Why go over the bump

[Craig Roys]

Originally Posted by DampRobot

Agree with JABot67. In 2010, out team theorized that the tunnel would be too easily dependable to bother even designing the robot to go through. We were able (and fairly effective at) traversing the bump. As we all know, the tunnel did not get defended very much at all, and teams (like 254) used it with no problem.

This year, we have elected to go over the bump. Why? We again think (and probably incorrectly) that the bridge will be too easy to defend. Also, we want to be fast, and lining up with and crossing the bridge is not "fast."

In 2010 we couldn't go over the bump (well...we could, but it was difficult for us. We did it once in an off-season event at Kettering Kickoff) which we thought might cause us trouble since it seemed that one tunnel would be easy to defend. It seems like we rarely were defended from the tunnel - even in eliminations on Newton field. This year, there will be two bridges to cross - one of which can't be defended without penalty...you can't touch the opposing alliances bridge or robot in contact with the bridge. That being said, I also agree that it's possible to design for crossing the barrier much quicker than the bridge. It's really up to the team to decide if the reward for being able to cross the barrier is worth the effort of design a robot that can do it.