Go to Post Whether we realize it or not, we've all been touched by the works of Dr. Kamen - through his TED talks, through his research and scores of publications in pediatric oncology, or perhaps more directly through his daughter. What an incredible life, what an incredible legacy. - Taylor [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
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-02-2012, 12:55
Wayne TenBrink's Avatar
Wayne TenBrink Wayne TenBrink is offline
<< (2008 Game Piece)
FRC #1918 (NC Gears)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Fremont, MI, USA
Posts: 528
Wayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond repute
G28/G44/G45

Our team has been discussing how the whole G28/G44/G45 interactions will be interpreted by the referees. There are several Q&A entries on the subject, but they do not provide a very clear picture of what to expect. Here are two examples:

Q. Need clairification of G28/G44: Two questions below appear to contardict each other. A robot pushed into opposing robot is a foul but strategy to exploit this rule is a technical foul. How would it be determined whether it is a foul, no foul or technical foul?
FRC4055 2012-01-19
A. Contact prohibited in Rule [G28] will always result in a Foul. The Referees will make their best determination if contact was a strategic move and call a Technical-Foul and Red Card accordingly.

Q. Re: G44 "[G28] is an exception to this rule." [G28] Foul when a robot "touch an opponent Robot in contact with its Key, Alley or Bridge...No matter who initiates the contact see G44." Does Blue while contact with Blue Alley get a [G45] Red Card for purposeful touch of Red?
FRC3005 2012-01-20
A. That scenario is incredibly situation dependent and cannot be answered on this forum.

It appears that they will be relying on referees to judge intent, which is not an exact science. It will be difficult to have consistency between referees, events, etc. If the rules make each scenario so “situation dependent” that it “cannot be answered in this forum”, then how will referees be able to make consistent calls? The second questioner gets at the core question (I paraphrase): “Does Blue, while in contact with blue alley or Key, get a [G45] technical foul for intentionally touching Red?" I expect this situation to happen often. How will referees determine if intentional contact was part of a strategy? Will they interpret all intentional contact as being part of a strategy to exploit [G44]? There are a lot of reasons for intentional contact that aren’t part of an explicit strategy to exploit [G44]. Many will be ambiguous.

Here’s are two examples that we expect to see: 1) Red is in the key and lining up for a shot. Blue pulls up close to block the shot. Red intentionally pushed blue back while remaining in contact with the key. What if its not obvious that Blue is close enough to have blocked Red’s shot but Red still bumps them? When does it become a technical foul? 2) Red defense bot spends most (but not all) of its time on the red-lane side of the field and follows Blue whenever they enter the Red lane to collect a ball. Clearly intentional, but when will the referees deem it a strategy to exploit [G44]? In both examples, identical robot actions could be viewed either way – a recipe for disagreement. When does a legitimate tactical action become a strategy to exploit [G44]? Who gets the benefit of the doubt?

We had originally interpreted the G28/G44/G45 rules to mean that we should just stay well clear of our opponents’ lane and key. These Q&A responses almost provide an incentive to intentionally go there in hopes of drawing a 3 point foul against ourselves and a 9 point technical foul against our opponent (but perhaps against ourselves, too, if the referee thought it was part of a strategy…).

Please help me craft a Q&A submittal that might bring some clarity on the issue.
__________________
NC Gears (Newaygo County Geeks Engineering Awesome Robotic Solutions)

FRC 1918 (Competing at St. Joseph and West MI in 2017)
FTC 6043 & 7911
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-02-2012, 13:16
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: 3,745
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/G44/G45

Firstly, there is a Q&A that atleast partially addresses this:
Quote:
Q. Is G45 violated if a robot herds balls into their alley and waits nearby so if/when an opposing robot attempts to retrieve said balls they can contact them resulting in a foul as per G44?

A. Yes. It could also be considered trapping depending on how the strategy is executed.
That's not a full and complete guideline, but it does give insight into the intent of the rule.
__________________
The difficult we do today; the impossible we do tomorrow. Miracles by appointment only.

