Go to Post Just that the robot battery wont catch fire if you drop it the wrong way. Those LiPos pack quite a punch. - dellagd [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Competition > Rules/Strategy
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #46   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 01:00
tcjinaz tcjinaz is offline
Tim
FRC #3853
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: May 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Arizona
Posts: 206
tcjinaz has a spectacular aura abouttcjinaz has a spectacular aura about
Re: <G28>

Ya know, in most forms of racing anything (sailboats excepted)

"Rubbin is Racin"

Having been on the receiving end of the behavior that inspired <G26>, <G27> & <G28>, I like'm. Enforcement will be problematic. Reality is this is a contact sport.

And <G28> has a little problem with the relationship of "its".
__________________
Software Mentor
3853 Pridetronics[

  #47   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 01:44
Tuba4 Tuba4 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Tom Albert
FRC #0063 (The Red Barons)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Erie, Pa
Posts: 137
Tuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant futureTuba4 has a brilliant future
Re: <G28>

Not to lawyer this up but.....the problem with <G45> is the definition of exploiting. Is forcing one penalty exploiting the <G44> exception of <G28>? Does two, three or four forced penalties make it exploitation? I believe the issue can only be resolved by quantifying what becomes exploitation. Removing <G45> totally would give a greater advantage to the team who owns the particular key, bridge or alley by allowing a larger number of penalties. But setting a number too low could swing the advantage to the team not owning the key, bridge or alley by limiting their penalties for more aggressive play.
  #48   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 06:53
pfreivald's Avatar
pfreivald pfreivald is offline
Registered User
AKA: Patrick Freivald
FRC #1551 (The Grapes of Wrath)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Naples, NY
Posts: 2,296
pfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond repute
Re: <G28>

I think the definition of "exploiting" will likely be left to the discretion of the judges, so plan accordingly.
__________________
Patrick Freivald -- Mentor
Team 1551
"The Grapes of Wrath"
Bausch & Lomb, PTC Corporation, and Naples High School

I write books, too!
  #49   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 07:51
Phyrxes's Avatar
Phyrxes Phyrxes is offline
Has done the math, have you?
AKA: Dave Button
no team (No Team, Changed Schools)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Gainesville VA
Posts: 489
Phyrxes has a brilliant futurePhyrxes has a brilliant futurePhyrxes has a brilliant futurePhyrxes has a brilliant futurePhyrxes has a brilliant futurePhyrxes has a brilliant futurePhyrxes has a brilliant futurePhyrxes has a brilliant futurePhyrxes has a brilliant futurePhyrxes has a brilliant futurePhyrxes has a brilliant future
Re: <G28>

The other day I overheard our Chief Scout explaining his definition of an "exploitation" of said rules to other students:

Example:
Red Robot is sitting on the Red Key shooting
Blue Robot approaches the Red key and suffers some system failure rendering it motionless.
Red Robot chooses to drive over and taps the Blue robot repeatedly while remaining in contact with the Red Key.

His logic for this being an exploit is that the contact serves no purpose other than to gain a penalty, especially since the Blue robot is not a threat.
__________________
Dave Button
Physics and Mathematics Teacher
Wakefield School
The Plains, VA

“Simplify and add lightness.”
― Colin Chapman, Team Lotus
  #50   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 09:06
pfreivald's Avatar
pfreivald pfreivald is offline
Registered User
AKA: Patrick Freivald
FRC #1551 (The Grapes of Wrath)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Naples, NY
Posts: 2,296
pfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond repute
Re: <G28>

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phyrxes View Post
His logic for this being an exploit is that the contact serves no purpose other than to gain a penalty, especially since the Blue robot is not a threat.
I am almost certain that this is the type of thing the refs will penalize: a penalty only for its own sake.
__________________
Patrick Freivald -- Mentor
Team 1551
"The Grapes of Wrath"
Bausch & Lomb, PTC Corporation, and Naples High School

I write books, too!
  #51   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 10:04
rsisk's Avatar
rsisk rsisk is offline
The GURU Channel
AKA: Richard Sisk
FRC #2493 (Robokong)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 2,749
rsisk has a reputation beyond reputersisk has a reputation beyond reputersisk has a reputation beyond reputersisk has a reputation beyond reputersisk has a reputation beyond reputersisk has a reputation beyond reputersisk has a reputation beyond reputersisk has a reputation beyond reputersisk has a reputation beyond reputersisk has a reputation beyond reputersisk has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via MSN to rsisk
Re: <G28>

Quote:
Originally Posted by pfreivald View Post
I think the definition of "exploiting" will likely be left to the discretion of the judges, so plan accordingly.
Referees! They wear the stripes.

