Who is hanging and how?

[Grim Tuesday]

There were 29 people who said they would be suspending. Over the entire season there was what, one suspension?

There were 33 people who said they could be suspended from. See above.

There were 14 people who said they would be climbing onto the base of the tower. I don't recall anyone successfully doing that, either.

How did so many teams horribly misread the game that year? Is suspending just like three robots balancing?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

There were 14 people who said they would be climbing onto the base of the tower. I don't recall anyone successfully doing that, either.

One did, using a ramp supplied by another team's robot (1629 was the ramp; don't remember who climbed up).

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

How did so many teams horribly misread the game that year? Is suspending just like three robots balancing?

Teams are overconfident every year. Honest evaluation of your capabilities with regard to your design strategy is a skill few teams have.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

Teams are overconfident every year. Honest evaluation of your capabilities with regard to your design strategy is a skill few teams have.

Quoted for truth.


This is a wonderful example of teams not really understanding how difficult some of the tasks are, and their own capabilities.

Build within your capabilities, and understand your capabilities (and what you cannot do) and you will do well.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Quoted for truth.


This is a wonderful example of teams not really understanding how difficult some of the tasks are, and their own capabilities.

Build within your capabilities, and understand your capabilities (and what you cannot do) and you will do well.

Which is why I loathe pit scouting.
Too many teams lie. They will tell you their robot can do anything and everything and it can barely move 1o feet.
All pit scouting really does is weed out teams that I never ever want on my alliance. If I can't trust you to tell me honestly what your own robot can or cannot do how can I trust you to execute the strategy in the eliminations?

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

Which is why I loathe pit scouting.
Too many teams lie. They will tell you their robot can do anything and everything and it can barely move 1o feet.
All pit scouting really does is weed out teams that I never ever want on my alliance. If I can't trust you to tell me honestly what your own robot can or cannot do how can I trust you to execute the strategy in the eliminations?

How many of those teams do you think are actually lying instead of citing their designed "upside?" Their robots were designed to do those tasks, and many still believe they'll be able to by weekends' end.

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

How many of those teams do you think are actually lying instead of citing their designed "upside?" Their robots were designed to do those tasks, and many still believe they'll be able to by weekends' end.

Oftentimes it is so overstated it is lying even if it is well intentioned. In 2008 at BAE we asked teams in the pit what they though a realistic estimate of their hurdles/match would be over the course of qualifiers. The average team told us 4, yet come noon Saturday only four teams had averaged two hurdles per match, one was very close to three. Interestingly, all five of those teams had come close to correctly guessing how many hurdles/match they would be worth.

[teachsail]

Originally Posted by Ian Curtis

Oftentimes it is so overstated it is lying even if it is well intentioned. In 2008 at BAE we asked teams in the pit what they though a realistic estimate of their hurdles/match would be over the course of qualifiers. The average team told us 4, yet come noon Saturday only four teams had averaged two hurdles per match, one was very close to three. Interestingly, all five of those teams had come close to correctly guessing how many hurdles/match they would be worth.

You ask a team to make a guess about a game they have never played with a robot they have barely driven? No surprise they got it wrong. A bad guess is not a lie. You should give these young and inexperienced teams/members a break. If a team tells me on Thursday morning that they can shoot the moon, I know they are telling me their hopes for their design. If they stick to that story on Saturday morning, and still haven't achieved it, then they are probably lying and trusting them is problematic.

[wilhitern1]

Originally Posted by teachsail

A bad guess is not a lie.

Then they should say I'm guessing and not represent it as fact. Part of scouting is understanding if the team actually bought a clue.

I don't blame rookies for messing up, but you still have to evaluate their capabilities. Some rookies may be good enough to play in the bigs but their word on it won't buy you a cup of water at MD.

[Bill_B]

Of course our robot can fly!

Who's scouting whom? If the scout is gullible, let's have some fun. If the scout is cute, let's keep talking so s/he'll stay around longer. Scout is gross, let's say something unbelievable so s/he'll get outta here.

cum grano salis for all reports, especially this one.

[JamesBrown]

Originally Posted by wilhitern1

I don't blame rookies for messing up, but you still have to evaluate their capabilities. Some rookies may be good enough to play in the bigs but their word on it won't buy you a cup of water at MD.

This doesn't have much to do with rookies, teams and team members of all levels of experience are guilty of nisrepresenting what the robot can do.

I find pit scouting to be valuable but I don't find getting information from the other teams members to be of much use. My pit scouting has always consisted of taking pictures of the robot and making observations, type of drive train, and type of manipulator. This is more for vetting our scouts data later in the weekend than anything else.

[eedoga]

I'm sure our team is guilty of a lie or two, but...I should explain. Our first two years we showed up with robots that were completely untested, and based on ideas that came from people who had very little experience actually building anything of this size.

We also had a problem with team membership shifting...Our first year we had six people, two of which had never seen the robot before taking it out of the crate at the competition. Our second year wasn't much better.

I think good scouting comes down to asking the right questions.

How many practice matches have you had?

What happened, or how did your robot do?

What problems have you run into and how did you solve them?

Take pictures of the robot (as other people have said)
And collect data during actual matches.

Awe said things like, we are going to try to hang, but in half the matches our robot ended up on its side, with a ball stuck in the kicker, and a missing wheel... The one time we did hook the bar we learned that 2CIM motors on a simple box were not enough to lift 135 or so pounds and ripped one of our bumpers off.

The thing is we learned...we are better now...but all of the things we said we thought were true at the time.

[Dr Theta]

I agree with the above post. Pit scouting is only useful if you ask the right questions. The questions proposed above have very valuable information in them.

Have you played in any practice matches? Did you participate in a preship scrimmage? How did you perform? What problems did you encounter and how did you solve them?

These all include information that is very valuable to you in gauging the general preparedness of a team which can play a huge factor in performance. If they encounter a problem that they haven't fixed, don't intend to fix, or don't know how to fix it tells you a lot about the preparedness of the robot. If they have played several practice matches, built a duplicate robot, or attended a preship scrimmage it tells you something about the preparedness of their drive-team.

You will get actual data on how they perform on the field by field scouting anyway which is undoubtedly more accurate than a guess from a team that has yet to play the game. I intend to implement these types of questions in our pit scouting this year, and this is the type of information that we attempt to be upfront about when others come to scout us.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

How many of those teams do you think are actually lying instead of citing their designed "upside?" Their robots were designed to do those tasks, and many still believe they'll be able to by weekends' end.

Practically none.

[Chris is me]

Being asked something like "how well can you score" can put a lot of pressure on an unprepared student. Students are awkward, excited, and optimistic sometimes - I wouldn't blame them for overstating their machine. While I'm not proud, I've gotten a bit excited myself. Especially right after a good match.

My response to this is to just not pit scout. Other than photos. It makes it easier for everyone that way.