The Tournament

[Grim Tuesday]

Someone suggested that I re-read The Tournament section of the the rules earlier today, and I found quite a lot of interesting rules. I'm usually the person on my team who knows all the rules, and I was quite surprised to find not one, not two, but three rules I had no idea existed. I would suggest that everyone takes another look at The Tournament, you might find some hidden treasures.

[T30]
In the case where the Alliance Captain’s Robot is replaced with the Backup Robot, the Alliance Captain is allowed in the Alliance Station as a thirteenth Alliance member so they can serve in an advisory role to their Alliance.

[T32]
Team members may not measure any component or dimension of the playing field during FRC events. Measurements are permitted on the practice field, if available.

5.6.2 Championship Backup Robot
If an Alliance has not previously brought in a Backup Robot, and a Robot becomes disabled during the Championship Playoffs and can not continue, the Alliance may request a Backup Robot. The Alliance Captain will be presented the option of having one of the three Division Finalist Robots, chosen randomly, from their division join the Alliance as a Backup Robot.

If an Alliance has won their division with a Backup Robot and moved on to the FRC Championship Playoffs, the Backup Robot continues to play for the Alliance in the Championship Playoffs.

As noted in Section 5.4.2, the original three-Robot Alliance shall only have one opportunity to draw from the Backup Robots. If the Alliance has brought in a Backup Robot during the division Elimination Matches or the Championship Playoffs, they cannot bring in a second Backup Robot. If a second Robot from the Alliance becomes inoperable during the Championship Playoffs, then the Alliance must play the following Matches with only two (or even one) Robots.

In either case, the replaced Robot remains part of the Alliance for awards but can not rejoin tournament play, even if their Robot is repaired. If the Alliance wins the Championship Playoffs, the FRC Champions will be all three original members of the Division Champion Alliance and the Backup Robot.

[MattC9]

Wow thanks! you are not the only one who had no idea of these rules.

[Tristan Lall]

[T32] captures a policy that was enforced by FTAs previously, but not formally part of the tournament rules. It's also kind of a cop-out: if FIRST is providing teams with specifications, and they do a competent job of assembling the field, what's the problem with proving it? By all means restrict the measurements for logistical reasons (e.g. only during downtime, when a field crew member or official is present to observe, etc.), but don't deliberately keep teams guessing as to whether you screwed up, in ways that are very likely to be pertinent to gameplay. The rule should instead allow the head referee to override specifications in extenuating circumstances (i.e. irreparable damage to the field)—so FIRST still has its out if the field isn't quite right.

[T30] and 5.6.2 are pretty much unchanged (except for a correction to a 5-year-old error).

[Jack Jones]

Originally Posted by Tristan Lall

[T32] captures a policy that was enforced by FTAs previously, but not formally part of the tournament rules. It's also kind of a cop-out: if FIRST is providing teams with specifications, and they do a competent job of assembling the field, what's the problem with proving it? By all means restrict the measurements for logistical reasons (e.g. only during downtime, when a field crew member or official is present to observe, etc.), but don't deliberately keep teams guessing as to whether you screwed up, in ways that are very likely to be pertinent to gameplay. The rule should instead allow the head referee to override specifications in extenuating circumstances (i.e. irreparable damage to the field)—so FIRST still has its out if the field isn't quite right.

[T30] and 5.6.2 are pretty much unchanged (except for a correction to a 5-year-old error).

I think they have that covered:

[T13]
The Head Referee has the ultimate authority in the Arena during the competition, but may receive input from
additional sources, particularly Game Design Committee members, FIRST personnel, and technical staff that may
be present at the event. The Head Referee rulings are final. The Referee will not review recorded replays under any circumstances.

[Bob Steele]

Originally Posted by Tristan Lall

[T32] captures a policy that was enforced by FTAs previously, but not formally part of the tournament rules. It's also kind of a cop-out: if FIRST is providing teams with specifications, and they do a competent job of assembling the field, what's the problem with proving it? By all means restrict the measurements for logistical reasons (e.g. only during downtime, when a field crew member or official is present to observe, etc.), but don't deliberately keep teams guessing as to whether you screwed up, in ways that are very likely to be pertinent to gameplay. The rule should instead allow the head referee to override specifications in extenuating circumstances (i.e. irreparable damage to the field)—so FIRST still has its out if the field isn't quite right.

[T30] and 5.6.2 are pretty much unchanged (except for a correction to a 5-year-old error).

Last year, in Seattle, our team just wanted to measure the heights of the pegs to set our PID properly for game piece placement. I was informed of this "guideline" then... I wasn't going to complain... I just wanted to set our robot up properly. I challenged this and asked to see the rule. Since there was none at that time... I went with the TSA's "guideline" but asked why. I think this year's change in the rules may have been a direct response to this.
I have always wondered why teams are held to real numbers and the field has a tolerance. I will give you an example. In our inspection at Portland this year our team was dinged for having an operator interface that was 3/32 too wide (we were 12 and 3/32) The team member who designed and made the interface had cut the end panels to 12" and had not taken into account the thickness of the sheets of aluminum outside the end panel.

