mode, as they're giving away the points that would be earned by Team B. Consider the second scenario, where Team A has an amazing and consistent 3 tube auto mode, while Team B has a sketchy 1 tube mode. This time I'd be annoyed if Team B ended up running their mode, costing the alliance the points that would be earned by Team A.

What a team does during in a match is clearly their own choice. If a team wants to showcase their own robot at the expense of their alliance, that's their own decision. Do I agree with it? No. I don't think it's gracious to sacrifice your partners' success at the expense of your own. But I also understand the motivations behind it.

On a related note, how is a team who decides to showcase their own robot at the expense of their alliance, any different than a team who throws a match for their own benefit? Many teams encourage the first type of behaviour, while vilifying the second. In my opinion, they're both examples of the same thing; a team putting their own goals and benefits ahead of their alliance partners.

[robodude03]

Originally Posted by Karthik

On a related note, how is a team who decides to showcase their own robot at the expense of their alliance, any different than a team who throws a match for their own benefit? Many teams encourage the first type of behaviour, while vilifying the second. In my opinion, they're both examples of the same thing; a team putting their own goals and benefits ahead of their alliance partners.

Absolutely agree with the points that you brought up in your post. I get irked when a team decides to throw a match for the sake of putting their own goals ahead of their alliance partners. This is mainly due to my experience (in Atlanta 2009) that cost us being undefeated in the qualifications. I understand why they made the move they did and it worked for them in the end, but it obviously the rest of the alliance.

Have to side with you in terms of this type of behavior. Teams should always do what is best for the alliance. This is the type of team that we look for when making our pick lists.

[pfreivald]

My philosophy: On the field, play to win, every game, within the bounds of GP.

If playing to win doens't showcase your robot, then what exactly did you build your robot to do?*

*Note: This rhetorical question is not directed at anyone in particular.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by robodude03

Absolutely agree with the points that you brought up in your post. I get irked when a team decides to throw a match for the sake of putting their own goals ahead of their alliance partners.

In the scenarios that you, Karthik, and John are describing - are the teams always aware that they are putting their desires to showcase their robot ahead of the success of the alliance or, are they sometimes ignorant in making these decisions and capable of improvement or show improvement under the guidance and experience of savvy alliance partners?

Jane

[Andy Baker]

My week 1 lessons learned:

(keep in mind that this is the perspective of a Lead Robot Inspector)

------

1. Get your robot inspected early. Then, you can get in the bypass line and run many, many practice matches.

2. Weigh and size your robot early on Thursday. At the Alamo Regional, two teams did not bother to come over to weigh until it was too late (8:00pm) on Thursday. One weighed in 20 pounds overweight on Friday and the other was 6 pounds overweight. The 6-pound-heavy robot was also 1/2" too wide.

PARTIAL INSPECTIONS ON THURSDAY MORNING (weigh and size, and a few other things) is a good thing!

3. Check your Driver Station version. It needs to be 02.27.11.00 or even more recent. If you have an older version, then the field will take longer to connect to your robot, or it may not connect at all. Also, your cRIO needs to be version 28.

4. USE the 12/24 V to 5V converter so that you don't blow up your D-Link router. We saw about 5 teams do this in San Antonio. Some teams went out to Best Buy (or wherever) to buy a new one ($100?), while others borrowed loaners from the spare parts booth.

5. If you don't have your bumpers done, bring materials you need to make them with you to the event. They are not that hard to make. Too many teams are not prepared for this. Sure, it is nice for veteran teams to step up and make these bumpers for other teams, but WHY IS THIS HAPPENING? Bumpers are not hard to make. Three things are needed:

5.1. Get some pool noodles (Walmart or save some from summer)
5.2. Go to Home Depot for some wood screws, staples, aluminum angle, mailbox number stickers and some 3/4" plywood.
5.3. Go to JoAnn Fabric (or some other fabric store) and buy some duck cloth (or something similar).
5.4. Get some sharpie markers if the number stickers don't work for you.

I hope this simple things help your team breeze through inspection.

Sincerely,
Andy Baker

[robodude03]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

In the scenarios that you, Karthik, and John are describing - are the teams always aware that they are putting their desires to showcase their robot ahead of the success of the alliance or, are they sometimes ignorant in making these decisions and capable of improvement or show improvement under the guidance and experience of savvy alliance partners?

Jane

Actually in my case (one mentioned in my post) the team came out and told me they were going to throw the match. All water under the bridge now, but at the time it was difficult for us to swallow.
In most other cases, teams want to showcase their strengths. Depending on the alliance that we are facing I explain the situation and present all of the facts for the upcoming match. At that point, most teams understand what their part in the match is and if anything showcase the ability to work well with others and execute a strategy.

[jblay]

Originally Posted by Karthik

Teams who showcase individual strategies/features at the expense of their alliance's success always plummet down our pick list. In fact certain teams who have consistently done this year after year are no longer even considered for our pick list.

I don't think this is a very smart thing to do. Just because a team is out of it in terms of getting into the top 8 and thinks it is important to showcase their skills doesn't mean you shouldn't think about picking them. A team that does this just wants to play in the elimination matches and win, so how does that make them a worse pick for the elimination matches. It isn't like they will do this during the eliminations so why take them off of your list?

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by jblay

I don't think this is a very smart thing to do. Just because a team is out of it in terms of getting into the top 8 and thinks it is important to showcase their skills doesn't mean you shouldn't think about picking them.

If they are putting their interests ahead of the interests of their alliance partners, I have no interest in picking them.

If none of the three are anywhere near the top 8, they won't need to do anything out of the ordinary to attempt to show off.

[HarveyAce]

out of curiosity, how does throwing a match in any way help your team, let alone the alliance? all it does is add a losss to your record. and if you are throwing a match, thats not very GP like!

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by robodude03

Actually in my case (one mentioned in my post) the team came out and told me they were going to throw the match. All water under the bridge now, but at the time it was difficult for us to swallow.
In most other cases, teams want to showcase their strengths. Depending on the alliance that we are facing I explain the situation and present all of the facts for the upcoming match. At that point, most teams understand what their part in the match is and if anything showcase the ability to work well with others and execute a strategy.

What I'm wondering is - would this topic be a good workshop or even Championship Conference level presentation to develop? I think there's a lot of information/training opportunity for what it takes to be valuable to an alliance here.

Just a thought,
Jane

[Bill_B]

Originally Posted by Taylor

Not really. If the other two robots simply drive forward a set distance and drop their tubes in front of them, the third "triple-scoring" robot would simply have to turn to pick them up.
I don't know that we'll see it at CMP, but offseasons? Not impossible.

You don't even have to drop. Pushing a UT to the right place for pickup could do it. In either case, the commentary regarding the relative reliability of auto routines would apply. Giving up a certain 4 or even 2 points for a possible score by a single 'bot is akin to the slam-dunk. The term has come to mean a more reliable process than the actual on-court results. Showing off is best reserved for a show and not a game.