Car Nack Prredicts 13-1

[connor.worley]

Can we go as far as to say that there will never be more than two robots successfully making level 3 climbs in the same match?

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by connor.worley

Can we go as far as to say that there will never be more than two robots successfully making level 3 climbs in the same match?

The only way I see three robots doing 30 point climbs in the same match is (a) at IRI or (b) a very, very luckily scheduled qualification match.

[xSAWxBLADEx]

Originally Posted by Jared341

The only way I see three robots doing 30 point climbs in the same match is (a) at IRI or (b) a very, very luckily scheduled qualification match.

MSC will have a match where they will have 2 or more robots that climb to the 3rd tier. I guarantee it.

[Racer26]

How about the relatively common Ontario finals matchup of 1114/2056/x vs 188/610/x?

I could see finals at a regional with 3 or 4 powerhouses resulting in 3 or 4 robots on a 30pt climb.

Also: @KokoEd, tell that to 190 in 2004. They climbed their bot up to the 10ft bar and spread wings to block others from hanging on the bar, during autonomous.

[Littleboy]

Thats probably dependent on if 188 plays or not. As of now, they are still not re-registered.

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by 1075guy

How about the relatively common Ontario finals matchup of 1114/2056/x vs 188/610/x?

I could see finals at a regional with 3 or 4 powerhouses resulting in 3 or 4 robots on a 30pt climb.

Also: @KokoEd, tell that to 190 in 2004. They climbed their bot up to the 10ft bar and spread wings to block others from hanging on the bar, during autonomous.

They also spent at least 1 regional tipping over quite frequently trying to do so...

I think if you are smart enough to get up there you are smart enough to stay up there. But I also think the bar to get up to a 30 point hang is much higher than many teams realize.

[dellagd]

Originally Posted by Jared341

The only way I see three robots doing 30 point climbs in the same match is (a) at IRI or (b) a very, very luckily scheduled qualification match.

Three robots will be a sight but I feel here in MAR two will be something that isnt TOO uncommon.

[slijin]

Originally Posted by CalTran

Car Nack's back. Sweet. As for this, I would harzard a guess as to say that he's right. The intention to climb up to the 3rd level does not always translate to the ability to climb to the 3rd level.

Moreover, the ability to climb won't necessarily translate into the act of climbing.

If a team isn't fully confident in their mechanism or doesn't want to reveal it, and they're far enough ahead based on disc points alone (which, if they can climb for 30, they probably will be), I'd be surprised if they climbed.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Car Nack

Car Nack Predicts 13-1

There will be some Regionals where no robot will score a 30 point climb.

Car Nack has spoken.

Some background information here. Taking a look at qualifying results from 2010 we find that:

- Israel had 1 successful hang: http://www2.usfirst.org/2010comp/Eve.../rankings.html
- Utah had 2 successful hangs: http://www2.usfirst.org/2010comp/Eve.../rankings.html
- Oregon had 3 successful hangs: http://www2.usfirst.org/2010comp/Eve.../rankings.html

Before someone asks, Number of Hangs = Hanging Points / (2*3), because hangs were were worth two points, and the entire alliance got credit for each successful hang performed by the alliance members.

Considering the difference in difficulty between hanging in 2010 and climbing in 2013, I think that Car Nack is definitely on the right track. (Of course Climbing is weighted significantly higher compared to the other game tasks than Hanging was to the game tasks of 2010)

[Libby K]

Originally Posted by Mr. Lim

Good point.

We were having this discussion about repeatedly + intentionally breaking the rules. The example in another thread was repeatedly carrying 6 alliance frisbees instead of 4 because the points scored outweigh the penalty. Or possessing more than 4 frisbees in autonomous mode. I don't think any of these things are in the spirit of the game... but...

Yes, illegal might just mean that you take the penalty... but the climb still counts.

I guess we'll find out soon enough!

....I'm not one for intense, snap-judgements on CD (or at least posting them 'aloud') but that has got to be one of the most idiotic ideas I've ever heard.

If you don't want to play in the spirit of the game, JUST STOP PLAYING.
Don't worry, that horrendous attitude towards getting around the rules? It won't be missed. Not one bit.

Might I bring this up again, because it clearly needs to be revisited:

Originally Posted by Team Update from 2012

To quote Woodie, “FIRST does not celebrate being an incompetent jerk. FIRST does celebrate high-quality, well-informed work done in a manner that leaves everyone feeling valued.” In other words, bullying, coercion, and unsportsmanlike conduct have no place in FIRST.

I'm really disappointed that strategies like that even cross people's minds. We're supposed to be better than that, as a community. Why stoop to that level?

[connor.worley]

Originally Posted by Libby K

....

No need to rant, just let them get yellow/red carded.

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by Libby K

....

I don't think a Car Nack thread is an appropriate place for this discussion, and I really don't think what seems like a borderline personal attack is warranted.

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by connor.worley

No need to rant, just let them get yellow/red carded.

Cite a rule?

We asked for a clarification of G24 in Q&A. We'll see if/how it is answered.

[connor.worley]

Originally Posted by Jared341

Cite a rule?

We asked for a clarification of G24 in Q&A. We'll see if/how it is answered.

Section 5.5.4 YELLOW and RED CARDS

The Head Referee may assign a YELLOW or RED CARD as a result of egregious ROBOT or Team member behavior at the ARENA.

...

Examples of egregious behavior include, but are not limited to, severe and/or repeated violations of a rule and inappropriate behavior.

[Libby K]

Originally Posted by Ian Curtis

I don't think a Car Nack thread is an appropriate place for this discussion, and I really don't think what seems like a borderline personal attack is warranted.

Wasn't anything personal, but thanks.

I don't plan on continuing this discussion here- if anyone wants to discuss it with me, PM is just fine. I don't want to hijack the thread.

1). I don't think it's particularly great that this is even an option, that any action in the game that gets you penalties also gets you awards, but

2). It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to intentionally state that you want to get around the rules and play outside of the 'spirit of the game'. Something FIRST doesn't want from 'traditional' sports is that do-anything-to-win, even if it hurts someone else, attitude. It just doesn't belong here.

And with that, I'm out - because you're right, this isn't the right thread.

If anyone wants to take this up with me, send me a PM.