Judges will be dressed in navy blue polo shirts and will be busy interviewing teams in the pits and talking to RCA candidates.
__________________
Quote:
The views expressed are mine and should not be construed to represent the views of anyone else.
  #52   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 10:24
efoote868 efoote868 is offline
foote stepped in
AKA: E. Foote
FRC #0868
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Noblesville, IN
Posts: 1,414
efoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: <G28>

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
That said: I think that TU#1 will address this question. If it does not, then Q&A should be asked for confirmation. If my interpretation is correct, matches can be won far too easily by teams exploiting [G28]. If my interpretation is incorrect, then I'm concerned about nothing. But nobody has been able to fully show me that I'm wrong so far.
Regardless, we need an interpretation from the GDC (either TU1 or QA). Is the GDC's intent to keep half of the field completely clear of the opposing alliance (i.e. pushing opponents for area penalties is a legitimate scoring strategy), or are they allowing teams to go in clear areas without worrying about being pushed into penalties?

The current wording leads me to the former, but it is entirely possible I'm lawyering the rules.

Unfortunately, it's difficult to lobby my team for a particular drivetrain without knowing if we have to worry about this.
__________________
Be Healthy. Never Stop Learning. Say It Like It Is. Own It.

Like our values? Flexware Innovation is looking for Automation Engineers. Check us out!
  #53   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 11:02
pfreivald's Avatar
pfreivald pfreivald is offline
Registered User
AKA: Patrick Freivald
FRC #1551 (The Grapes of Wrath)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Naples, NY
Posts: 2,296
pfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond reputepfreivald has a reputation beyond repute
Re: <G28>

Quote:
Originally Posted by rsisk View Post
Referees! They wear the stripes.

Judges will be dressed in navy blue polo shirts and will be busy interviewing teams in the pits and talking to RCA candidates.
Yes, yes, yes... I make that mistake all the time!
__________________
Patrick Freivald -- Mentor
Team 1551
"The Grapes of Wrath"
Bausch & Lomb, PTC Corporation, and Naples High School

I write books, too!
  #54   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 13:39
mototom's Avatar
mototom mototom is online now
Registered User
AKA: Tom Boehm
FRC #0329 (Raiders)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Medford, NY
Posts: 10
mototom is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: <G28>

What if we think about the intent of the rule here?
Consider that the intent of the rule is to prevent BLUEBOT from sitting in the red alley stopping red from getting balls. The intent is to allow REDBOT not to be hit while shooting from the key. The intent is to allow the red alliance to balance without worrying about being hit by BLUEBOT.

If that is the intent, then the rules seek to stop BLUEBOT from interfering with red in these ways. If either team operates not in the spirit of the game or FIRST, then it sounds like <G45> wins.

In any event, this will probably be explained in TU1.
  #55   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 14:41
Kevin Sevcik's Avatar
Kevin Sevcik Kevin Sevcik is offline
(Insert witty comment here)
FRC #0057 (The Leopards)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,689
Kevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Kevin Sevcik Send a message via Yahoo to Kevin Sevcik
Re: <G28>

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
That said: I think that TU#1 will address this question. If it does not, then Q&A should be asked for confirmation. If my interpretation is correct, matches can be won far too easily by teams exploiting [G28]. If my interpretation is incorrect, then I'm concerned about nothing. But nobody has been able to fully show me that I'm wrong so far.
There are days when I really feel sorry for the GDC. A day when I read someone admitting that his interpretation of the rules means matches can be won by a team shoving an opponent into a forbidden corner and repeatedly tagging it to rack up foul points is definitely one of those days. Demanding the GDC explicitly tell us that we can't win a match solely by forcing fouls on our opponent seems pretty silly to me. I know the GDC has made some calls in the past that many of us disagreed with or thought would go the other way, but this one just seems far far too obvious to support this speculation. I'm honestly expecting a Q&A on this to get a rather abrupt smackdown requesting the submitter not lawyer the rules and use some common sense.
__________________
The difficult we do today; the impossible we do tomorrow. Miracles by appointment only.