Lone Star Regional Troubleshooter
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-02-2012, 13:19
nitneylion452's Avatar
nitneylion452 nitneylion452 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Joe Lee
FRC #3167 (Environmental Tectonics Crusaders)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 596
nitneylion452 has much to be proud ofnitneylion452 has much to be proud ofnitneylion452 has much to be proud ofnitneylion452 has much to be proud ofnitneylion452 has much to be proud ofnitneylion452 has much to be proud ofnitneylion452 has much to be proud ofnitneylion452 has much to be proud of
Re: G28/G44/G45

Relevant rules:

[G28]
Quote:
Robots may not touch an opponent Robot in contact with its Key, Alley, or Bridge.
Violation: Foul; Technical-Foul for purposeful, consequential contact.
[G44]
Quote:
Generally, a rule violation by an Alliance that was directly caused by actions of the opposing Alliance will not be penalized. Rule [G28] is an exception to this rule.
[G45]
Quote:
Strategies exploiting Rule [G44] are not in the spirit of the FRC and are not allowed.
Violation: Technical-Foul and Red Card
In the situation that Red 1 is sitting in red's key and Blue 2 moves up to defend, without actually entering the key or contacting Red 1, and Red 1 moves forward to bump Blue 2 while remaining in the red key, I would assess a technical foul to Red 1 for purposeful contact and a foul to Blue 2.

That is my interpretation due to the fact that [G28] is always enforced regardless of who initiated contact and is exempt from [G44] protection. I wouldn't issue a red card, however, because it would be impossible to exploit [G44] in this situation as [G44] does not apply.

We'll have to see how the refs call it in week 1 events.
__________________
Joe
"The ones who will one day rule the world rule the basketball court today."

http://www.fatherjudgerobotics.webs.com

Volunteer 2012 MAR Region Championship - Field Reset
Volunteer 2013 MAR Region Championship - Field Reset
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-02-2012, 13:19
liam.larkin's Avatar
liam.larkin liam.larkin is offline
We will find a way or make one!!
FRC #0272 (Cyber Crusaders)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Lansdale PA
Posts: 75
liam.larkin is a splendid one to beholdliam.larkin is a splendid one to beholdliam.larkin is a splendid one to beholdliam.larkin is a splendid one to beholdliam.larkin is a splendid one to beholdliam.larkin is a splendid one to behold
Re: G28/G44/G45

We (my team) have been going back and forth as well with these exact questions. If I may give you my personnal philosophy on this. The GDC and FIRST in general are attempting to design all games so they maximize entertainment value. I chuckle at this a bit since Dean spends a great deal of time and effort bashing or maybe I should say critiquing the entertainment industry.

With this is mind the game rules are designed in such a way to impede the ability of an opponent to stop a capable robot. This is why I have preached and will continue to preach that the best plan is as you said in your comments to simply stay away from these scenerios. Additionally, I am not sure if there is a way to properly construct a question to answer your questions. The Q&A forum while a bit ambiguous I would have to say is right in the way they answered some of the questions. Each scenerio has its own variables and it is tough if not impossible to predict or to make a ruling.

As an additional note I always find a lot of teams take a long time trying to exercise (strategize) different scenerios. However, my opinion as a former driver when I was in High School and now a Coach. The game is played much quicker and much finer in competition and much of that strategizing goes out the window. I becomes a match by match, instant by instant, sort of thing.

Sorry for the long windness. I do enjoy these hypotheticals though
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-02-2012, 13:41
Jon Stratis's Avatar
Jon Stratis Jon Stratis is offline
Mentor, LRI, MN RPC
FRC #2177 (The Robettes)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,835
Jon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond repute
Re: G28/G44/G45

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne TenBrink View Post
Here’s are two examples that we expect to see: 1) Red is in the key and lining up for a shot. Blue pulls up close to block the shot. Red intentionally pushed blue back while remaining in contact with the key. What if its not obvious that Blue is close enough to have blocked Red’s shot but Red still bumps them? When does it become a technical foul?
Instead of preemptively pushing into blue in this situation, why not shoot the ball, have it be blocked, then go chasing after it, hitting blue while doing so? Then the intent is clear - you're going after the ball. Blue gets a foul, red does not. Its like you made the shot!
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2012, 00:55
Mr. Van Mr. Van is offline
Registered User
#0599 (Robo-Dox)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Granada Hills, CA
Posts: 350
Mr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond repute
Re: G28/G44/G45

I don't think I agree with Joe on this one:

Redbot is in it's key and lining up a shot. Bluebot approaches and comes close to Redbot to block. Redbot moves forward and touches Bluebot and Redbot gets a technical foul?