I had not caught the change in this year's rules ...(a maximum size requirement for the operator interface...is in the rules...)
We were eventually allowed to compete...
I saw several other OI's during competition that were well over 12" so this allowance must have been extended to other teams... (or not caught)

I totally understand the length because of the short driver station this year. I am not sure why they instituted a rule on the width... it is the same width of shelf we have used for many years...

The problem is that the shelf and the width of the driver station for the field both have tolerance....but your operator interface does not...

It was interesting...

[Jared Russell]

[T32] is one of my least favorite rules for all of the reasons previously mentioned. There are much better ways for FIRST to get an "out" for an out-of-spec dimension than forbidding teams to measure it.

[Brandon Holley]

Originally Posted by Jared341

[T32] is one of my least favorite rules for all of the reasons previously mentioned. There are much better ways for FIRST to get an "out" for an out-of-spec dimension than forbidding teams to measure it.

Said perfectly. I have a big issue with that rule.

-Brando

[Grim Tuesday]

Another rule I hate is [T28]

[T28]
In the Elimination Matches, each Alliance will be allotted one Timeout of up to 6 minutes. If an Alliance wishes to call for a Timeout, they must submit their Timeout coupon to the Head Referee within two minutes of the Head Referee issuing the arena reset signal preceding their Match. When this occurs, the Time-out Clock will count down the six minutes starting with the expiration of the Arena reset period. Both Alliances will enjoy the complete 6-minute window. In the interest of tournament schedule, if an Alliance completes their repairs before the Time-out Clock expires, the Alliance Captain is encouraged to inform the Head Referee that they are ready to play and remit any time remaining in the Timeout. If Alliances are ready before the 6-minute window, the next Match will start. There are no cascading Timeouts. An Alliance may not offer their unused Timeout to their opponent.

Emphasis mine.

If they want to offer their timeout, why shouldn't they? The greatest display of gracious professionalism in an FRC event was when the first seeded alliance (341 and 365, of course they were awesome) at Philly 2010 donated their timeout to us, because we were the 7th seeded alliance playing against them in the semifinals, and one of our teammates had a broken C-RIO. They didn't want to play an unfair match; we would lose certainly if we didn't have a third robot, and we didn't want to call for a replacement. For whatever reason, the refs allowed them to call it even though the rule was still in effect in 2010. We played, and it was one of my strongest FRC memories. We lost 7-8 due to a penalty of our side panel coming off, but I've been cheering for Miss Daisy and Moe ever since.

[Steven Donow]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

Another rule I hate is [T28]



Emphasis mine.

If they want to offer their timeout, why shouldn't they? The greatest display of gracious professionalism in an FRC event was when the first seeded alliance (341 and 365, of course they were awesome) at Philly 2010 donated their timeout to us, because we were the 7th seeded alliance playing against them in the semifinals, and one of our teammates had a broken C-RIO. They didn't want to play an unfair match; we would lose certainly if we didn't have a third robot, and we didn't want to call for a replacement. For whatever reason, the refs allowed them to call it even though the rule was still in effect in 2010. We played, and it was one of my strongest FRC memories. We lost 7-8 due to a penalty of our side panel coming off, but I've been cheering for Miss Daisy and Moe ever since.

I think the problem with that rule specifically isn't that an alliance can't donate a timeout to their opponent (I think the intent of that rule is so that an alliance in the semis can't give it to their opponent, who already used one timeout, and would use the second one in the finals). IIRC what happened in Philly 2012 was that they called a timeout, and technically didn't give it to you guys (of course I was just a spectator, so I can't speak for myself on that). The problem is that there are no cascading timeouts, meaning that if one alliance is struggling, the opposing alliance can't call a timeout to help them, they'd have to play a match, then call the timeout.

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

If they want to offer their timeout, why shouldn't they? The greatest display of gracious professionalism in an FRC event was when the first seeded alliance (341 and 365, of course they were awesome) at Philly 2010 donated their timeout to us, because we were the 7th seeded alliance playing against them in the semifinals, and one of our teammates had a broken C-RIO. They didn't want to play an unfair match; we would lose certainly if we didn't have a third robot, and we didn't want to call for a replacement. For whatever reason, the refs allowed them to call it even though the rule was still in effect in 2010. We played, and it was one of my strongest FRC memories. We lost 7-8 due to a penalty of our side panel coming off, but I've been cheering for Miss Daisy and Moe ever since.

I don't hate that rule, because an alliance may still ask if their opponent would call a timeout. The opponent can call their timeout at any legal time, for whatever reason they desire. Only the offer is prohibited.

[dtengineering]

Hmmm... I'm not quite ready to assume that the "don't measure the field" rule is to prevent teams from discovering an "out of spec" field. I suppose if a team had reason to believe that a field component was "out of spec" that they still have the option of requesting the referees measure the component.

I'll also point out that teams are given a tolerance in their robot designs. For instance a 28"x38" robot is actually a 27.5"x37.5" robot with a half inch tolerance. It isn't stated that way in the rules, but maybe it should be...

I'll agree that FRC has some kind of quirky rules, but by and large... and given the complexity of the competition... I have to say that I am extremely impressed by the quality of the rule book.

My congratulations to the OP, however, for emphasising the importance of reading ALL the rules.

Jason