Lone Star Regional Troubleshooter
  #56   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 14:53
Laaba 80 Laaba 80 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Joey
FRC #1714 (MORE Robotics)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 495
Laaba 80 has a reputation beyond reputeLaaba 80 has a reputation beyond reputeLaaba 80 has a reputation beyond reputeLaaba 80 has a reputation beyond reputeLaaba 80 has a reputation beyond reputeLaaba 80 has a reputation beyond reputeLaaba 80 has a reputation beyond reputeLaaba 80 has a reputation beyond reputeLaaba 80 has a reputation beyond reputeLaaba 80 has a reputation beyond reputeLaaba 80 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: <G28>

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik View Post
I'm honestly expecting a Q&A on this to get a rather abrupt smackdown requesting the submitter not lawyer the rules and use some common sense.
The problem is though that you need to lawyer the rules. You need to go strictly by what the rules say, and not by what you personally think the intent is. I know that on our team, we thought that redirecting balls in breakaway was illegal.

<G45> Active BALL control - ROBOTS may not control BALL direction with active MECHANISMS above the BUMPER ZONE. Violation: PENALTY.

Judging from intent, it seems that you cant redirect balls. In reality active was the key word in that rule, and it wasnt defined as to what constitutes active mechanisms. Had 469 not "lawyered" the rules, we would not have seen one of the best robots in this era.

Does anyone know when update 1 comes out?
__________________
Driving Record - 75-43-8
Coaching Record - 92-65

Last edited by Laaba 80 : 10-01-2012 at 15:34.
  #57   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 15:43
Chris Hibner's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
Chris Hibner Chris Hibner is offline
Eschewing Obfuscation Since 1990
AKA: Lars Kamen's Roadie
FRC #0051 (Wings of Fire)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,488
Chris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond repute
Re: <G28>

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik View Post
I know the GDC has made some calls in the past that many of us disagreed with or thought would go the other way, but this one just seems far far too obvious to support this speculation. I'm honestly expecting a Q&A on this to get a rather abrupt smackdown requesting the submitter not lawyer the rules and use some common sense.
(EDIT: I think my initial stance on this wasn't so clear, so I made a few edits.)

I don't think it's that obvious that the rule should be clarified as you suggest. Below are two scenarios in which violating G28 can win you a match if the rule is clarifed as suggested. In other words, the following two scenarios illustrate that a team that knows that G45 provides protection against multiple G28 infraction causes that team to violate G28 in order to win the match:

In each scenario you have one great robot (robot A) that can pick up balls and score with ease, and another robot that can't pick up balls, can't shoot, but is as large as a refrigerator (robot Z).

Scenario 1:
Robot Z's alliance has three balls in front of Robot A's rebounder station with 40 seconds to go. Robot Z knows Robot A can pick up the balls and score them with ease resulting in losing the match, so Robot Z herds the balls into the corner of the field in the lane and parks their robot so Robot A can't get them.

Robot A tries to shove Robot Z out of the lane in order to get to the balls, which earns Robot A three points for the foul (Robot Z is in violation of G28, so Robot A gets 3 points). Robot Z continues to sit there knowing that Robot A can't get to the balls and they can't continue to touch Robot Z for fear of violating G45 (or even if they don't violate G45, perhaps the refs only award one foul). Robot Z's alliance wins since the 3 point foul is less than the 9 points Robot A would have scored. Violating rule G28 resulted in an advantage to Robot Z.