It seems to me that there is no way that a ref can judge the intent of such an action. Was Redbot simply trying to get in range?

If Bluebot backs away immediately, then they should only suffer the single 3-point foul, regardless of how many times Redbot makes contact, but if they stay, then Redbot should be able to touch them again for another 3 points.

If this is not the case, what is to keep a defender from camping out on their opponent's key? Sure, they take a single 3-point foul, but they could possibly shut down an effective scorer.

I believe that the "strategies" that the DGC is referring to are things like camping out on the key, waiting for opposing robots to come over the Cooperttion bridge and suddenly backing up to make contact as they come off the bridge.

It seems to me that the intent of the rules are:

"Don't mess with robots that are shooting from the key, robots that are using their alliance bridge or robots retrieving balls from their alley."

AND

"Don't lawyer the rules to turn the tables on this intent by pretending to be shooting from they key, using your alliance bridge or retrieving balls from your alley with the intention of causing other teams to get fouls."

Does that seem right?

- Mr. Van
Coach, Robodox
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2012, 06:36
GaryVoshol's Avatar
GaryVoshol GaryVoshol is offline
Cogito ergo arbitro
no team
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Royal Oak, MI
Posts: 5,762
GaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond repute
Re: G28/G44/G45

I think I can say, without violating any confidences, that head referees are still being trained on this. We were told that it would be a point of emphasis in our next training session.

So a partial answer to how referees will know how to call it is that we will be trained how to call it. We will see various scenarios and be able to ask questions about it to Aidan Browne, the national head ref. It is beyond the scope of Q&A to answer scenario-dependent questions. But that doesn't mean the refs will be winging it.

I am going to forward a link to this thread to the private head referee forum, and make a recommendation that it be included as a standard part of the driver/coach meeting at events.
__________________
(since 2004)
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2012, 08:18
Gdeaver Gdeaver is offline
Registered User
FRC #1640
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: West Chester, Pa.
Posts: 1,370
Gdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: G28/G44/G45

This is going to be a nasty year for the refs. The GDC has placed a subjective and hard to call rule set in place this year. One way the refs could save them selves a load of grief and make their job a little easier is to hash this out at a very detailed drivers meeting. The meeting would be mandatory for the whole driver team. At the meeting they need to use pictures, cardboard cutouts or what ever to convey how they will call that event. I'm OK with there being refereeing variation between events as long as at each event the refs are up front with their interpretation and all the teams are informed of this.
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2012, 09:31
FrankJ's Avatar
FrankJ FrankJ is offline
Robot Mentor
FRC #2974 (WALT)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Marietta GA
Posts: 1,946
FrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond repute
Re: G28/G44/G45

Think of it like charging in basketball. Or pass interference in football. Or maybe like the strike zone in baseball. All those have a fairly detailed descriptions but end up as a referee's call. Despite the best efforts of the refs there will be variation from regional to regional.

Speaking from some one with no inside information.
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2012, 13:01
Wayne TenBrink's Avatar
Wayne TenBrink Wayne TenBrink is offline
<< (2008 Game Piece)
FRC #1918 (NC Gears)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Fremont, MI, USA
Posts: 528
Wayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond repute
Re: G28/G44/G45

The GDC and head referees have the authority to set the criteria and provide guidelines for making these judgement calls. It would be appreciated if they could share some of this with teams prior to the start of the competition season.

Some actions are taken for tactical/opportunistic reasons, and some are primarily done as part of some larger strategy. In this game, it will be hard for a referee or spectator to know the difference. Perhaps it comes down to deciding who gets the benefit of the doubt.

I would not like to see [G45] get the benefit of doubt over [G44]. That could have the same effect as a rule stating "A ROBOT IN CONTACT WITH ITS OWN KEY, ALLEY, OR RAMP MAY NOT CONTACT AN OPPONENT. PENALTY: TECHNICAL FOUL." Last year, you got a penalty for entering your opponent's lane and a red-card for contacting an opponent. This year, depending on how things are called, there is either (1) no penalty for entering your opponent's lane/key, and only a 3point foul if contact is made with an opponent, or (2) a 6 point hit (9-point technical - 3 point foul) for intentionally making contact with an opponent while you are touching your own key/lane. I don't think that was the intent of the rules.

Pushing another robot half way across the field and into your lane/key/ramp in order to collect a penalty unsportsmanlike and is not in the spirit of the game. Camping out in the lane or key for the sole purpose of trying to touch your opponent and collect the foul is quite lame and I woud be quite happy to see that penalized. Making sure your opponent keeps its distance from you while you are in your "protected area", even if that means intentionally touching them while in your own key is fair game in my opinion. If a defense bot chooses to follow the robot that is chasing after a ball in its own lane vs. the one that is chasing after a ball in the far corner is also fair game, in my opinion. [G28] was specifically excluded from [G44} for a reason, and I hope that referees give the benefit of doubt to the "contactor" and not the "contactee".

My opinion, however great it may be (haha), is not what matters here. I just hope that guidelines are made clear to teams in advance of the competitions, and applied as uniformly as possible.
__________________
NC Gears (Newaygo County Geeks Engineering Awesome Robotic Solutions)

FRC 1918 (Competing at St. Joseph and West MI in 2017)
FTC 6043 & 7911
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2012, 14:19
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/G44/G45

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne TenBrink View Post
Pushing another robot half way across the field and into your lane/key/ramp in order to collect a penalty unsportsmanlike and is not in the spirit of the game. Camping out in the lane or key for the sole purpose of trying to touch your opponent and collect the foul is quite lame and I woud be quite happy to see that penalized. Making sure your opponent keeps its distance from you while you are in your "protected area", even if that means intentionally touching them while in your own key is fair game in my opinion. If a defense bot chooses to follow the robot that is chasing after a ball in its own lane vs. the one that is chasing after a ball in the far corner is also fair game, in my opinion.
I completely agree with everything in this quote. I hope it gets called that way.
__________________
-
An ounce of perception is worth a pound of obscure.
  #12   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-02-2012, 12:32
Wayne TenBrink's Avatar
Wayne TenBrink Wayne TenBrink is offline
<< (2008 Game Piece)
FRC #1918 (NC Gears)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Fremont, MI, USA
Posts: 528
Wayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond repute
Re: G28/G44/G45

The following question has been posted to Q&A:

"Red robot is in its key lining up to shoot. Blue robot approaches close to red robot to block the shot. Red robot intentionally pushes blue robot back to clear the way for its shot, contacting blue robot while red robot is still in contact with its key. Is this a violation of [G45]?"

We'll see if that warrants a response.
__________________
NC Gears (Newaygo County Geeks Engineering Awesome Robotic Solutions)

FRC 1918 (Competing at St. Joseph and West MI in 2017)
FTC 6043 & 7911
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-02-2012, 21:39
GaryVoshol's Avatar
GaryVoshol GaryVoshol is offline
Cogito ergo arbitro
no team
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Royal Oak, MI
Posts: 5,762
GaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond repute
Re: G28/G44/G45

Wayne, if your Q&A doesn't get answered, I'll tell you on Thursday. See you at Gull Lake.
__________________
(since 2004)
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 25-02-2012, 16:43
George Nishimura's Avatar
George Nishimura George Nishimura is offline
Lurker
no team
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: London
Posts: 231
George Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud of
Re: G28/G44/G45

What if you push a robot in to your alley, but your objective isn't as much going for the penalty as much as it is to pin them down for a couple of seconds far away from their Alliance bridge?

I'm just curious.
__________________
Team 1884 - The Griffins (2007-2014)
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 25-02-2012, 17:00
bduddy bduddy is offline
Registered User
FRC #0840 (ART)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: San Bruno, CA
Posts: 869
bduddy has a reputation beyond reputebduddy has a reputation beyond reputebduddy has a reputation beyond reputebduddy has a reputation beyond reputebduddy has a reputation beyond reputebduddy has a reputation beyond reputebduddy has a reputation beyond reputebduddy has a reputation beyond reputebduddy has a reputation beyond reputebduddy has a reputation beyond reputebduddy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: G28/G44/G45

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnishi2011 View Post
What if you push a robot in to your alley, but your objective isn't as much going for the penalty as much as it is to pin them down for a couple of seconds far away from their Alliance bridge?

I'm just curious.
The referees are not going to be able to figure out what your intent is. And even if your intent is something else, the result is the same: you're arguably abusing G44 to cause your opponent to incur penalties. I would not recommend it.
__________________

Does anyone else remember when TBA signatures actually worked?
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 04:42.

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