Scenario 2:
Robot A makes 100% of it's shots from a particular position of the key and is not so good elsewhere in the key (they have a fixed shooter that is highly optimized for one spot). Robot Z knows this and anchors itself to the part of the key that Robot A likes to shoot from. Robot A tries to shove Robot Z out of the way (giving Robot A 3 points for the foul) but can never move Robot Z out of the way since they are an immovable object. Robot A settles for the shot from the side of the key and misses all three shots (it only shoots well from where Robot Z is sitting). Robot Z's alliance wins since the 3 point foul is less than the 9 points it would have given up had Robot A had it's ideal scoring spot. Robot Z gained an advantage by violating G28.


In these two scenarios, do we really want to reward breaking a rule since breaking that rule costs less than if they played by the rules? As far as I'm concerned, in both cases Robot A should be awarded for at least the number of points they had to give up due to Robot Z's violations of G28. If that means awarding Robot A 3 points every time they back up and hit them again to try and move them out of the way, then so be it. The problem is that if the rule is changed, it's easy to violate G28 and get a 6 point advantage by doing so.
__________________
-
An ounce of perception is worth a pound of obscure.

Last edited by Chris Hibner : 10-01-2012 at 18:23.
  #58   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 16:26
wilhitern1's Avatar
wilhitern1 wilhitern1 is offline
Sr. Systems Analyst / BRM
AKA: Neal Wilhite
FRC #1225 (Gorillas)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Hendersinville, NC
Posts: 147
wilhitern1 is a name known to allwilhitern1 is a name known to allwilhitern1 is a name known to allwilhitern1 is a name known to allwilhitern1 is a name known to allwilhitern1 is a name known to all
Re: <G28>

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hibner View Post
Scenario 1:
Violating rule G28 resulted in an advantage to Robot Z.

Scenario 2:
Robot A tries to shove Robot Z out of the way (giving Robot A 3 points for the foul) but can never move Robot Z out of the way since they are an immovable object. ... Robot Z gained an advantage by violating G28.
In scenario1, I disagree that G28 was violated. The intent here is to make the alleyway defendable, but not to make passing robots into targets.

In scenario 2, I disagree with both quoted statements. Z did not violate G28 and the driver of A is a fool and should have made at least 4 substantial runs into the opposing robot and thus gained 12 points. Z was out of position and deserved the points.

Moral: defend far enough away from the zones to be reasonable and if the opponent comes tearing at you , dodge and remember, they are wasting their time instead of scoring.
  #59   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 16:33
efoote868 efoote868 is offline
foote stepped in
AKA: E. Foote
FRC #0868
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Noblesville, IN
Posts: 1,414
efoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: <G28>

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik View Post
There are days when I really feel sorry for the GDC. A day when I read someone admitting that his interpretation of the rules means matches can be won by a team shoving an opponent into a forbidden corner and repeatedly tagging it to rack up foul points is definitely one of those days.
Just curious, how different is that than a situation in which a team realizes the proximity of an opponents robot (say, playing defense), and while in the key bumps them several times? To me, that's "exploiting" a rule, but well within the intent and language of the rule.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik View Post
Demanding the GDC explicitly tell us that we can't win a match solely by forcing fouls on our opponent seems pretty silly to me. I know the GDC has made some calls in the past that many of us disagreed with or thought would go the other way, but this one just seems far far too obvious to support this speculation. I'm honestly expecting a Q&A on this to get a rather abrupt smackdown requesting the submitter not lawyer the rules and use some common sense.
Either way, I'd appreciate a clear interpretation to prevent ambiguity. That's not something I want to find out at the first regional.
__________________
Be Healthy. Never Stop Learning. Say It Like It Is. Own It.

Like our values? Flexware Innovation is looking for Automation Engineers. Check us out!
  #60   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2012, 16:47
Mr B's Avatar
Mr B Mr B is offline
Registered User
AKA: Andy Bradley
FRC #0233 (The Pink Team)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Cocoa, FL
Posts: 29
Mr B is a name known to allMr B is a name known to allMr B is a name known to allMr B is a name known to allMr B is a name known to allMr B is a name known to all
Re: <G28>

Ha ha. That is too funny. Does this mean that two robots could sit there and rack up a huge number of fouls and set a scoring record?
Click image for larger version

Name:	double_penalty.JPG
Views:	42
Size:	32.6 KB
ID:	11310
Closed Thread


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 16:24.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi